How to solve factorial related problems

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thundagere
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Factorial
AI Thread Summary
To solve factorial-related problems, particularly for finding specific digits in sums, it is effective to use modular arithmetic. In the example of finding the tens digit in the sum of factorials from 7! to 2006!, one can note that factorials greater than or equal to 10 contribute nothing to the tens digit since they are multiples of 100. Thus, only the factorials 7!, 8!, and 9! need to be considered. By calculating the sum of these factorials, it is determined that the tens digit is 4. This approach of simplifying the problem through modular reasoning is useful for similar AMC 10 problems.
Thundagere
Messages
159
Reaction score
0
Hi all,
I know what factorials are, obviously, and permutations and combinations, but what I Don't know is, given a problem with factorials in it, is there a general format for solving?
For instance, an old AMC 10 problem:

10B-#11. What is the tens digit in the sum 7! + 8! + 9! +
. . . + 2006! ?
(A) 1 (B) 3 (C) 4 (D) 6 (E) 9

How would one go about solving this?
All help appreciated!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Thundagere said:
Hi all,
I know what factorials are, obviously, and permutations and combinations, but what I Don't know is, given a problem with factorials in it, is there a general format for solving?
For instance, an old AMC 10 problem:

10B-#11. What is the tens digit in the sum 7! + 8! + 9! +
. . . + 2006! ?
(A) 1 (B) 3 (C) 4 (D) 6 (E) 9

How would one go about solving this?
All help appreciated!

Hey Thundagere and welcome to the forums.

This reminds me of a number theory problem.

For finding the final digit of the number (i.e. the lowest ranked digit in the number), then this reduces to finding the number N (mod 10).

Now based on this as well as other congruence arithmetic identities, do you have any new ideas that you can use to solve this?
 
Isn't every factorial above a certain number a multiple of 100, and therefore wouldn't add to the tens digit?
 
Char. Limit said:
Isn't every factorial above a certain number a multiple of 100, and therefore wouldn't add to the tens digit?

That's a great observation and makes the problem really easy :)
 
OK
So anything greater than or equal to 10 we can discount, since 2 * 5 * 10 is 100, which wouldn't matter.
So with that in mind, we're looking at
7! + 8! + 9!
=7!(1 + 8 + 8 * 9)
=5040(81)
=408,240
So it's then 4?
For these types of AMC 10 problems, could reasoning it out as above suffice? I'm not well versed in number theory, so...yeah.
Thanks for your help!
 
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...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
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