The Fundamental Periods of Sums of Periodic Functions

Author(s): James Caveny and Warren Page

Source: The College Mathematics Journal, Vol. 20, No. 1 (Jan., 1989), pp. 32-41
Published by: Mathematical Association of America
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2686816
Accessed: 26-04-2016 02:42 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Mathematical Association of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to The College Mathematics Journal

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Fundamental Periods of Sums of
Periodic Functions

James Caveny
Warren Page

James Caveny received his Ph.D. in mathematics from the

University of Kentucky in 1966. He is currently Associate
Professor of Mathematics at the University of Southern Mis?
sissippi, where he served as Chair of the Mathematics De?
partment from 1971- 1981. He then served as Assistant
Dean and as Acting Dean of the College of Science and
Technology at the University of Southern Mississippi before
returning to full-time teaching in the Mathematics Depart?
ment in 1984. Dr. Caveny enjoys teaching the undergraduate mathematical analysis
courses and exploring the evolving mathematical software for microcomputers.

Warren Page is Professor of Mathematics at New York City

Technical College of CUNY. He received his MS (stability
theory for ODEs) in 1965 and his Ph.D. (functional analysis,
topology, and measure theory) in 1972 from the Polytechnic
University of Brooklyn. Since then he has published in a
wide variety of areas in pure and applied mathematics, and
in mathematics education. Professor Page is active on
MM numerous advisory boards and commissions that seek to
improve and advance mathematics at ail levels. Currently, he is Editor of the MAA
Notes Series, Secretary of Section A (Mathematics) for the AAAS, and Second Vice
President of The Mathematical Association of America. When not absorbed with
professional endeavors, Dr. Page enjoys alpine skiing, deep-sea fishing, and expedi?
tions to tribes in remote corners of the globe. His greatest joy, however, is his
seven-year-old son Joshua.

The Question

A real-valued function / defined on the real line IR is periodic if there is a

nonzero real number /?, called a period of /, such that f(x +/?) =f(x) for all x in
IR. If there is a smallest positive period of /, it is called the fundamental period of /.
What can we say about the fundamental period of a sum of periodic functions?

Example 1. Let fx and f2 be the periodic functions defined on U by

-3sin(flrx), l<x<2
(-sin(7rx), 0<x<l
/2(x-2), for all xeR.

32

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Then fx and f2 each have fundamental period 2, but their sum, (/i+/2 )(?*) =
|sin(7rx)| has fundamental period 1.

We can even make the fundamental period of the sum arbitrarily small without
changing the fundamental periods of the summands.
Example 2. For any given positive integer N,

(sin(2Mr*), 0<x<l/N
f1(x) = {0, 1/N<x<l
for all x e R

and

/0, 0<x<l/N
f2(x) = I sin(2Mr*), \/N <x<\
\f2(x-l)9 for all xgR
each have fundamental period 1. But their sum (fx +f2)(x) = sm(2Nirx) has
fundamental period 1/N.
A sum of periodic functions, each having a fundamental period, may not be
periodic (e.g., sinx + sin7rx). And even if the sum is periodic it may not have a
fundamental period, as the following example (provided by John M. H. Olmsted)
illustrates.

Example 3. Let Z denote the set of all integers, and let Q denote the set of all
rational numbers. Then on U,

^Ho! *ez) and '*<*> = (o, x^Qor,GZ

each have fundamental period 1. However, their sum

</.+a>w-{J: ::2
has no smallest positive period since every rational number is a period. (The
characteristic function of a set that consists of "every other point" on the real line
has "every other real number" as a period. See [4], [7].)
In view of the above illustrations, it is natural to ask:

How does one determine the fundamental period (if it exists) of a sum of
functions each having a fundamental period*}

First Considerations

To establish criteria that will enable us to identify the candidates for the
fundamental period of a sum, we shall make use of the following fact:

Property (* ). If a periodic function f has fundamental period /?, then every positive
period of f is an integral multiple of p.

33

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 To verify Property (*), assume that q is any positive period of / and let n be the
largest integer that is less than or equal to q/p. Then q = np + r, where 0 < r <p.
Since / has periods p and q, it follows that f(x)= f(x + q)= f(x + np + r) =
f(x + r) for each xelR.If r were not zero, then / would have a positive period r
smaller than its fundamental period p. Hence, r = 0, and q = np.

Remark. Note that the converse of Property (*) is false: sinirx has fundamental
period 2, but every period of sin7rx is an integral multiple of p = 1. (See [5, ?1507]
for additional related material.)

In each of the above examples, the periods are rational. As sin x + sin irx
illustrated, the sum may not be periodic when irrational periods are involved. To
find some property that will ensure that a sum of periodic functions /= Lj2=1/; is
periodic, we begin with the observation that f(x) = sinx has fundamental period
p = 2ir and that g(x) = f(x/(n/2ir)) = sm(27Tx/n) has fundamental period
(n/2ir)(p) = n. More generally,
f(x) has (fundamental) period p if and only if g(x)=f(x/s) has
(fundamental) period sp.
This suggests that arbitrary periods { pt: \<i <n) can be accommodated if there is
a scale factor s for which each spt (1 < i < n) is rational. As we shall see, such a
scale factor exists when the periods pt of the summands f are commensurable?that
is, the ratios Pi/Pj are rational numbers for all /, j e {1,2,..., n). Thus,
2\/2/3,3\/2 ,4\/2/5,6\/2 are commensurable, but their square roots are not.
If the positive real numbers pv p2,..., pn are commensurable, then there are
integers ni,di (2<i<n) such that pi = (ni/di)p1. Now let M be any common
multiple of the integers d2,d3,...,dn. Then, multiplying the original periods pt by
s = M/px changes the scale, so that spt is an integer for each /' = 1,2,...,/?. If the
functions fl9 /2,..., fn have respective fundamental periods pl9 p2,..., ptV then the
functions gt(x) = ft{x/s) have integer fundamental periods spt. Furthermore, a real
number p is a (fundamental) period of /= L"=1/; if and only if sp is a (fundamen?
tal) period of g = Lfl=1gi.

Example 4. Consider any functions /l9 /2, /3, f4 that have respective periods
{Pv Pn />3> Pa) = (2^/2/3,3^2 ,4^/2/5,6^/2 }. Since

Pi = (f )Pi> P3 = (DPi' Pa = (f )/>!>

we can let M = 10 and use the scale factor s = M/px = 15/\/2 . Then the functions
gi(x) = ft(x/s) (1 < / < 4) have respective periods {spl9 sp2, sp3, sp4) =
{10,45,12,90}.

Since it is always possible to change the scale of the independent variable in this
way, it will suffice to pursue our investigation for the case where the fundamental
periods of the summands are all positive integers.
Every finite nonempty set {pv p2,.-.,pn} of positive integers has a least com?
mon multiple, denoted by \cm{pv p2,..., pn} or [pv p2,..., /??}, and a great?
est common divisor denoted by gcd{pv p2,..., pn) or (pl9 p2,..., pn). For any
finite sum E"=1/; of periodic functions f having respective integer fundamental
periods pi9 every common multiple of [pl9 p2,..., pn) is a period of E;w=1/;.

34

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Examples 1, 2, and 3 show that the least common multiple need not be the
fundamental period of the sum. However, our experience with sums of sine and
cosine functions is confirmed by the following.

Property ( * * ). Let pv /?2> ? ? ? > Pm oe distinct positive integers, and let

m

/(*) = E {?^os(27rV/?J + ^sin(27rV^)}?

k=\

where ak and jik are constants, not simultaneously zero (a2k + jikl> ?). Then f is
periodic with fundamental period M =[pv p2,..., pm].

Let's prove Property (* *). We begin by showing that for distinct positive real
values tv t2,..., tm9 the set of 2m functions {costkx,sin tkx: 1 < k < m} is linearly
independent. Assuming the contrary would imply the existence of a smallest positive
integer r such that there is a subset {tv t2,..., rr) of r distinct members of the set
{tvt2,...,tm}, and constants {ak,bk: k = 1,2,..., r} not all zero, for which
r

? {^^cosT^x + ^sin^x} = 0. (1)

k=\

Because of the minimality of r, either ak?^Q or bk?^0 for each k = 1,2,..., r.

Furthermore, r > 2 since cos tx and sin tx are linearly independent for any t > 0.
Adding the equation obtained by differentiating (1) twice to the equation that
results from multiplying (1) by t} yields
r-\

E (^2-^2)(^^osT^ + ^sinT^)=0.
k=\

But this violates the minimality of r (since t,2 - t^ # 0 for 1 < k < r - 1), and hence
establishes that {cos tkx,sin tkx: 1 < k < m) is linearly independent.
Now we complete the proof of Property (* *) as follows. Put tk = 2tn/pk so that
m

/(*)= E {a*cosf*x + 0*sinfpc}.

k=\

Then f(x + p) = f(x) is equivalent to

m m mm

X) akcostk(x+p) + E /**sinffc(x+/>) = E akcostkx+ E^sin^x,

k=\ k=l k=\ k=\

or

E ak{{costkx){GO&tkp -l)-(sin^x)(sin^/?)}
k = l

+ E Pk{(sinhx)(costkp -l) + (costkx)(sintkp)} =0.

k=\

Because of the linear independence of {cos tkx, sin tkx: 1 < k < m}, the coefficients
of cos tkx and of sin tkx in this last equation must be zero. Thus, for each

35

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
k = 1,2,..., m:

(costkp -l)ak + (smtkp)Pk =0

(-sin^K+vCOS^/? -1)^ = 0.
This implies that

(cos tkp -l)(a2 + ?2) = 0,

which (since at least one of ak or /3k is different from zero) yields
cos tkp = 1 (\<k<m).
Replacing tk by 2<n/pk, we obtain
cos(27rp/pk) = 1 (1 <k<m).
Thus, /? is an integral multiple of pk for each k (k = 1,2,..., m). Therefore, p is an
integral multiple of M =[pv p2,..., pm]. Since M is a positive period of /, and
every period p of / is a multiple of M, it must be that M is the smallest positive
period of /. Our proof is now complete.

Our proof of Property (**) is adapted from [3] (see [1], [8], [9] for related
material). Note that the conclusion of Property (* *) need not hold if the pk are not
distinct. For instance, if
fx(x) = sin(7rx) and f2(x) = sin(7rx/2) = -f3(x),
then (fx + f2 + f3)(x) = sm(iTx) has fundamental period 2 rather than [2,4,4] = 4.

Additional Observations

Our next two examples suggest that a certain symmetric relationship might exist
between the integer fundamental periods of the summands and the fundamental
period of their sum.

Example 5. The functions fv /2, and / with respective fundamental periods pv

p2, and /?,
fi(x) = sin(7Tx)-\-sm(27Tx/3) px = 6
f2(x) = -sm(irx) + sin(27rx/5) p2 = 10
f(x) = sin(27rx/3) + sin(27rx/5) /? = 15,
satisfy f = fY +A- This is equivalent to fx +f2 +/3 = 0 for /3 = -/ having funda?
mental period p3 =p. Note that for these fundamental periods pv p2, p3 we have
Pl\ [/>2>/>3L Pl\ [PnPl], P3\[Pl>Pl]'

Example 6. There do not exist functions /1? /2, and / with respective fundamental
periods px = 2, p2 = 3, and p = 4 such that / = /i+/2. For, if /x and /2 have
respective fundamental periods 2 and 3, then 6 = [2,3] is a period of fx + /2 =/? But
then, because of Property (*), / could not have fundamental period 4. The same
reasoning shows that there do not exist functions fv /2, f3 with respective periods
/?! = 2, /?2 = 3, p3 = 4 such that /x +/2 +/3 = 0. Note that for the three fundamental

36

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
periods considered here, we have

Pl\ [P^Ps]' Pl+lPl'Ps]' P3*[Pl,PlY

Examples 5 and 6 suggest that a necessary and sufficient condition for the
existence of functions fv f2,..., fn having respective fundamental periods
Pv Pi>-~>Pn and satisfying L"=ifi = 0 is that each p. divide [pl9 p2,..., pp..., pn].
(Here, [pv p2,..., pp..., pn] means that the yth term p- is missing.) This is clearly
a necessary condition since E"=1// = 0 implies that for each j (1 < j < n), we have

fj= - ? ft and tne conclusion that pj\[pl9 p2,..., pp..., pn].

i=\

These divisibility conditions suggest looking into the prime-factor decomposi?

tions of the periods pv p2,..., pn.
Example 7. Do there exist functions fl9 /2, /3, /4 having respective fundamental
periods
/>1 = 12 = 22-3
p2 = 15 = 3-5
p3 = 20 = 22 -5
p4 = 90 = 2 ? 32 ? 5

and satisfying LUif = 0? If E-=i/; = 0 for such f. (1 < i < 4), then [^ /?2, /?3] =
22 ? 3 ? 5 is a period of /4 = -E-=1/;. But this contradicts the fact that the fundamen?
tal period p4 = 2 ? 32 ? 5 does not divide 22 ? 3 ? 5. The reason p4 \ [pv p2, p3] is
because 32, the maximum power of 3 among the factorizations of p( (1 < / < 4),
occurs in only one factorization?namely, p4s.
In the next example, p4\[pv p2, p3] is obtained by modifying the condition
involving the powers of 3, and this modification will be used to produce E?=1/) = 0
for the given fundamental periods.

Example 8. For the given positive integers

/?l = 12 = 22-3
p2 = 45 = 32. 5
p3 = 20 = 22 -5
/?4 = 90 = 2-32-5,
the maximum power of each prime occurs in at least two factorizations. Further?
more, the functions

f1(x)= sin(27rx/2) + sin(27rx/4) + sin(27rx/3)

f2(x)= sin(27tx/3) + sin(27tx/9) 4- sin(27tx/5)
f3(x) = sin(27rx/2) - sin(27rx/4) 4- sin(27rx/5)
fA(x) = -2sin(27rx/2) -2sin(27rx/3) -sin(27rx/9) - 2sin(27rx/5)
have respective fundamental periods pv p2, p3, p4. This follows by applying Prop?
erty (* *) to each /; (/' = 1,2,3,4). In this example, 9 is a factor of both p2 and p4.

37

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Therefore, the component function sin(27rx/9) can occur in both f2 and /4, with
nonzero coefficients that sum to zero. Likewise, for each prime power p appearing in
the factorization of some pi9 we can choose a zero-sum set of coefficients associated
with the component function sin(27rx/p). This shows that there exist many 4-tuples
of functions {fv /2, /3,/4} having respective fundamental periods [pl9 p2, p3, p4)
and satisfying Ef=1/) = 0.

Some Answers

Examples 5-8 illustrate the key features of the following.

Theorem. For any collection pv /?2,..., pn of n>2 positive integers, the following
conditions are equivalent:
(I) There exist functions fl9 /2,..., fn having respective fundamental periods
Pv P2>~->Pn andsatisfying L"=if = 0;
(II) pi\[p1,P2,'~,Pi,~>,Pn] for each i = 1,2,..., w;
(III) The maximum power on each prime in the factorizations pi = 2Cii3hi5Cl ???
(1 < / < n) appears in at least two factorizations.

Proof The remarks preceding Example 7 established that (I) implies (II). It is easy
to prove that (II) implies (III). Suppose that p is the maximum power of a prime
that appears in the factorizations of pl9 /?2,..., pn. Then p\pt for some / (1 < / < n).
If Pi\[Pv Pi'--' Pi>'~> PX tnen tnere must ex*st some Pj (1 ^j ^ n> where j # /)
that has p as a factor. Thus, (II) implies (III). (The converse is clearly true.) It
remains only to show that when the conditions in (III) hold, there are ways to
construct functions /lr/2, ...,/? that satisfy (I).
Let p0=l, and let px,p2,...,pm denote the other distinct members of 0 =
{2a\2a\...,2a%3b\3b\...,y,%5c\5c\...,5c%...}, where each member of 9 di-
vides at least one pt (\<i <<n).
n). Now
Now let
let {{aik:
aik:11< <i
/ <n
< n and 0 < k < m} be any set
of constants such that

aik?=0 if and only if pk \pt,

and consider the functions
m

gi(x)= E a/*sin(27rx/P*) (i = 1,2,...,/i).

k=0

The sum defining gi contains at least one nonzero coefficient, ai0 (and others when
pi =^1). Since the integers { pk: 0 < k < m} are distinct, we can apply Property (* *)
to the nonzero terms of the sum to conclude that the fundamental period of gi is
lcm{pk: aik =? 0} = lcm{pk: Pk\Pi}~Pi- Thus, g; has fundamental period pt for
each / (1 < / < n). Since each pk^9 occurs in at least two factorizations, we can
always choose a set of nonzero coefficients {aik: 1 < / < n} satisfying YTi=iaik = 0.
Finally, let fl9 /2,..., /? denote the functions gl9 g2,'--,gn having coefficients that
satisfy Y,ni=iaik = 0 for each k = 09l9...9m. Then fl9 /2,..., fn satisfies (I).

The preceding theorem (applied to the n + 1 functions fi,f2,--,f?, &nd ~/ =

? E"=1/,) characterizes when a positive integer can be the fundamental period of a
sum /= H"=if of functions, where each f. and / have integer fundamental periods.
But what can be said about a nonintegral fundamental period of E"=1/) (as, for

38

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
instance, in Example 2)? The following consequence of our theorem relates the
prime-factor decomposition of the fundamental period of a sum of functions to the
prime-factor decompositions of the fundamental periods of the summand functions.

Corollary. For any collection pl9 p2,..., pn of n>2 positive integers, the following
conditions are equivalent:
(IV) There exist functions fv f2,..., fn with respective fundamental periods
Pv Pn-'i Pn sucn that f= Hni=ifi has fundamental period p\
(V) p = u/v is rational with (w, v) = 1, where u\[pl9 p2,..., pn] and u is divisible
by each prime power that divides precisely one pt (1 <i <n).

Proof. Assume that there exist functions fl9 f2,...,fn satisfying (IV). Then
P\iPv Pi>--> Pn\ and xt follows that p is rational. Let p = u/v with (u9v) = \.
Then each gi(x)=fi(x/v) has integer fundamental period vpi9 and g(x) =
H"=1gi(x) has integer fundamental period vp = u. Since (by the theorem)
u\[vpl9 vp29...9 vpn]9 and (w, v) = 1, we have u\[pl9 p29...9 pn]. Finally, suppose 8^
is any prime power that divides only one pt. Let v be the largest integer such that Sv
divides v. Then Sfl+P divides vpt and no other up- (j^i). Therefore (by the
theorem), SfL+p must appear in the prime power factorization of u. Thus, 8^ divides
u (and, in fact, *> = 0 since (u9v) = l). This completes the proof that (IV) im?
plies (V).
Suppose p = u/v satisfies the conditions in (V). Set un + l = u = vp9 and let
ui = vPt (1 < / < ?). Now suppose that p is a maximum power prime that appears in
some factorization?say, for u} e {ul9 u29...9 un + l). If j = n + l, then p\u and
(since u\[pl9 p2,..., pn]) we have p\vpt for some i e {1,2,..., n). If j < n9 and p
does not appear in the factorization of any other vpi9 then (since n > 2) p does not
divide v. This means that p = 8"+/i, where 8 is a prime, Sp\v and S^p- for /x > 1. In
particular, 8^ divides pj and no other pt. Hence, by (V), 8^ divides u. Since
(u9 v) = 1, this requires that v = 0 and p = S^ divides u. Thus, we have shown that
{ul9u29...9un + l} satisfies condition (III) of the theorem. Accordingly, there exist
functions gi having respective fundamental periods ut such that ?"= lgt = 0. We can
recast this as -gn+1 = L-=1gi. Now let f(x)= -gn + 1(vx)9 and let fi(x) = gi(vx)
for / = 1,2,..., n. Then each f has fundamental period ul/v=pi9 and /=E"=i//
has fundamental period u/v = p. This completes our proof that (V) implies (IV).
Remark. When n = \9 condition (V) of the corollary is necessary but not sufficient
for condition (IV).

Illustrations and Applications

Now, in light of the results we have established, let's revisit Examples 1 and 2 at
the beginning of the article.
In Example 1, the functions fx and f2 have fundamental periods Pi=p2 = 2.
The candidates for the fundamental period of fx + f2 are of the form p = u/v9
where (w, v) = 1 and u divides 2. Hence, p e {l/v: v = 1, 2, 3,... } or
p g {2/v: u = l,3,5,...}. We were able to identify the particular value p = 1 as the
fundamental period of fx +f2 because of our specific knowledge of fx + f2.
In Example 2 (where px =p2 = 1) p must be of the form p = l/v, where v is any
positive integer. Again, we were able to identify the appropriate value p = 1/N
because of our specific knowledge of fx + f2.

39

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 The particular construction technique we used in the proof that (III) implies (I)
[or (V) implies (IV)] does not yield the piecewise definitions of the functions of
Examples 1 and 2. Instead, it yields functions having the periods of those examples,
but which are defined as sums of simple sine functions.
When the fundamental period p of L"=lf is required to be integral, there are
only finitely many values of p = u that satisfy (V). In general, however, there are
infinitely many possible values of p = u/v because infinitely many integers v satisfy
(V). As v becomes large, the corresponding period p = u/v becomes small. In any
specific example, there are usually obvious lower bounds for the fundamental period
of the sum, and this enables us to eliminate all but a finite number of the
candidates.

Example 9. Suppose we have four functions gl9 g2, g3, and g4 with respective
fundamental periods qx = 3a, q2 = 13a/4, q3 = la/2, and q4 = 15a/'4, where a is
irrational. Put f(x) = gt(ax/4) (1 < / < 4) so that fl9 f2, f3, and /4 have respective
fundamental periods px = 12, p2 = 13, p3 = 14, and p4 = 15. We have
/?1 = 22-3, />2 = 13, p3 = 2-l, p4 = 3-5.
The possible values of the fundamental period p of /=E?=1/f- are of the form
p = u/v with (u, v) = 1, where u divides [22 ? 3,13,2 ? 7,3 ? 5] and u is divisible by
22, 5, 7, and 13. Hence, either u = 22 ? 5 ? 7 ? 13 = 1820 or u = 3 ? (22 ? 5 ? 7 ? 13) =
5460, and v is an integer that is relatively prime to u. The fundamental period
q of g(x) = H/j=1gi(x)=f(4x/a) is of the form q = (a/4)/? = (5 ? 7 ? I3pa)/v
(p = 1 or p = 3), where (22 ? 5 ? 7 ? 13 ? p, v) = 1. Having identified potential candi?
dates for the fundamental period q of g = E"=ig/, anything more specific about q
will require additional information about the functions g, or their sum g.
Example 10. For the same integer fundamental periods pl9 p2, p3, p4 in Example
9, it should be possible for the sum / to have, for instance, fundamental period
u/v = 1820/11. Let's construct functions / and f (1 < z < 4) with respective
fundamental periods p = 1820/11 and px = 12, p2 = 13, p3 = 14, p4 = 15 for which

First, we calculate the prime power divisors pk of the vp/s to obtain the row and
column labels for the coefficient table below. Since none of the periods is 1, the
column corresponding to p0 = 1 is unnecessary and has been omitted. Zeros have
been placed at the addresses where pk does not divide the corresponding
vpi or u.
px = 2 p2 = 22 p3 = 3 p4 = 5 p5 = 7 p6 = ll = y p7 = 13
vPl = 22 ? 3 ? 11 an au 0 0 a16 0
vp2 = 11-13 0 0 0 0 a0. a
27

vp3 = 2-l'll <*3i ? 0 0 a35 a36 0

vp4 = 3-5-ll 0 0 fl4o aAA 0 a a. 0
u = 21 ? 5 ? 7 ? 13 ax a2 0 a4 a5 0 a7

Assign nonzero values to the remaining coefficients so that the columns satisfy
ak = Z,Li<*ik V^k< 7). Now let
7

//(?*)= E aiksin(2irvx/pk) (z = 1,2,3,4).

k=l

40

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Then each fi has fundamental period pi9 and
7 4

/(*)= E **sin(27rwc/pj = E/,(*)

fc = l / = 1

has fundamental period /> = 1820/11.

Note that it is not essential to take al^=0 since p2 = 4 is already a divisor of u.
Still other possibilities exist?for example, by using appropriate composite (rather
than prime power) divisors we could achieve the same results as follows:
22irx 22itx 22irx
fAx) = sin-h sin?-h sin- p, = 12
227TX 227TX

f2(x)= -sin-jj- + sin?jy- Pi = ^

22<nx 227tx

f3(x)= -sin-^- + sin-^- P3 = 14

22ttx 22ttx 22ttx
f4(x) = -sin?? +sin?? + sin?? />4=15>
and

* 22<7tx 22itx 22ttx 22itx

/(*)= E//(^) = sin?^?+sin?j-+sin-Yj-+sin-^~

has fundamental period p = [22,5,13,2 ? 7]/ll = 1820/11.

The numbers pl9 p29..., pn are incommensurable if one or more of the ratios
Pi/Pj are irrational. For continuous functions fi with incommensurable periods, the
sum /=EJ7=1// cannot have a fundamental period. For a discussion of sums of
periodic functions with incommensurable periods, see [2] and [6].
Acknowledgement. The authors would like to thank Harley Flanders and William Watkins for their
constructive suggestions on an earlier draft of this article.

REFERENCES

1. Richard Beigel, Solution to Problem 1095, Mathematics Magazine 54 (1981) 142-143.

2. Regina Caveny and James Caveny, Periodic sums of functions with incommensurable periods,
Mathematics Magazine 55 (1982) 280-285.
3. Leroy F. Myers, Resolution of Yeshurun's conjecture with regard to periodic functions, Int. J.
Math. Educ. Sci. TechnoL 10 (1979) 281-282.
4. _, Translating a set to its complement, Amer. Math. Monthly 75 (1968) 795-796.
5. John M. H. Olmsted, Real Variables, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1959.
6. J. M. H. Olmstead and Carl G. Townsend, On the sum of two periodic functions, Two-Year College
Math Journal 3 (1972) 33-38. Also appeared in Delta Magazine 1 (1970) 1-10.
7. Warren Page, A nonmeasurable subset of the reals, Bollettino U.M.I. (4) 5 (1972) 453-454.
8. William C. Waterhouse, Letter to the editor, Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol. 9 (1978) 375.
9. Shraga Yeshurun, A conjecture with regard to periodic functions and its significance: mathematics
education versus teaching of mathematics, Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol. 8 (1977) 411-415.

41

This content downloaded from 128.197.26.12 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 02:42:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms