MHB Co-prime Numbers in a Series of 10

  • Thread starter Thread starter kaliprasad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers Series
kaliprasad
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
1,333
Reaction score
0
Show that in 10 consecutive numbers there is at least one number which is co-prime to other 9 numbers.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
[sp]In any set of ten consecutive integers, each of the numbers $0,1,\ldots,9$ will occur as the last digit of one of those integers. Select the four integers ending in $1$, $3$, $7$ and $9$. None of those will be divisible by $2$ or $5$. At most two of them will be divisible by $3$ (because consecutive odd multiples of $3$ differ by $6$), and at most one of them will be divisible by $7$ (because consecutive odd multiples of $7$ differ by $14$). So at least one of those four numbers, $N$ say, is not divisible by $3$ or $7$ (or by $2$ or $5$). Apart from $2$, $3$, $5$ and $7$, no other prime can be a factor of more than one integer in a consecutive run of ten. Therefore none of the prime factors of $N$ occurs in any of the other nine numbers, and so $N$ is coprime to all of them.[/sp]
 
Opalg said:
[sp]In any set of ten consecutive integers, each of the numbers $0,1,\ldots,9$ will occur as the last digit of one of those integers. Select the four integers ending in $1$, $3$, $7$ and $9$. None of those will be divisible by $2$ or $5$. At most two of them will be divisible by $3$ (because consecutive odd multiples of $3$ differ by $6$), and at most one of them will be divisible by $7$ (because consecutive odd multiples of $7$ differ by $14$). So at least one of those four numbers, $N$ say, is not divisible by $3$ or $7$ (or by $2$ or $5$). Apart from $2$, $3$, $5$ and $7$, no other prime can be a factor of more than one integer in a consecutive run of ten. Therefore none of the prime factors of $N$ occurs in any of the other nine numbers, and so $N$ is coprime to all of them.[/sp]

above answer is good and better than my answer which is as below
Out of 10 consecutive numbers 5 numbers are divisible by 2 and not more that 4 numbers are divisible by 3 out of which
maximum 2 numbers are odd and divisible by by 3 that makes 7, 2 numbers are divisible by 5 out of which is even so there are maximum one number is divisible by 5 and neither 2 nor 3 and that makes 8 and maximum 2 numbers are divisible by 7 out of which is only one is odd maximum one number is divisible by 7 and neither 2 nor 3 nor 5 and that makes maximum 9 numbers that are divisible by one of 2,3,5,7. so there is at least one number which is not divisible by 2,3,5 or 7 so the lowest prime factor of the same is 11 and it cannot divide any other number of the set. so this number is co-prime to rest 9.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top