Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (MU) 9/23/84; site munnari.OZ
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!mulga!munnari!lizs
From: lizs@munnari.OZ (Liz Sonenberg)
Newsgroups: net.math
Subject: Re: Lists of points clarification
Message-ID: <615@munnari.OZ>
Date: Thu, 20-Dec-84 07:03:54 EST
Article-I.D.: munnari.615
Posted: Thu Dec 20 07:03:54 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Dec-84 03:10:43 EST
References: <206@cmu-cs-g.ARPA> <614@munnari.OZ>
Organization: Comp Sci, Melbourne Uni, Australia
Lines: 13

> 
>   I still don't see the problem.  After an *evenly distributed* list of k points
> has been chosen, exactly  k  of the subintervals
> [0, 1/(k+1) ),  [1/(k+1), 2/(k+1)), ... , [ k/(k+1), 1)  will contain one of
> the chosen points.  By the pigeon-hole principle, there must be an interval
> [i/(k+1), (i+1)/(k+1)) that doesn't contain one of the points.   Choosing the
> (k+1)th  point in this interval will produce an *evenly distributed* list of
> k+1  points, won't it ?

    OOPS.   Sorry peoples, if I had seriously tried to answer my own question I
ought to have seen my blunder immediately.
						David Wilson