For some positive integers n , n 2 − 2 0 1 6 is a perfect square. Find the smallest possible value for n .
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.
Note: We could have directly concluded that n 2 − 2 0 1 6 ≥ 0 ⇒ n ≥ 2 0 1 6 = 2 5 0 4 .
Unfortunately, this approach isn't great because it is very unique to the value of 2016. For example, if we had ( n − m ) 2 = n 2 − 2 0 1 7 , then we would still arrive at n ≥ 4 5 , and then start testing the cases n = 4 5 , 4 6 , … . Unfortunately, it would take us a long time to get to the answer of n = 1 0 0 9 .
Log in to reply
The 2017 version does not require much testing. By using the standard method (same as mine and possibly others) and notation of the solution of Tom Engelsman and the fact, that 2017 is a prime number, hence the only possible factorisation is:
n − k = 1
n + k = 2 0 1 7
2 n = 2 0 1 8
n = 1 0 0 9
Log in to reply
This is why I said "Unfortunately, this approach isn't great because it is very unique to the value of 2016. "
To be clear, I'm referring to Chew-Seong's solution, where he finds the minimium value of n and then tests this value. I am not referring to "all possible approaches to this problem".
beautiful. great minds and experience can give such a unique solution like this. mine was a standard method but was also easy
Let n 2 − k 2 = 2 0 1 6 ⇒ ( n − k ) ( n + k ) = 2 0 1 6 . Now 2 0 1 6 = 2 5 3 2 7 1 , which contains eighteen positive integer divisor pairs:
( n − k , n + k ) = ( 1 , 2 0 1 6 ) ; ( 2 , 1 0 0 8 ) ; ( 3 , 6 7 2 ) ; ( 4 , 5 0 4 ) ; ( 6 , 3 3 6 ) ; ( 8 , 2 5 2 ) ; ( 9 , 2 2 4 ) ; ( 1 2 , 1 6 8 ) ; ( 1 4 , 1 4 4 ) ; ( 1 6 , 1 2 6 ) ; ( 1 8 , 1 1 2 ) ; ( 2 1 , 9 6 ) ; ( 2 4 , 8 4 ) ; ( 2 8 , 7 2 ) ; ( 3 2 , 6 3 ) ; ( 3 6 , 5 6 ) ; ( 4 2 , 4 8 ) .
Of these pairs, ( n − k , n + k ) = ( 4 2 , 4 8 ) yields the smallest n :
n − k = 4 2
n + k = 4 8
or 2 n = 9 0 ⇒ n = 4 5 .
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Let the perfect square be ( n − m ) 2 , then
( n − m ) 2 n 2 − 2 m n + m 2 − 2 m n + m 2 ⟹ n n = n 2 − 2 0 1 6 = n 2 − 2 0 1 6 = − 2 0 1 6 = 2 m 2 0 1 6 + m 2 = m 1 0 0 8 + 2 m ≥ 2 5 0 4 ≈ 4 4 . 9 0 0 Using AM-GM inequality
Therefore, the smallest n is 4 5 and 4 5 2 − 2 0 1 6 = 9 = 3 2 .