MHB Recreational Number Theory, Unsolved Problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the challenge of finding a perfect power k^m greater than 1, where neither k, m, nor k^m contain the digit 2 in their decimal representation, and they do not share any decimal digits. The original poster has attempted to find such integers using an online big integer calculator but has faced difficulties, especially as the numbers grow larger. They have successfully identified examples for other digits (d) but remain uncertain about the existence of a solution for d = 2. The poster suggests that a brute force search might yield results or that a proof could clarify the impossibility of such integers existing. The problem remains intriguing and unsolved, inviting further exploration by others.
Tamas
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Find a perfect power k^m > 1 where k, m, k^m do not contain 2 in their decimal digits, nor do share any decimal digit, no matter if k^m might possibly be expressed in more than one way for some value, e.g. 8^2 = 4^3. I do not know if such an integer exists at all, or how many and how large they are if they do. What did I do to try finding a solution to this problem? I cannot compute or program, so I tried an online big integer calculator with manual input and checking. This was, though methodical, but slow. I got to very large numbers without success, and the more digits appeared, the less likelihood remained for finding a match. Since I am not a mathematician, let alone a number theorist, I cannot prove or disprove the existence of such integer. Finding one can be a proof, but it is beyond my capabilities. Still, this interesting problem fascinates me and I hope others will like it too.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The more interesting it is, because powers exist with all the other individual decimal digits d missing from the otherwise also not decimal digit sharing k, m, and k^m.
So, d = 2 seems to be elusive, or, is indeed the exception?
Easily found examples for each d not equal 2 as follows:
For d = 0 -> 2^3 = 8; for d = 1 -> 3^2 = 9; for d = 3 -> 67^2 = 4489; for d = 4 -> 33^2 = 1089; for d = 5 -> 2^4 = 4^2 = 16; for d = 6 -> 7^2 = 49;
for d = 7 -> 44^2 = 1936; for d = 8 -> 34^2 = 1156; and for d = 9 -> 38^2 = 1444.
I believe a brute force search may bring up perhaps an example for d = 2, or an insightful proof is found for its impossibility and therefore non-existence.
Without these, we don't know.
 
Last edited:
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...
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...
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...
Back
Top