Digit sum of 99

What is the smallest possible digit sum of a positive multiple of 99?

18 11 99 9

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.

3 solutions

Calvin Lin Staff
Jul 1, 2016

[This is not yet a complete solution, but has enough for you to work it out.]

The sum of digits has to be a multiple of 9.
The alternating sum of digits has to be a multiple of 11.

Hana Wehbi
Jul 1, 2016

99 × 1 = 99 a n d 9 + 9 = 18 99 \times 1= 99 \ and \ 9+9=18 . Talking about multiples is another way of looking at the multiplication table of 99 99 , then the smallest multiple will the one where 99 99 multiplied by 1 1 .

I got confused and still confused but I will check your solution later.

Hana Wehbi - 4 years, 11 months ago

The question is about the smallest digit sum of a multiple, not the digit sum of the smallest multiple.

Calvin Lin Staff - 4 years, 11 months ago

My solution is about the properties of multiples of 11:

When you multiply a number by 11 11 , you sum the digits of the number 2 by 2. For example:

Multiplying 24 × 11 24\times11 you get 264 264 as answer. In fact 2 + 4 = 6 2+4=6 . Multiplying 38 × 11 38\times11 you get 418 418 as answer. In fact 3 + 8 = 11 3+8=11 and carrying 1, 3 + 1 = 4 3+1=4 .

Now returning to the main problem.

When you multiply every number by 99, you are multiplying this number by 9 and 11.

The sum of digits of a multiple of 9 is always a multiple of 9.

Let's try with number 7:

99 × 7 = 7 × 9 × 11 = 63 × 11 99\times7=7\times9\times11=63\times11 . In this case the numbers 6 and 3 sum up to 9. Then the answer will be 693 693 . In this case the sum of digits is 18. And it will continue until 100, when you get 9900.

After this you will get two more 9's in the sum, and the digit sum will be 36, when you multiply by 101. Other numbers after it will sum or 18 or higher numbers. It is because you will always have a 9 in the answer or two or more groups of digits that sum up to 9. Then 9 is not the minimum.

The proof of it is because the alternating sum of digits of a multiple of 11 is a multiple of 11. It means that a number in form abcdef... \text{abcdef...} is a multiple of 11 if ( a + c + e + . . . ) ( b + d + f + . . . ) (a+c+e+...)-(b+d+f+...) is too. If these digits sum up to 9, it's impossible to get a multiple of 11, because the alternating sum must be a multiple of 11. Because 9 is an odd number, the values for the sum of digits in even position ( ( a + c + e + . . . ) (a+c+e+...) ) and odd position ( ( b + d + f + . . . ) (b+d+f+...) ) must be 9 and 0, 8 and 1, 7 and 6, 5 and 4, 4 and 5, 3 and 6, 2 and 7, 1 and 8 or 0 and 9. Making a subtraction of it you will not get a multiple of 11.

We can conclude about it, is that the sum of digits of a multiple of 99 will never be smaller than 18. It is because the properties of multiplying by 11 and 9.

It's not clear to me what you're trying to express. I do not see a strong reason why the digit sum cannot be 9.

Calvin Lin Staff - 4 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

I forget to say that the lowest positive multiple of 99 is 99 itself. When I said that the sum of other multiples higher than 99 must have a digit sum higher than 9, it implies that 18 is the minimum possible sum.

Victor Paes Plinio - 4 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

In correction of my comment:

The reason why the digit sum can't be 9, is because the alternating sum of these numbers be a multiple of 9, as I said in my solution when I edited it.

Victor Paes Plinio - 4 years, 11 months ago

Right, so the key is to explain why the sum must be greater than 9. I don't think you did this sufficiently well. E.g. you considered two digits, three digits, four digits, six digits as separate cases. How do you know that there isn't a 101 digit multiple with a digit sum of 9?

Calvin Lin Staff - 4 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

@Calvin Lin I updated my solution with an explanation for it.

Victor Paes Plinio - 4 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

@Victor Paes Plinio Essentially, the part that you need is in "the proof of it is because ...". The other stuff isn't needed, and some of them are wrong.

  1. I don't understand "sum the digits of the number 2 by 2".
  2. I don't understand what property you are showing with 3 + 8 = 11 3 + 8 = 11 carrying 1.
  3. "It is because you will always have a 9 in the answer or two or more groups of digits that sum up to 9" needs to be explained, and I sortof see it in the next paragraph, but that should be clarified.

Calvin Lin Staff - 4 years, 11 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...