Find Number b/w 1000-2000: Impossible Sum of Consec. Nums

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kaliprasad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers Sum
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The number between 1000 and 2000 that cannot be expressed as the sum of consecutive integers is 1024. This conclusion is derived from the fact that any number that cannot be expressed in this manner must be a power of 2 and have no odd divisors. The mathematical proof involves demonstrating that sums of consecutive integers either have odd factors or can be expressed as sums of integers that include negative terms, ultimately leading to the conclusion that only powers of 2, such as 1024, cannot be represented as such sums.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of powers of 2 and their properties
  • Basic knowledge of arithmetic series and sums
  • Familiarity with odd and even numbers
  • Ability to manipulate algebraic expressions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of powers of 2 in number theory
  • Learn about arithmetic series and their applications
  • Explore the concept of sums of consecutive integers in depth
  • Investigate the relationship between divisors and expressibility as sums
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, educators, students studying number theory, and anyone interested in the properties of integers and their representations as sums.

kaliprasad
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
1,333
Reaction score
0
Find the number between 1000 and 2000 that cannot be expressed as sum of (that is >1) consecutive numbers.( To give example of sum of consecutive numbers

101 = 50 + 51

162 = 53 + 54 + 55 )

and show that it cannot be done
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
kaliprasad said:
Find the number between 1000 and 2000 that cannot be expressed as sum of (that is >1) consecutive numbers.( To give example of sum of consecutive numbers

101 = 50 + 51

162 = 53 + 54 + 55 )

and show that it cannot be done
[sp]Suppose that $n$ is a multiple of an odd number, say $n = k(2p+1)$. Then $$n = \sum_{r=-p}^p (k+r)$$, so that $n$ is a sum of consecutive integers.

[Note: In that sum, some of the terms may be negative. But if so, those terms will cancel with some of the positive terms, leaving an expression for $n$ as a sum of consecutive positive integers. For example, if $k = 2$ and $p=3$ then $n = k(2p+1) = 14$, and the above formula gives $14 = (-1) + 0 + 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5$. After cancelling the $-1$ with the $+1$, that becomes $14 = 2+3+4+5$.]

So if number cannot be expressed as a sum of that form then it can have no odd divisors at all and must therefore be a power of 2. If the number lies between 1000 and 2000 then it has to be 1024.

To see that a power of 2 cannot be a sum of that form, notice that if such a sum has an odd number of terms, say $2p+1$ terms with the middle term being $k$, then the sum is $k(2p+1)$ (as above) and therefore has an odd factor. If the sum has an even number of terms, say $2k$ terms starting with $m$, then the sum is $$\sum_{r=0}^{2k-1}(m+r) = k(2m+2k-1),$$ which again has an odd factor, $2(m+k)-1.$ Therefore a power of 2 can never be a sum of consecutive integers.[/sp]
 
Opalg said:
[sp]Suppose that $n$ is a multiple of an odd number, say $n = k(2p+1)$. Then $$n = \sum_{r=-p}^p (k+r)$$, so that $n$ is a sum of consecutive integers.

[Note: In that sum, some of the terms may be negative. But if so, those terms will cancel with some of the positive terms, leaving an expression for $n$ as a sum of consecutive positive integers. For example, if $k = 2$ and $p=3$ then $n = k(2p+1) = 14$, and the above formula gives $14 = (-1) + 0 + 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5$. After cancelling the $-1$ with the $+1$, that becomes $14 = 2+3+4+5$.]

So if number cannot be expressed as a sum of that form then it can have no odd divisors at all and must therefore be a power of 2. If the number lies between 1000 and 2000 then it has to be 1024.

To see that a power of 2 cannot be a sum of that form, notice that if such a sum has an odd number of terms, say $2p+1$ terms with the middle term being $k$, then the sum is $k(2p+1)$ (as above) and therefore has an odd factor. If the sum has an even number of terms, say $2k$ terms starting with $m$, then the sum is $$\sum_{r=0}^{2k-1}(m+r) = k(2m+2k-1),$$ which again has an odd factor, $2(m+k)-1.$ Therefore a power of 2 can never be a sum of consecutive integers.[/sp]

Good solution above by opalg.

my solution

for it to be a sum of consecutive numbers it must have an odd factor

Let N be a number that can be represented as a sum of k > 1 consecutive integers, starting with, let's say, a+1, summing the arithmetic progression, we get:
$N = (a+1) + (a+2) + (a+3) + . . + (a+k) = \frac(ka + k(k + 1)){2}$

Hence $2N = 2ka + k(k + 1) = k(2a + k + 1)$
Now if k is odd, N is divisible by k

If k is even, then 2a + k + 1 are odd and again N would have at least one odd factor.>1

Then I need to show that if it has a odd factor > 1 this can be expressed as sum of of consecutive number

2n + 1 = n + (n+1)

Any even number is a power of 2 or can be expressed as power of 2 multiplied by an odd number >1

Say it is $2^p(2n+1)$ where p is highest power of 2 which is a factor.

Now 2n+1 can be written as n+ (n+1) of course n > 1

Now we have 2 cases $2^p \lt n$ or $2^p \gt n$

Case 1) $2^p < n$

This can occur $2^p$ times but there shall be $2^p$ copies of n and $2^p$ copies on n + 1

In the kth copy subtract k-1 from n and add k-1 to n+ 1

So we get the values $n-(2^p-1)$ to $n+ 2^p$

The sum shall be $2^p ( n + 1 +n)$

And all numbers are consecutive ( 1st number >= 1) and positiveCase 2) $2^p > n$

We take 2n+1 copies of $2^p$

From the middle value at a distance of k we subtract k on from the left element and add k on the right element

So we have consecutive numbers $2^p-n$ to $2^p+ n$
Hence for it not to be sum of consecutive numbers it has to be power of 2 that is 1024
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
710
  • · Replies 125 ·
5
Replies
125
Views
20K
Replies
3
Views
8K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K