MHB Is the Product of Two Integers Greater Than 10^2009? Let's Prove It!

  • Thread starter Thread starter anemone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integers Product
anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
115
Prove that $\large 3^{4^5}+4^{5^6}$ is the product of two integers, each at least $\large 10^{2009}$.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
anemone said:
Prove that $\large 3^{4^5}+4^{5^6}$ is the product of two integers, each at least $\large 10^{2009}$.
$\large 3^{4^5}=3^{1024}$
$\large 4^{5^6}=4^{15625}=(3+1)^{1024}\times 4^{14601}$
using binomial expansion the first part is done
 
Last edited:
Hello, Albert!

Prove that $3^{4^5}+4^{5^6}$ is the product of two integers,
each at least $\large 10^{2009}$.
You are misreading the exponents.

In an exponential "stack",
. . we read from the top down.

. . 3^{4^5} \;=\;3^{1024}

. . 4^{5^6} \;=\;4^{15,625}However: .(3^4)^5 \;=\;8^4\:\text{ and }\: (4^5)^6 \:=\:1024^6
 
thanks soroban , in a haste I made a mistake in misreading the exponent :o

now the solution is as follows :

$(3^{512})^2+(2^{15625})^2---(1)$
let $a=3^{512}, b=2^{15625}$
(1) becomes $(a+b)^2 -2ab=(a+b)^2 -[(3^{256}\times 2^{7813})]^2=(x+y)(x-y)$
$here \,\, x=a+b, y=(3^{256}\times 2^{7813}) $
the rest is easy:
we only have to compare x-y and $10^{2009}$(compare digit numbers of both values)
I only count them roughly
$15625\times log 2>15625\times 0.3>4687>2009$
$256\times log 3+7813\times log 2>102+2343$
4687-102-2343=2242>2009
$\therefore x-y >10^{2009}$
and the proof is finished
 
Last edited:
soroban said:
Hello, Albert!


You are misreading the exponents.

In an exponential "stack",
. . we read from the top down.

. . 3^{4^5} \;=\;3^{1024}

. . 4^{5^6} \;=\;4^{15,625}However: .(3^4)^5 \;=\;8^4\:\text{ and }\: (4^5)^6 \:=\:1024^6

Hi soroban,

Thanks for helping me to let Albert know that a misreading has occurred and that he has the chance to fix things right.:)

Albert said:
thanks soroban , in a haste I made a mistake in misreading the exponent :o

now the solution is as follows :

$(3^{512})^2+(2^{15625})^2---(1)$
let $a=3^{512}, b=2^{15625}$
(1) becomes $(a+b)^2 -2ab=(a+b)^2 -[(3^{256}\times 2^{7813})]^2=(x+y)(x-y)$
$here \,\, x=a+b, y=(3^{256}\times 2^{7813}) $
the rest is easy:
we only have to compare x-y and $10^{2009}$(compare digit numbers of both values)
I only count them roughly
$15625\times log 2>15625\times 0.3>4687>2009$
$256\times log 3+7813\times log 2>102+2343$
4687-102-2343=2242>2009
$\therefore x-y >10^{2009}$
and the proof is finished

Thanks Albert for participating and your solution as well!

Suggested solution by Pedro and Alex:

Let $m=3^{256}$ and $k=4^{3906}$. Then

$\begin{align*}\large 3^{4^5}+4^{5^6}&=m^4+4k^4\\&=(m^4+4m^2k^2+4k^4)-4m^2k^2\\&=(m^2+2mk+2k^2)(m^2-2mk+2k^2)\end{align*}$

Notice that $m^2+2mk+2k^2>m^2-2mk+2k^2>2k^2-2mk=2k(k-m)>k>2^{7800}>(10^3)^{780}>10^{2009}$.

The result is then follows.
 
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.
Back
Top