Can a set of 11 numbers be divided into two equal subsets with the same sum?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter arcnets
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the possibility of dividing a set of 11 numbers into two equal subsets with the same sum. This includes exploring mathematical properties related to number sets and their divisibility, as well as examining specific cases and conditions under which such divisions may or may not be possible.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that among any 6 consecutive natural numbers, there exist at least 2 numbers that have no common divisor larger than 1.
  • One participant suggests that proving the relationship between consecutive integers and their greatest common factor (GCF) is essential to understanding the divisibility of the set.
  • Another participant introduces a method of analyzing the divisibility of numbers in a set by considering even and odd properties, as well as multiples of 3 and 4.
  • A later post presents a new problem regarding the division of a set of 11 numbers into two subsets of 5, raising questions about the conditions necessary for achieving equal sums.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the mathematical properties of number sets and their divisibility. There is no consensus on the methods or conclusions regarding the division of the set of 11 numbers, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific mathematical concepts such as the greatest common factor and properties of even and odd numbers, but the discussion does not resolve the implications of these concepts for the original problem posed.

arcnets
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Prove this: Among any 6 natural numbers in a row (e.g. 20,21,22,23,24,25) there's at least 2 of them which have no common divisor larger than 1.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All you need too do in this case is prove that the LCD (Least Common Denominator) of two consecutive integers is 1. It then follows that m consecutive integers have at least m - 1 pairs of integers that have no common divisors greater than 1. But, since I am a Sadistic Mathematician, I shall leave the proof as an exercise for the reader.
 
Good, Ben-CS. Except the L in LCD means largest not least. - Anyone?
 
We're both wrong: It should be GCF, for Greatest Common Factor. (Those *...* fractions are messing with my mind!)
 
call the numbers x, x+1, x+2...x+5

Now, either x or x+1 is even, along with two other numbers. Regardless, we can redefine the set that is not divisible by 2 as y,y+2,y+4 with y defined as odd. The other numbers are multiples of 2.

Only one of these can be divisble by 3. Any multiple of 3 +/- 2 or 4 is not a multiple of 3.

We might think that if y is a multiple of 4, that y+4 would be as well, but none of them is even, so none of them is a multiple of 4.

For any higher multiples, if y=nz, where z>4, (n+1)z>y+4, ruling out higher multiples.

Njorl
 
Correct IMO, Njorl.
 
Another problem:

consider a set of 11 numbers

Define the that sets can you do the following:
Remove 1 arbritary number from the set then divide the set into 2 subsets of 5 numbers each and make sure that the sum of the numbers of the first subset equals the sum of the numbers of the second subset.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K