A 3 digit number have its square made up by just 3 non-zero distinct digits. Kouhan told his Uncle Ren(zoku) about the number and its property to impress him, but to his surprise, Uncle Ren one-up him by multiplying that square to a 2 digit number and have the answer to have the exact same digits (and the number of those digits too) as they were in Kouhan's square, plus 2 zeros.
What is the palindromic difference between the 3-digit and 2-digit numbers?
Notes : As there are multiple possible answers, the intended one read the same from the back. Special thanks to Paul Hindess for his help and advice in making a better question in every aspect (mathematical and the language part, too).
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.
I wrote a program in Python to do a brute force search and found only three combinations of 3- and 2-digit numbers satisfying the conditions of the problem:
(1) m = 1 1 1 , n = 8 2 ( m 2 = 1 2 3 2 1 , n m 2 = 1 0 1 0 3 2 2 );
(2) m = 6 8 8 , n = 9 1 ( m 2 = 4 7 3 3 4 4 , n m 2 = 4 3 0 7 4 3 0 4 );
(3) m = 7 6 5 , n = 8 9 ( m 2 = 5 8 5 2 2 5 , n m 2 = 5 2 0 8 5 0 2 5 ).
Only in the third case the difference m − n ( = 6 7 6 ) is a palindromic number.