A set of lattice points S is called a titanic set if there exists a line passing through exactly two points in S.
An example of a titanic set is S = {(0, 0), (0, 1), (0, 2), (1, 1), (2, 0), (1, 0)}, where the line passing through (0, 1) and (2, 0) does not pass through any other point in S.
On the other hand, the set {(0, 0), (1, 1), (2, 2), (4, 4)} is not a titanic set since the line passing through any two points in the set also passes through the other two.
For any positive integer N, let T(N) be the number of titanic sets S whose every point (x, y) satisfies 0 ≤ x, y ≤N.
It can be verified that T(1) = 11, T(2) = 494, T(4) = 33554178, T(111) mod (108) = 13500401 and T(105) = 63259062.
Find T(1011) mod108.
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-09 21:58
0 ≤ x, y ≤ N
Please refrain from using ambiguous syntax.
Also, mathematics are Jewish, but they're also Arabic, and I think someone once said Arabs are proto-Jews who evolved into al-muslimi.
>>3
Does it mean that 0 is less or equal than x, *and* that y is less than N? Or does it mean that x and y are between 0 and N? You could have said $x, y \in (0,N)$ if you wanted to said that.
But no, not being able to guess the meaning makes me a retard.
Yes, I hate kikes and sandniggers.
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-09 22:07
>>6
hey mathboy looks like math isn't your thing it seems
you ought to go shoot yourself racist
>>7
Are you a kike or a mudslime? Why do you care?
looks like math isn't your thing
Programming isn't my thing because someone made a a = a++ + ++a and I'm asking the author to clarify what he meant? Yeah, no. Fuck off.
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-09 22:17
>>8
Rofl, telling me to fuck off over the internet? I'll do what I want and you cant do shit about it.
>>1
The problem seems to not be given correctly.
If x and y can be any real number less than N, then there should be an infinite number of sets even for T(1), unless there is something I'm missing.