Let a n denote the n -digit integer, n number of 1’s 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 … 1 .
How many of the following are prime numbers ?
a 2 , a 9 1 , a 8 3 7 , a 9 5 1
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.
We already know a 2 = 1 1 is prime.
For each other case note that if n = i j for i , j = 1 , then b i = ( 1 0 i − 1 ) / 9 and a n / b i = 1 0 . . . 0 1 0 . . . 0 1 with j 1's and i − 1 zeros in between each 1. Since 91=7(13), 837=3(279), and 951=3(319). The only case that is prime is a 2 .
Note: this is the same way as factoring x i − 1 x n − 1
r = n number of 1’s 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 … 1
To solve this problem, we can use the fact that if n is composite then the above number is composite. But let's prove the statement before.
Let n be equal to a b and s be equal to a number of 1’s 1 1 1 … 1 . a needs to be greater than 2 while b needs to be greater than 1.
We can rewrite r as
s ⋅ 1 0 n − a + s ⋅ 1 0 n − 2 a + ⋯ + s
Since s is common in every term, r is not prime.
As 91, 837 and 951 are all composite, they are out of the list.
Now we are left with 11. Through analysis, it's the only prime.
Apart from saying "Since s is common in every term", we still have to ensure that the other term is not 1. For example, 1 1 × 3 − 1 1 × 2 is a prime, even though 11 is common in every term.
@Calvin Lin Thanks! I have modified my answer.
Log in to reply
Hm, I don't see it reflect that we have r = s × t with t > 1 . We need that to ensure that r is not prime. Yes, I agree that it's obvious we have t > 1 , but it should still be stated.
If n is composite, obviously that a n is not a prime. The inverse here doesn't apply.
Proof: Let a n be written as the polynomial function for f : N → N , f ( x ) = 1 + x + . . . + x n − 2 + x n − 1 (later, we substitute x = 1 0 ).
From the polynomial, create partitions by m , m > 1 of f ( x ) in order, e,g. f ( x ) = 1 + x + . . . + x n − 1 = ( 1 + x + . . . + x m − 1 ) + ( x m + . . . ) + . . . + x n − 1
Let B as the sets of the partitions and let the partitions become somewhat as a subset of b 1 , b 2 , . . . , b j . f ( x ) will be factorable if B ′ ∈ ∅ . Thus, there will be m n subsets, which m ∣ n , from b 1 , b 2 , . . . , b m n . Exactly, the GCF of the subsets is b 1 . We may factor f ( x ) as f ( x ) = ( 1 + x + . . . + x m − 1 ) ( 1 + x m + . . . + x n − m )
Setting to x = 1 0 . f ( 1 0 ) consists of at least two factors, so it won't be prime. In conclusion, for n composite and a subset partitions of m , which is b 1 , b 2 , . . . , b j ∈ B , and B ′ ∈ ∅ , a n = f ( 1 0 ) is not prime.
For n prime, the inverse of above is broken. Easy to prove that for n = 2 , we have 1 1 which is a prime, but n = 3 , we have 1 1 1 which is divisible by 3 .
a2 is a prime number=11 all of these type of numbers such as 111,1111,11111,... except 1 and 11 are composite numbers. so a2 is the only prime number in the options.
i know a837 and a951 are divisible by 3.. But how a91
Log in to reply
a91 = 11*(45 times 10).
Log in to reply
brother .. we know that for a number to be a multiple of 11 ... the difference between the sum of odd-positioned digits and sum of the even-positioned digits hav to be a multiple of 11 ... but here the difference is 1 ..[(46 x 1) - (45 x 1) = 1] ... then how come you tell it is a multiple of 11???
awaiting ur gud reply
If you check the idea in my solution, you'll notice 91 = 7*13. By trying a91/a7 and a91/a13, you'll find that both these values are integers.
same question i have
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
a 2 , a 1 9 , a 2 3 , a 3 1 7 , a 1 0 3 1 are the only ones known to be primes.