One small difference is pretty large

Algebra Level 1

2 2014 2 2013 = ? \LARGE \color{#20A900}2^{\color{#3D99F6}{2014}}-\color{#20A900} 2^{\color{#3D99F6}{2013}} = \ \color{#20A900}?

2 × 2013 2 \times 2013 2 2013 2^{2013} 2 × 2014 2 \times 2014 2 2014 2^{2014}

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

42 solutions

Victor Loh
Jul 7, 2014

2 2014 2 2013 2^{2014}-2^{2013}

= 2 2013 ( 2 ) 2 2013 =2^{2013}(2)-2^{2013}

= 2 2013 ( 2 1 ) = 2 2013 =2^{2013}(2-1)=\boxed{2^{2013}} .

I noticed a pattern. If 2^4 - 2^3 = 2^3 and 2^3 - 2^2 = 2^2, assuming the pattern continued, so long as the statement was in the form 2^x - 2^(x-1), the answer would be 2^(x-1). In more general form, n^x - n^(x-1) = (n-1)n^(x-1).

Scholastica Okoye - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

think it only works for 2 though. So no 'n' form. 3^3 - 3^2 = 18 . not 9.

Dom Lawrence - 6 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

it still work, look 3^3-3^2=3^2(3)-3^2=3^2(3-1)=3^2(2)=9x2=18

shu he - 6 years, 10 months ago

Very logical point.

سمیرا یاسمین - 6 years, 9 months ago

na cancel that. you've got it in there. good work

Dom Lawrence - 6 years, 10 months ago

I'm chiming in just to elaborate on some of the explanations already given. It may seem obvious, but I hope my explanation -- the way that has helped me get what is going on -- helps others get it, too.

In this problem, simply realize that the second term is exactly half of -- one order of 2 less than -- the first term. Thus, when you're working with a base of 2, take any order of 2 and divide it in half and subtract that from the original number, the difference is, well, half, which is one order of 2 less. That's exactly what's going on here, and of course we can visualize that more easily when we use smaller numbers, e.g., ( 2 4 ) ( 2 3 ) = 2 3 , o r ( 2 4 ) / 2 (2^4)-(2^3)=2^3, or (2^4)/2 (i.e., 16 8 = 16 / 2 = 8 16-8=16/2=8 , the same value as the second term).

As others have pointed out, n x n ( x 1 ) = ( n 1 ) n ( x 1 ) n^x - n^{(x-1)} = (n-1) * n^{(x-1)} only works when the base n is 2, in which case we're either doubling (incrementing the order of the exponent by one), or halving (decrementing the order of the exponent by one).

Jeff Carter - 5 years, 5 months ago

Its not working when the power is 1 and 0 when the value of n is anything other than 2

Gourav Shaw - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

I believe it is always valid now, because I checked the equation using the distributive property of multiplication, paying particular attention to the exponent rules for multiplication. n^x - n^(x-1) = (n-1) * n^(x-1) = n^x - n^(x-1) Try checking the equation itself by the distributive property of multiplication. Anyway, this means that it is valid for n other than 2. Say n= 0 and x = 1. (Though really, n and x can be any two numbers, positive or negative.) 0^1 - 0^0 = (0-1) * 0^0 0 - 0 = -1 * 0 0 = 0 Say n= 3 and x = 1. 3^1 - 3^0 = (3-1) * 3^0 3 - 1 = 2 * 1 2 = 2 Say n= 3 and x = 0. 3^0 - 3^(-1) = (3-1) * 3^(-1) 1 - 0.3333333 = 2 * 0.3333333 0.6666666 = 0.6666666

Scholastica Okoye - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

@Scholastica Okoye Mehn, don't test Nigerians

moses aiyenuro - 4 years, 12 months ago

The pattern only valid for n=2. Not valid for n>2

Yahaya Jibrin Danjumah - 5 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

I believe it is always valid now, because I checked the equation using the distributive property of multiplication, paying particular attention to the exponent rules for multiplication. n^x - n^(x-1) = (n-1) * n^(x-1) = n^x - n^(x-1) Try checking the equation itself by the distributive property of multiplication. Anyway, this means that it is valid for n>2. Say n= 5 and x = 9. (Though really, n and x can be any two numbers, positive or negative.) 5^9 - 5^8 = (5-1) * 5^8 1953125 - 390625 = 4 * 390625 1562500 = 1562500

Scholastica Okoye - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

@Scholastica Okoye You just showed that your theory for it always working for "n" is incorrect as 1562500 does not equal 5^8. 5^8 = 390,625.

Timothy Wilson - 5 years ago

I also do same way

Nirmal Prakash - 5 years, 10 months ago

Why yall so smart

Kenzie Willier - 5 years, 5 months ago

Me too. Cheers.

Akshat Mehra - 5 years, 4 months ago

I did the same thing.

Briana Lightbourn - 5 years, 3 months ago

I used the samething =)

Mike C - 5 years, 2 months ago

I understand you're searching for patterns, but how did you arrive at the conclusion of the existence of said pattern to begin with?

Mike Thomas - 4 years, 9 months ago

How can you ’assume’ that the pattern continues? \text{How can you 'assume' that the pattern continues?}

Victor Loh - 6 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

Because algebra is the mathematics of patterns. An algebraic expression is, for all intents and purposes, the mathematical solution to a pattern observed around us.

Besides, mathematicians have been using that same technique for centuries. When looking for a pattern in a group of large numbers, instead look for a pattern in a similar group of smaller numbers.

Jason Carr - 6 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

@Jason Carr Its not always true..is it ?

A Former Brilliant Member - 5 years, 10 months ago

How do you prove it? \text{How do you prove it?}

Victor Loh - 6 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

@Victor Loh mathematical proof by induction

Andrew Czarnuszewicz - 6 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

@Andrew Czarnuszewicz I agree :)

Jesse Boldt - 5 years, 9 months ago

@Victor Loh you test it.

Dom Lawrence - 6 years, 10 months ago

Thanks for the info..any books that u would recommend in order to learn this type TRICKS..

Sanket Kulkarni - 6 years, 8 months ago

Me too noticed the same :D

Shiyas Fazal - 6 years, 8 months ago

I did the same

SAI KISHORE - 5 years, 4 months ago

base 2 so 2014 is twice as big as 2013. so if 2014 is (2013 + 2013) - 2013.

Joel Villavicencio - 6 years, 10 months ago

2^4 - 2^3 = 16-8=8 which is equal 2^3 :D :D so take on it the solution it'd be 2^2013

Nadä Hossam - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

same process i went about.

Brandon Bellick - 6 years, 10 months ago

great solution

Abhishek Das - 6 years, 11 months ago

Brilliant Victor. I took lots of time to realize

Jace Suico - 6 years, 8 months ago

let 2^2013 = x, so,2^2014 - 2^2013 =2*(2^2013)-(2^2013)= 2x-x=x=2^2013

Muhammad Arif - 6 years, 11 months ago

this amazing

Swapna Sudharsan - 6 years, 11 months ago

simple if you think correct way

Kamal Khaiwal - 6 years, 11 months ago

GREAT TRICK.

Ajay Bhardwaj - 6 years, 11 months ago

=2(2)^{2014}^{+}^{2013} =4^{4054182} =16216728 F.A.

Mark Anthony Abenir - 6 years, 8 months ago

how 2^2014=2^2013 (2)

abubakar gul - 6 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

Because 2 is the multiple. Lets say you have 2^2 then 2^3 is twice as big. First one is 2x2 second one is 2x2x2 so (2x2)*2. Its twice as big. So if you have 5^25 then 5^26 is 5 times as big.

Michael Bruce - 5 years, 11 months ago

=2^(2014-2013) =2^(1) =2^1 =2 Why not answer should be 2

Sagar Ghorpade - 5 years, 8 months ago

Log in to reply

You only subtract the actual powers when you divide the numbers

Michael Rizzi - 5 years, 2 months ago

gud solution

Muhammad Faizan - 6 years, 11 months ago

FROM WHERE NO.1 HAS COME

Kameswari Lakkamraju - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

2014 2013 2 _ 2

2013 2013 2 x 2 _ 2

2013 2013 2 (2 - 1) [ where we taken 2 as common. 2013 x 1 = 2013 2 2 this is how we get 1 and 2013 x 2 = 2014.] 2 2

so, 2013 (2 - 1) 2013 2 = 2

         HOPE U GOT IT :)

Carl Jackson - 6 years, 11 months ago

There is always an imaginary one for every whole number there is an imagenary one as its denominator, as its exponent at times to make a negative number work for a solution>>have peace with that idea or it will drive you crazy.

Frances M Saberon - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

Wise words "have peace with that idea or it will drive you crazy."

David Holloway - 5 years, 5 months ago

By taking common

Malik Yousaf - 6 years, 11 months ago

X= (2^2014) - (2^2013) X= (2 * 2^2013) - (1*2^2013) X=(2^2013) *(2 - 1) X= 2^2013

Sam Martin - 6 years, 11 months ago

that exactly what I did

Fahad Alawadhi - 6 years, 10 months ago

a wonderful solution

Jason Zhang - 6 years, 10 months ago

the last line can be clarified by taking 2^2013 common. When you do that you have 2^2013 * ((2*1) - 1)

Jhan Bhaia - 6 years, 10 months ago

general solution is (2^(n+1))-(2^n)= 2^n

nayeem tufat - 6 years, 8 months ago

Nice question, i have solved it

Munir Ahmad - 6 years, 8 months ago

2^x - 2^y = 2^y . 2^{x - y} - 2^y = 2^y (2^{x - y} - 1)

Zainal Syam Arifin - 6 years, 8 months ago

2^2013 r8 answer

Rafiq Taqqi - 6 years, 7 months ago

The bases are equal (in terms of absolute value), so you just scratch the bases and subtract the exponents to get 1.

Jake Donahue - 5 years, 11 months ago

nice one :)

Nauman Chaudhry - 6 years, 11 months ago

i hate to say this.. but i agree! well played

Jan Paolo Relos - 6 years, 8 months ago

2 raised 2013

Jerome Rendon - 6 years, 8 months ago

my ans is 2

Jerome Rendon - 6 years, 8 months ago

wrong ans because when two base are same we can take one them. 5^3-5^2=100 . only applicable for 2

Manzur Rahman Ruddro - 5 years, 11 months ago

Following the laws of bodmas this is incorrect as the answer would be 2^1=2 there is no direct instruction and therefore can only assume to complete this by bodmas

Stephanie Trueman - 5 years, 10 months ago

How did u get 1?

Walters Cal - 5 years, 10 months ago

totally illogical solution! 2^2013*(2-1)=2^2013 * (0)=0

it always will be equal to zero.

Misbah Azeemi - 5 years, 9 months ago

2'(2014-2013)aisa karke answer sirf 2'1 qui nahi

Sagar Ghorpade - 5 years, 8 months ago

Is there a name to this technique, so that I may search it up online?

Tory McClymonds - 5 years, 3 months ago

If I would try this equation like that below, 2014 ln 2 - 2013 ln 2 is it gonna right?

Ahmed Alif - 5 years, 2 months ago

How did you get the (2-1)?

Lucas Kikkawa - 5 years ago

ONLY EASY SOLUTION . THANKS VICTOR .

Sujit Chy - 6 years, 7 months ago

But when I give 2^2013 on my calculator shows Math Error. Why?

Sheikh Nazmul Islam - 5 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

The number is insanely huge. Your calculator cannot handle it.

Michael Bruce - 5 years, 11 months ago

I couldn't tell you. I never took nor did I ever plan to take algebra, trigonometry, calculus, physics or anything remotely close to it. Never wanted it, never needed it and never used any of it in 56 years, not going to start now.

James Barnes - 5 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

Age is just a number......!

A Former Brilliant Member - 5 years, 10 months ago

Thumbs up!!

Charity Aghahowa - 5 years, 10 months ago

I couldn't tell you. I never took, nor did I ever plan to take algebra, trig, calculus or anything else above basic math. Never needed it, never used it or anything remotely similar.

James Barnes - 5 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

Thanks for confirming the stereotype that all Americans are stupid.

Justin Zeigler - 5 years, 3 months ago

why we don't solve it like this

2^2014 -2^2013 = X

2014 ln(2) - 2013 ln(2) = ln (X)

ln(2) (2014 -2013 ) = ln(X)

ln(2) = ln(x) so X=2

Shady Nabil - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

Wrong answer sequence, When you take ln of an equation you have to take ln or the whole side once,so: Ln(2^2014-2^2013) is not equal to ln(2^2014)-ln(2^2013)

Mina Younan - 6 years, 11 months ago

why we don't solve it like this 2^2014 -2^2013 = X 2014 ln(2) - 2013 ln(2) = ln (X) ln(2) (2014 -2013 ) = ln(X) ln(2) = ln(x) so X=2

Shady Nabil - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

the logarithm concept is totally wrong

Kang Chin Ann - 6 years, 11 months ago

if 2^2014 -2^2013 = X, then ln(X)=(2014ln(2))/(2013ln(2)).

Ajmal Ansari - 6 years, 11 months ago
Arul Kolla
May 13, 2014

Take a simpler case, such as 2 3 2 2 2^{3}-2^{2} , which equals 2 2 2^{2} . For any non-zero positive integer n n , 2 n 2 n 1 2^{n}-2^{n-1} = 2 n 1 2^{n-1} , so 2 2014 2 2013 2^{2014}-2^{2013} is 2 2013 2^{2013} .

This answer is more logic !Thank you for sharing~

Gary Jiang - 4 years, 11 months ago

Great explanation

Brandon Miles - 4 years, 11 months ago

Is there a name to this property? I'd like to look further into it.

Linus Garcia - 4 years, 10 months ago
Lokesh Sharma
Jul 7, 2014

2 2014 2^{2014} is simply twice of 2 2013 2^{2013} . Now if we remove 2 2013 2^{2013} from 2 2014 2^{2014} , what we have is, is 2 2013 2^{2013}

That is the way i thought too. Exemple: take 2¹¹ - 2¹º. If 2¹º is 1024, 2¹¹ is 1024 x 2=2048 ... 2048 (2¹¹) - 1024 (2¹º) = 1024

Leonardo Engracia - 5 years, 11 months ago

but that is just in 2's case. what if the base was something positive but a non-2 integer?

Anupama Tiwari - 4 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

The general formula would be a n + 1 a n = a . a n a n = ( a 1 ) a n a^{n+1} - a^n = a.a^n - a^n = (a-1)a^n . In this specific problem a = 2 a = 2 .

Lokesh Sharma - 4 years, 7 months ago
Ben Chalmers
Aug 7, 2015

2 2014 2 2013 = ? 2^{2014}-2^{2013} = ?

2 2014 = 2 2013 + 2 2013 2^{2014} = 2^{2013}+2^{2013}

2 2013 + 2 2013 2 2013 = 2 2013 2^{2013}+2^{2013}-2^{2013} = \boxed{2^{2013}}

Rules of indices: x y = 2 x y 1 \boxed{x^{y}=2x^{y-1}}

Same to you

Sumitra Wankhade - 4 years, 7 months ago
Suresh Gohil
Jan 3, 2016

You imagine the minimum amount 2 2^4-2^3=? 2^4=16 & 2^3=8 16-8=8 8=2^3 2^4-2^3=2^3 So any count following this pattern So 2^2014 - 2^2013=2^2013

Andrew Rodgers
Jul 18, 2015

Seemingly, you could half 2 to 2014 powers, since multiplying by two is just doubling (2 squared=4, 2 cubed=8), meaning you could figure this out by knowing what 2 to 2014 powers. Of course, a number that high could be difficult to work with even for what would normally be a simple sum, most notably when using division, being usually quite easy.

Jacob Morse
Oct 18, 2016

2 2014 2 2013 2^{2014} - 2^{2013}

Factorise out 2 2013 2^{2013} from both terms:

= 2 2013 ( 2 1 1 ) 2^{2013} (2^{1} - 1)

Left with final answer:

= 2 2013 ( 1 ) = 2 2013 2^{2013} (1) = 2^{2013}

William Morton
Sep 10, 2016

y^x - y^x-1 = y^x-1

Bhavik Bansal
Jul 3, 2015

As 2^2014=(2^2013)*2=2^2013+2^2013 That means 2^2014-2^2013=2^2013

Henrique Jensen
Jul 2, 2015

k(maybe 2013) is a number and k+1(maybe 2014) is your successor so,
2^(k+1) - 2^k =
2^k*2^1 - 2^k =
2^k + 2^k - 2^k =
2^k



2^2014-2^2013 =2^2013(2-1) =2^2013

Abu Elkhair
Jan 26, 2017

Apply equivalent problem of simple units

Janas Bartek
Jun 26, 2016

I dont understand why ppl disscus some problems like that... not abe to solve some problems more difficult ?

If you want to try to difficult problems, click here

Pranshu Gaba - 4 years, 11 months ago
Mark Maillet
Jun 8, 2016

2^(n+1) - 2^n = (2^n)(2^1) - 2^n = (2^n)(2-1) = 2^n

Vasanth Vignesh
Apr 30, 2016

2^2013(2-1)=2^2013

Simone Nerviani
Apr 3, 2016

x=2013

2^(x+1) - 2^x = 2^x • 2 - 2^x = 2^x • (2 - 1 ) = 2^x

2^x = 2^2013

Vignesh Rao
Dec 23, 2015

Let 2 2013 be x We know that, 2 × 2 2013 = 2 2014 [ a m × a n = a m + n ] 2 2014 = 2 x 2 2014 2 2013 = 2 x x = x = 2 2013 \text{Let } 2^{2013} \text{ be }x \\ \text{We know that, }2 \times 2^{2013} = 2^{2014} \ \ \ [a^m \times a^n = a^{m+n}] \\ \therefore 2^{2014} = 2x \\ \Rightarrow 2^{2014} - 2^{2013}= 2x - x =x = \boxed{2^{2013}}

Ellie-Anne Watts
Dec 10, 2015

This one is quite easy but I think some people are over complicating things.

To get 2^{2014} you have to do 2X2^{2013}.

so if we put that in to our equation instead we get :

(2X2^{2013})-2^{2013}=2^{2013}

Moderator note:

Good job with recognizing the exponents. They can be tricky at times.

Vivti N
Nov 29, 2015

2^2014 - 2^2013

2^2013(2) -2^2013

2^2013[2-1]

2^2013//

Lukas Leibfried
Nov 13, 2015

2 2014 2 2013 = 2 2013 ( 2 1 2 0 ) = 2 2013 2^{2014} - 2^{2013} = 2^{2013}(2^{1} - 2^{0}) = 2^{2013}

Caroline Lui
Nov 8, 2015

So I apparently chose a really roundabout way of solving this, but I got there. Okay, so we know that 2^2013 is just (2^2014)/2. Substitute that in and find a common denominator to subtract, and you get ((2)(2^2014)-(2^2014))/2. So, ((2-1)(2^2014))/2, which simplifies to (2^2014)/2, which we said before was just 2^2013. :)

Rajesh Kumar
Oct 30, 2015

2^2014=2^2013*2^1

                        Which can be written as

2^2014=2^2013+2^2013

and hence

2^2014-2^2013 = 2^2013+2^2013-2^2013=>

2^2013...

Sirajudheen Mp
Oct 19, 2015

2^2014-2^2013=(2^2013)(2-1)=2^2013

Aaron Montalvo
Oct 18, 2015

I considered it in the ideas of halves. 2^(n-1) is half of 2^n . Therefore, a whole minus half is half. 2^n - 2^(n-1) = 2^(n-1).

종혁 김
Oct 12, 2015

2014 2013 2013 2013 2014 2 =2 + 2 =2 ×2 = 2

Elizabeth Wang
Sep 10, 2015

2^2013 times 2 is 2^2014, so 2^2014-2^2013 = 2(2^2013)-2^2013 = 2^2013

Aidelle Pizzaro
Sep 5, 2015

I do't get it. How come you'll multiply it by 2?

2^2014- 2^2013 =2(2^2013)-(2^2013) let x=2^2013 therefore,the eq becomes 2x-x =x=2^2013

Kalindi Suchak - 5 years, 7 months ago
Rizwan Rafi
Sep 4, 2015

2^n+1 - 2^n is always equal to 2^n .

Shekhar Chaudhary
Aug 30, 2015

2^4-2^3=8=2^3 gives the pattern leads to2^2013

Mark Leahy
Aug 26, 2015

2^2014 = 2^2013 x 2 therefore 2(2^2013)-2^2013=X therfore 2^2013=X 2^2013

Ramesh Prajapati
Aug 25, 2015

here X^n - X^(n-1) =X^(n-1) {X-1} =so X become 2, AND n become 2014 =2^2013 * {2 - 1} = 2^2013 ....................ANS

Amit Ojha
Aug 22, 2015

(2p1 2p2013-2 p2013)=2p2013(2-1)=2p2013

Sarah Lawley
Aug 21, 2015

It's 2 not 2 to the 2013 power

Darshan S
Aug 17, 2015

Just calc unit place digit and eliminate the options

Jonathan Rivera
Aug 8, 2015

Similar to Victor: i just factored 2^2013(2^2 - 2) = 2^2013

if you calculate (using windows calculator) absolute value for 2^2014 then subtract 2^2013 the answer is 2^2013 !! Tedious big numbers here but with modern computers that can handle them why not nothing like this when i was at school 50 years ago

2^2014 - 2^2013 =2^2013 (2-1) =2^2013 (1) =2^2013

Owen Leong
Aug 2, 2015

2 2014 2 2013 = 2 × ( 2 2013 2 2012 ) 2^{2014} - 2^{2013} = 2\times(2^{2013} - 2^{2012})

2 2013 2 2012 = 2 × ( 2 2012 2 2011 ) 2^{2013} - 2^{2012} = 2\times(2^{2012} - 2^{2011})

. . . ...

2 1 2 0 = 1 2^{1} - 2^{0} = 1

2 2014 2 2013 = 2 2013 × ( 1 ) = 2 2013 2^{2014} - 2^{2013} = 2^{2013}\times(1) = 2^{2013}

Ashik Mahmud
Jul 26, 2015

2^2014 - 2^2013 = 2^2013(2 - 1) = 2^2013

Hadia Qadir
Jul 20, 2015

2^2014 - 2^2013 =2^2013(2) - 2^2013 =2^2013 (2 - 1) = 2^2013

Thien Thanh
Jul 1, 2015

2^2014 is a half from 2^2015 because 2^2015 multiply more than 2^2014 is one number two so 2^2014 is double of 2^2013. 1- 0.5 =0.5 . The answer is 2^2013

Ahsan Habib
Jun 23, 2015

2^4 - 2^3 = 16-8=8 (8=2^3)

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...