Construct 4-Digit Number: Greatest to Smallest

  • Thread starter Thread starter whoelsebutme
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
To construct the greatest and smallest four-digit numbers from four distinct digits, arrange the digits in descending order for the greatest number and in ascending order for the smallest. The difference between these two numbers should consist of the same digits originally chosen. The example provided identifies the digits 6, 1, 7, and 4, which lead to the Kaprekar Constant, 6174. This constant demonstrates that repeated application of the process will always return to 6174, regardless of the starting four-digit number. The discussion highlights the intriguing properties of number manipulation and the Kaprekar Algorithm.
whoelsebutme
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
4 digit number...

Consider four distinct digits.

Construct the greatest four digit number out of those digits.

Now construct the smallest number, again from those four digits.

If the difference of the two numbers consists of the same four digits as chosen originally, can you find the four digits?

:confused: :confused:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
This doesn't belong in this forum. Try general maths.
 
whoelsebutme said:
Consider four distinct digits.

Construct the greatest four digit number out of those digits.

Now construct the smallest number, again from those four digits.

If the difference of the two numbers consists of the same four digits as chosen originally, can you find the four digits?

:confused: :confused:
Say, you have 4 digits, namely: a1, a2, a3, and a4, and that: a1 > a2 > a3 > a4.
To compare 2 4-digit numbers, say abcd, adn efgh, one must first compare the thousands right? If a > e, then abcd > efgh.
If a = e, we continue to compare the hundreds, then... blah blah blah.
Can you get this?
---------------
Now if you want to construct the greatest number from these digits, how can you do that?
Can you go from here? :)
 
the answer is 6, 1, 7, and 4

*just for knowledge, the number 6174(the answer) is called the Kaprekar Constant. If you do with this number, exactly as written above, then you always get the number back...
 
In fact, if you start with any 4-digit number and go through a bunch of iterations (of the Kaprekar Algorithm, each step involving the process described in the OP), you end up with either 0, or the number above.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
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...
Back
Top