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.
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top