Solve Large Numerical Values Without a Calculator

PageWizard
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone :),

I'm sure someone will have no problem helping me with this. How do I figure out large powered numerical values without using a calculator. Kept getting questions involving 2^2007 and others. How would I be able to figure out these values without using a calculator or a lot of time on my hands? I haven't studied yet how to figure this out. Hope that makes sense, and thank you for your time to helping me with this :).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not certain I understand just what you want. It seems pretty pointless to be able to write out all the digits in the number 2^2007. So how about an approximate result where you find the nearest power of 10?

Basically, you need to know that log(2) is approximately 0.3. Using that, we can write:

<br /> 2^{2007} = 10^{\log(2^{2007})}<br /> = 10^{2007 \cdot log(2)}<br /> \approx 10^{2007 \ \cdot \ 0.3}<br /> \approx 10^{602}<br />

Or ... you can use the fact (familiar to those knowledgeable about computers) that 2^10 is approximately 1000 or 10^3 (It's really 1024, but we're approximating here). So:

<br /> 2^{2007} = 2^{10 \ \cdot \ 200.7} = (2^{10})^{200.7} \approx (10^3)^{200.7} = 10^{3 \ \cdot \ 200.7} \approx 10^{602}<br />
 
Or...

the questions may have been about modular arithmetic, like "what is the last digit of 2^2007". In that case, you look at

2^1 = 2 (mod 10)
2^2 = 4 (mod 10)
2^3 = 8 (mod 10)
2^4 = 6 (mod 10)
2^5 = 2 (mod 10)
. . .

and notice that the pattern repeats.
 
I think they would be looking for modular arithmetic since this is a number theory style proof they request for these type of questions. But, this helps me out thank you, gives me somewhere to start :).
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
Back
Top