2
$\begingroup$

For $A\subseteq \omega$ we let the lower and upper density be defined as $$\mu^-(A):= \lim\inf_{n\to\infty}\frac{|A\cap n|}{n+1} \text{ and } \mu^+(A):= \lim\sup_{n\to\infty}\frac{|A\cap n|}{n+1}$$ respectively.

Let $s:\omega\to\{0,1\}$ be an infinite binary string, $n\in\omega\setminus\{0\}$ a positive integer and $t\in\{0,1\}^n$ a finite binary string of length $n$. Then we define the set of starting points of $t$ in $s$ by $$\text{start}(t, s) = \{k\in \omega: (\forall i\in n)\; t(i) = s(k+i)\}.$$ We say that $s$ is uniform for $t\in\{0,1\}^n$ if $$\mu^-\big(\text{start}(t,s)\big) = \mu^+\big(\text{start}(t,s)\big) = 1/2^n.$$

(The $1/2^n$ part is motivated by the fact that there are $2^n$ binary strings of length $n$.) We say that $s:\omega\to\{0,1\}$ is strongly uniform if for all positive integers $n$ and for all $t\in\{0,1\}^n$ we have that $s$ is uniform for $t$.

It is not clear to me whether strongly uniform infinite binary strings exist. A candidate could be the Champernowne binary string which is obtained by concatenating the binary representations of the integers: $$0\; 1 \; 10\; 11\; 100\; 101\;\ldots.$$

Question. Is the the Champernowne binary string strongly uniform? If not, is there a strongly uniform infinite binary string?

$\endgroup$
5
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Your tendency to denote the set $\{0,\dots,n-1\}$ by $n$, even in questions outside of foundations of mathematics, may be irksome and/or confusing for some. It is irksome to me. I would also usually prefer seeing $\mathbb N_0$ in place of $\omega$ -- which latter is used very differently (say) in probability. On the other hand, the symbol $\mathbb N_0$ is universally understood unambiguously. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 20:24
  • $\begingroup$ Isn't the notation $\{0,\ldots,n-1\} = n$ also immensely practical and compact? See $A \cap n$ vs $A \cap \{0,\ldots,n-1\}$. - But I get your point about $\omega$ having a different meaning in other mathematical domains. I just love $\omega$ and $\{0,\ldots,n-1\} = n$ for saving me so much typing labor! $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 20:37
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I think a serious priority should be making our posts more easily and broadly understood (perhaps even by beginners, where possible). Saving on our typing is, I would suggest, is not that important. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 20:55
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ $[n] := \{1,2,\ldots,n\}$ is much more common in finite combinatorics. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 16, 2023 at 1:35
  • $\begingroup$ Point taken @IosifPinelis, and thanks for reminding me of this compact notation, Sam! $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 16, 2023 at 17:00

1 Answer 1

6
$\begingroup$

Yes, the Champernowne binary string is normal (or strongly uniform, in your terms); see also here.

Almost all infinite binary string are normal, in the sense that the set of the corresponding real numbers in $[0,1]$ is of Lebesgue measure $1$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ That's right - the Champernowne string is normal, but strong uniformity is a much stronger condition than normalcy, because it has this measure requirement $\mu^-\big(\text{start}(t, s)\big) = \mu^+\big(\text{start}(t, s)\big) = 1/2^n$ for strings of length $n$. This requirement is missing in the definition of normal $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 19:49
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @DominicvanderZypen Strong uniformity is exactly normality (in base 2). See e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_number for the definition. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 20:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DominicvanderZypen : According to the definition at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_number#Definitions , an infinite binary string $s$ is normal (in base $2$) if, for all finite binary strings $t$ one has $\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac {N_s(t,n)}n=\frac1{2^{|t|}}$, where $|t|$ denotes the length of the string $t$ and $N_s(t,n)$ is the number of times the string $t$ appears as a substring in the first $n$ digits of $S$. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 20:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Previous comment continued: That is, $N_s(t,n)=|\text{start}(t,s)\cap[n]|$. So, $\mu^-\big(\text{start}(t,s)\big) = \mu^+\big(\text{start}(t,s)\big)=1/2^{|t|}$ iff $\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac {N_s(t,n)}n=\frac1{2^{|t|}}$. So, your term "strongly uniform" is the same as "normal". $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 20:12
  • $\begingroup$ OK thanks -> apologies to @IosifPinelis, will accept and upvote your answer. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 20:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.