Can a number that ends in 3 have a multiple consisting of only 1's?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter I like Serena
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Multiple
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on whether a number that ends in 3 can have a multiple consisting solely of the digit 1. Participants explore various mathematical approaches and proofs related to this question.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Mathematical reasoning, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that for a number \( N \) ending in 3, the relationship between \( N \) and the powers of 10 can be used to demonstrate the existence of a multiple consisting of only 1's.
  • One approach involves using the greatest common divisor, stating that since \( \gcd(N,10)=1 \), the order of 10 modulo \( N \) is finite, leading to the conclusion that \( 10^k - 1 \) is a multiple of \( N \).
  • Another participant introduces the concept of \( R_n \), a number consisting of \( n \) 1's, and applies the pigeonhole principle to show that two remainders must coincide when divided by \( N \), implying that a certain \( R_{n-m} \) is a multiple of \( N \).
  • Multiple participants provide similar examples, such as the case of 13 having the multiple 111111, to illustrate their points.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the premise that a number ending in 3 can have a multiple consisting of only 1's, but they present different methods and proofs to support this claim. No consensus is reached on a singular approach as multiple solutions are discussed.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the dependence on specific properties of numbers and modular arithmetic, which may not be universally applicable without further assumptions. The discussion does not resolve all mathematical steps involved in the proofs presented.

I like Serena
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
MHB
Messages
16,335
Reaction score
258
Given a number that ends in 3, prove that it has a multiple that consists of only 1's.

For instance 13 has the multiple 111111.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Klaas van Aarsen said:
Given a number that ends in 3, prove that it has a multiple that consists of only 1's.

For instance 13 has the multiple 111111.
[sp]

Let $N$ be the number. As $\gcd(N,10)=1$, $10$ has finite order, say $k$, modulo $N$. This means that $10^k-1$ is a multiple of $N$; that number consists of $k$ digits $9$.

Let $M = \dfrac{10^k-1}{9}$ (a number consisting of $k$ digits $1$). We have $10^k-1 = 9M = aN$ for some integer $a$. If $\gcd(N,3)=1$, since $N\mid 9M$, we have $N\mid M$ and we are done.

If this is not the case, let $P$ be the number obtained by copying $M$ $9$ times; this number consists of $9k$ digits $1$. Note that $P = M(1+10^k+\cdots+10^{9k})$ is a multiple of $9M$. As $M$ is a multiple of $N/9$, $P$ is a multiple of $N$.

[/sp]
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
Given a number that ends in 3, prove that it has a multiple that consists of only 1's.

For instance 13 has the multiple 111111.
[sp]Let $R_n$ be the number consisting of $n$ $1$s. If $n>m$ then $R_n - R_m$ consists of $n-m$ $1$s followed by $m$ $0$s. So $R_n - R_m = 10^mR_{n-m}$.

Suppose that $N$ is an integer ending in $3$, and consider the remainders when the numbers $R_1,\,R_2,\ldots,R_{N+1}$ are divided by $N$. There are only $N$ possible remainders mod $N$, so by the pigeonhole principle two of them must coincide, say $R_m \equiv R_n \pmod{N}$. So $10^mR_{n-m} \equiv 0 \pmod{N}$. But, as in castor28's solution, $10$ is invertible mod $N$, so it follows that $R_{n-m}\equiv0\pmod{N}$. In other words, $R_{n-m}$ is a multiple of $N$.[/sp]
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
Given a number that ends in 3, prove that it has a multiple that consists of only 1's.

For instance 13 has the multiple 111111.

I shall prove a more general case why 3 , any number that does not have a factor 2 or 5 satisfies the criteria

Proof:

The number with 10 does not have a common factor and so 10 and the number say k are coprimes

Now let us consider $10^p$ mod n for p = 1 to k-1 if k is not a multiple of 3 and upto 9k-1

they shall have k-1 remainders none of them zero and one of them shall be 1

to prove that one of them has to be 1 let us assume that none of the is one.

now there are k-1 remainders and k-2 values (as zero and 1 are not there)

so they correspond to power $10^a$ and $10^b$ with same remainder and a > b

so $10^a - 10^b \equiv 0 \pmod k$
or $10^b(10^{a-b} -1) \equiv 0 \pmod k$
or $10^{a-b} -1 \equiv 0 \pmod k$

which is not true as there is a contradiction
so there is a value n so that such that $10^n -1 equiv 0 \pmod k$

if k is not multiple of 3

$10^n -1 \equiv 0 \pmod k => \frac{10^{n-1} -1}{9} \equiv 0 \pmod k$

if k is multiple of 3
$10^n -1 \equiv 0 \pmod {9k} => \frac{10^{n-1} -1}{9} \equiv 0 \pmod k$
 
All correct.
Thank you all, and nice to see different solutions to the same problem.
They cover the solutions that I am aware of.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K