
#1
Dec1904, 05:16 AM

P: 20

hi ,
i recently found while playing around with my new calculator that any number repeated six times is divisible by 7 .... for eg, 4 repeated 6 times gives 444444/7 =63492 an say 761 repeated 6 times 761761761761761761/ 7 =108823108823108823 the last one was done using a computer ... can anyone plz help me out why this happens??? regrds Mahesh 



#2
Dec1904, 05:17 AM

P: 20

one correction to my query ... not any number but any integer
sorry for that Mahesh 



#3
Dec1904, 06:23 AM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 1,123

22715371505222715371505222715371505222715371505222715371505222715371505 2 is 227153715052 repeated 6 times and is not a multiple of 7 as its prime factors are:
2 ^ 2 x 3 x 11 x 19 x 37 x 67 x 73 x 137 x 3169 x 52579 x 98641 x 333667 x 2082527 x 99990001 x 999999000001 x 3199044596370769 Edit: Sorry got a little carried away on my computer 



#4
Dec1904, 06:37 AM

P: 20

wonders of math
hi ,
repeating an integer, x (say), six times is not the same as multiplying it six times .... i m sorry but i think u havent got my question correctly... it is like this suppose x is an n digit number repeating it 6 times gives a number y= 1*x + 10^(n)*x + 10^(2n)*x + 10^(3n)*x+ ....+10^(6n)*x which is not equal to x^6 and i think i have got the solution for this problem.... if u want me to post it plz tell me , or if u want to find it urself then its good for u regards Mahesh 



#5
Dec1904, 06:41 AM

P: 277

well, it's easy to prove for any one digit number n:
10^5*n+10^4*n+10^3*n+10^2*n+10*n+n That is a single digit n repeated 6 times, divide by 7 and you get: 14285 5/7 * n + 1428 4/7 * n + 142 6/7 * n + 14 2/7 * n + 1 3/7 * n + 1/7 * n = 15870*n + (21/7)*n = 15873 * n So, a single digit repeated 6 times will always divide by 7 to an integer. In other words, if you multiply 15873 * 7 * n , where n is a single digit, then you will get a number that is that digit repeated 6 times. If you feel like it, you can attempt similar proofs for more than one digit to see if it holds for more than one digit repeated, and if not than maybe you can find certain conditions for which it would hold with bigger numbers. Or maybe someone has a better way to prove this than me ... 



#6
Dec1904, 06:59 AM

P: 696

It does not appear to be true for 123423123423123423123423123423123423 either (that is 123423 repeated 6 times).




#7
Dec1904, 07:31 AM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 9,398

Repeating a string, s, of r digits six times is the sam as the sum of a geometric progression. Let k be 10^r, it is
s +ks +k^2s+..+k^5s The sum of this is (s/9)*(10^61) since 9=2 mod 7, and thus invertible, and 10 is coprime with 7, this reduces to zero mod 7 quite trivially by fermat's little theorem. 



#8
Dec1904, 07:32 AM

P: 277

And your formula is wrong. It should only go up to 10^(5n). 



#9
Dec1904, 07:39 AM

P: 277





#10
Dec1904, 08:13 AM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 1,123





#11
Dec1904, 08:25 AM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 9,398

Either you or I have made a mistake, then, Zurtex. Now, if there truly were counter examples, then there would be a smaller on than the one you've just written. Incidentally, what is the remainder of that number mod 7?
As for dividing by 9. suppose x/9 = y in the integers, then x=9y, and x=9y mod any integer, n say. If 9 and n are relativeyl prime then there is an integer k such that 9k=1 mod n thus xk=y mod n. 9 is a unit modulo 9, 9 is invertible. If 9 and 7 weren't coprime then I couldn't do this. 



#12
Dec1904, 08:54 AM

P: 277

okay, I followed everything you said individually, but I don't understand "invertible".
I'm missing some piece of the puzzle here. Sorry for being dense. Maybe you could write it out in few steps starting from s/9 * (10^6 1) I would start like this myself (which seems to be more complicated and possibly wrong): 10^6=10^3*10^3 and 10^3 mod 7 = 1 so the whole thing mod 7 = s/9(1*1 1) = 0 



#13
Dec1904, 09:41 AM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 1,996

k1 won't be invertible mod 7 if r=0 mod 6 (Fermat's little theorem). Note Zurtex example has r=12 and Muzza has r=6. r=6 is the least number of digits you'll find for a counterexample. 



#14
Dec1904, 10:06 AM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 9,398

ah, there we go, for some reason i'd got 9 rather than 10^r  1.



#15
Dec1904, 10:18 AM

P: n/a

I think mahesh really meant the following as he himself corrected:




#16
Dec1904, 10:26 AM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 11,863

Daniel. 



#17
Dec1904, 10:33 AM

P: 277

Can someone give me a really simple definition of "invertible" here? Thanks. 



#18
Dec1904, 10:36 AM

Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 1,123

I've not been able to keep up the thread but I think you're in the wrong matt:
22715371505222715371505222715371505222715371505222715371505222715371505 2 mod 7 = 2 There will be smaller counter examples but that's the 1st one I found (mind you I only searched for about 10 secs. 


Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
The Seven Wonders  General Discussion  2  
The wonders of nature  Earth  1  
Wonders in the world  Introductory Physics Homework  1  
Wonders of the World  General Discussion  12 