Remember Me?

 Straight Dope Message Board Remember Me?

#1
03-19-2007, 05:56 AM
 brokespoke Guest Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: North Carolina Posts: 2
mathematical oddities

I had to work this one out before I believed it......The product of 111,111,111 times 111,111,111 (or 111,111,111 squared) is 12,345,678,987,654,321

Anybody want to post any others??
#2
03-19-2007, 06:07 AM
 Noone Special Guest Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Tel Aviv Posts: 5,877
This actually works for any number of '1'-s (up to 10):

1 x 1 = 1
11 x 11 = 121
111 x 111 = 12,321

etc....

This finally breaks down when you have 10 '1'-s:
1,111,111,111 x 1,111,111,111 = 1234567900987654321
#3
03-19-2007, 06:38 AM
 Robot Arm Guest Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Medford, MA Posts: 21,792
eiπ = -1
#4
03-19-2007, 06:44 AM
 Giles Charter Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Newcastle NSW Posts: 12,854
Something else that works for a similar reason:

12345679 x 8 = 98765432

and

12345679 x 9 = 111111111
#5
03-19-2007, 07:06 AM
 Malacandra BANNED Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: England, Britain, UK Posts: 18,480
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Robot Arm eiπ = -1
It's even prettier expressed as eip + 1 = 0; five fundamental constants, addition, multiplication, exponentiation and equality all in one bite-size package.

I like the way that 11,111,111,111 factorises to 21,649 and 513, 239 - just two prime factors 5 and 6 digits long!
#6
03-19-2007, 07:41 AM
 BobLibDem Guest Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps Posts: 19,641
If you add odd numbers in sequence you always get a perfect square.

1+3=4
1+3+5=9
1+3+5+7=16

etc.
#7
03-19-2007, 07:44 AM
 Alive At Both Ends Guest Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Milton Keynes, UK Posts: 1,347
142857 x 1 = 142857
142857 x 2 = 285714
142857 x 3 = 428571
142857 x 4 = 571428
142857 x 5 = 714285
142857 x 6 = 857142

The same six digits every time, in the same cyclic order.

(BTW, 142857 x 7 = 999999).
#8
03-19-2007, 07:56 AM
 Noone Special Guest Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Tel Aviv Posts: 5,877
Quote:
 Originally Posted by BobLibDem If you add odd numbers in sequence you always get a perfect square. 1+3=4 1+3+5=9 1+3+5+7=16 etc.
Well, if you have N2, what is the square of N+1?

(N+1)2 = N2+2N+1. So the difference between N2 and (N+1)2 is just 2N+1.

We start off with 12 = 1
So -- the difference between 12 and 22 is 2*1+1 = 3. So 22 = 1+3.
The difference between 22 and 32 is 2*2+1 = 5. So 32 = 22 + 5, or 1+3+5.
Etc.... ad infintum. Effectively, the series 1+3+5+...+(2N+1) is by definition = (N+1)2
#9
03-19-2007, 08:00 AM
 Noone Special Guest Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Tel Aviv Posts: 5,877
Another one... any number of the form ABC,ABC (e.g., 237,237) will be divisible by 7, by 11, and by 13.
Moreover, the result of dividing such a number by 7, then 11 and then 13 will be ABC. (so, dividing 237,237 by 7, then 11, then 13 will be 237). It's a rather neat parlor trick, if you only perform it once -- get sombody to choose the 3-digit number, then have another "double" it, a third divide by 7... all the while assuring them it will be divisible, which should seem to be no mean feat in itself!

This is because 7*11*13 = 1,001 -- and the number ABC,ABC is simply ABC*1001.
#10
03-19-2007, 08:13 AM
 Ludovic Charter Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: America's Wing Posts: 27,483
The sum of the digits of any integer divisible by 3 will also be divisible by 3.
(393/3=131 3+9+3=15, 15/3=5)
Same thing goes for 9.
#11
03-19-2007, 08:35 AM
 Alive At Both Ends Guest Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Milton Keynes, UK Posts: 1,347
Take any four-digit number in which the digits aren't all the same (e.g. 1112 is OK, but not 1111 or 2222).

Arrange its digits in ascending order and descending order, and subtract the smaller number from the larger. Repeat the process with the new number.

Starting with 4698 (for example):

9864 - 4689 = 5175

Repeat the process with the new number (5175):

7551 - 1557 = 5994

Repeat with 5994, and keep repeating:

9954 - 4599 = 5355

5553 - 3555 = 1998

9981 - 1899 = 8082

8820 - 0288 = 8532

8532 - 2358 = 6174

You always arrive at 6174, whatever number you started with; after which the sequence repeats because 7641 - 1467 = 6174 again.
#12
03-19-2007, 09:14 AM
 RealityChuck Charter Member Join Date: Apr 1999 Location: Schenectady, NY, USA Posts: 40,916
Rules for division:

Division by 1: Any integer
Division by 2: The last digit is divisible by two
Division by 3: The sum of the digits is divisible by three
Division by 4: The last two digits are divisible by four
Division by 5: The last digit is either 5 or 0
Division by 6: The last digit is divisible by two, and the sum of the digits is divisible by three
Division by 7: Double the last digit and subtract it from the rest of the number. The result is divisible by 7 (e.g., 49. 2*9=18 4-18=-14, divisible by 7).
Division by 8: The last three digits are divisible by 8
Division by 9: The sum of the digits are divisible by 9
Division by 10: The last digit is 0
Division by 11: The sum of the even digits minus the sum of the odd digits is divisible by 11 or equals 0. (e.g., 35838. Even digits: 5+3 = 8 Odd digits 3+8+8=19. 19-8=11).
Division by 12: The sum of the digits is divisible by three and the last two digits are divisible by four.
Division by 13: Four times the last digit plus the other digits is divisible by 13 (e.g., 455. 4x5= 20. 20+45 = 65. For 65: 5x2 = 20 20+6 = 26)
Division by 14: Last digit divisible by two; if so, use the test for division by 7
Division by 15: Last digit 0 or 5, sum of the digits divisible by 3.
Division by 16: Last four digits divisible by 16.
__________________
"If a person saying he was something was all there was to it, this country'd be full of rich men and good-looking women. Too bad it isn't that easy.... In short, when someone else says you're a writer, that's when you're a writer... not before."
Purveyor of fine science fiction since 1982.
#13
03-19-2007, 09:44 AM
 Giles Charter Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Newcastle NSW Posts: 12,854
Quote:
 Originally Posted by RealityChuck Rules for division: Division by 7: Double the last digit and subtract it from the rest of the number. The result is divisible by 7 (e.g., 49. 2*9=18 4-18=-14, divisible by 7). Division by 13: Four times the last digit plus the other digits is divisible by 13 (e.g., 455. 4x5= 20. 20+45 = 65. For 65: 5x2 = 20 20+6 = 26)
It's easier to do 7 and 13 together, especially for relatively large numbers:

Taker a number, e.g. 85230288
Divide the number into groups of 3 digits, starting at the right, e.g. 85 230 288
Sum the even groups, and sum the odd groups, e.g. 230 and 373
Find the difference between the two sums, e.g. 143
If that difference is divisible by 7, the number is divisible by 7.
If that difference is divisible by 13, the number is divisible by 13.
(The number is not divisible by 7, but is divisible by 13, because 143 = 13 x 11)

(The method relies on 7 and 13 being divisors of 1001)
#14
03-19-2007, 10:26 AM
 Noone Special Guest Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Tel Aviv Posts: 5,877
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Giles It's easier to do 7 and 13 together, especially for relatively large numbers: Taker a number, e.g. 85230288 Divide the number into groups of 3 digits, starting at the right, e.g. 85 230 288 Sum the even groups, and sum the odd groups, e.g. 230 and 373 Find the difference between the two sums, e.g. 143 If that difference is divisible by 7, the number is divisible by 7. If that difference is divisible by 13, the number is divisible by 13. (The number is not divisible by 7, but is divisible by 13, because 143 = 13 x 11) (The method relies on 7 and 13 being divisors of 1001)
I take it, then, that this method will work for 11 as well? (since 1001 = 7*11*13)
#15
03-19-2007, 10:32 AM
 CalMeacham Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 41,956
All of this just hits the tip of the iceberg of mathematical oddities. Have a look at David Wells' books The Penguin Dictionary of Numbers and The Penguin Dictionary of Interesting Geometry for all sorts of weird relationships you never knew of and wouldn't expect. Look up Poncelet's Porism and Steiner Chains (I discovered a subset of Poncelet's Porism on my won, but didn't realize how all-encompassing it was. Look it up on the Web for some really cute Java Applet animations).
#16
03-19-2007, 11:12 AM
 Giles Charter Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Newcastle NSW Posts: 12,854
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Noone Special I take it, then, that this method will work for 11 as well? (since 1001 = 7*11*13)
Yes -- but there's a simpler way to test for division by 11.
#17
03-19-2007, 11:16 AM
 Noone Special Guest Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Tel Aviv Posts: 5,877
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Giles Yes -- but there's a simpler way to test for division by 11.
Yes, I know the "classic" division-by-11 test (difference between sums of even- and odd-placed digits); I just liked the idea of completing the 1001 factorization by testing for all three factors
#18
03-19-2007, 11:32 AM
 Giles Charter Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Newcastle NSW Posts: 12,854
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Noone Special Yes, I know the "classic" division-by-11 test (difference between sums of even- and odd-placed digits); I just liked the idea of completing the 1001 factorization by testing for all three factors
Indeed. The most important factor tests are for prime factors. The first three primes (2, 3 and 5) all have easy tests. The next three primes (7, 11 and 13) can be done all together. So base-10 arithmetic helps up to that point: but then it suddely becomes hard. The equivalent test for 17 involves dividing into groups of 8 digits; and for 19, you divide into groups of 9 digits. Unless the number is very large -- say, bigger than 10^20 -- it would be easier just to do the straight long division.
#19
03-19-2007, 01:33 PM
 Amp Guest Join Date: Jun 2000 Posts: 4,348
2 x 2 = 4

2 + 2 = 4

1 + 2 + 3 = 6

1 x 2 x 3 = 6
#20
03-19-2007, 01:40 PM
 panamajack Guest Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: up the coast Posts: 4,417
sin x

x3

the error function

- all rather odd.
#21
03-19-2007, 03:25 PM
 rowrrbazzle Guest Join Date: Jul 1999 Location: Chicago Posts: 8,531
12 = 3 * 4
56 = 7 * 8
#22
03-19-2007, 03:36 PM
 Thirty-Nine Guest Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bristol, England Posts: 342
My username comes from The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Numbers, where 39 is described as the first number with no particularly interesting properties.

I felt sorry for it.

My favourite:

Between any two rational numbers is an irrational number.
Between any two irrational numbers is a rational number.

But there are infinitely more irrational numbers!

 Bookmarks

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is Off HTML code is Off Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Main     About This Message Board     Comments on Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports     General Questions     Great Debates     Elections     Cafe Society     The Game Room     Thread Games     In My Humble Opinion (IMHO)     Mundane Pointless Stuff I Must Share (MPSIMS)     Marketplace     The BBQ Pit

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:41 AM.

 -- Straight Dope v3.7.3 -- Sultantheme's Responsive vB3-blue Contact Us - Straight Dope Homepage - Archive - Top

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com