looks too easy right?

3 + 3 2 + 3 3 + 3 4 + 3 5 + . + 3 104 3 + 3^{2} + 3^{3} + 3^{4} + 3^{5}+ \ldots. + 3^{104} is divisible by

5 and 2 only 3 and 1 only 1 , 2 , 3 and 5 (5-2) only 1 only 3 only 1 , 2 and 3 0nly

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.

1 solution

Let S = 3 + 3 2 + 3 3 + 3 4 + 3 5 + . . . = 3 ( 1 + 3 + 3 2 + 3 3 + 3 4 + . . . ) = 3 ( 3 104 1 ) 3 1 = 3 ( 3 104 1 ) 2 \begin{aligned} \text{Let } S & = 3+3^2+3^3+3^4+3^5+... \\ & = 3(1+3+3^2+3^3+3^4+...) \\ & = \dfrac {3(3^{104}-1)}{3-1} \\ & = \dfrac {3(3^{104}-1)}{2} \end{aligned}

  • S S is of course divisible by 1 1 .
  • Since S S is a whole number, 3 104 1 0 ( m o d 2 ) \Rightarrow 3^{104}-1 \equiv 0 \pmod {2} .
  • Since 3 3 is a factor of S S , it is divisible by 3 3 .
  • 3 104 ( 3 2 ) 52 ( 10 1 ) 52 1 ( m o d 5 ) 3 104 1 0 ( m o d 5 ) 3^{104} \equiv (3^2)^{52} \equiv (10-1)^{52} \equiv 1 \pmod {5}\Rightarrow 3^{104} - 1\equiv 0 \pmod {5} .

Therefore, 3 + 3 2 + 3 3 + 3 4 + 3 5 + . . . 3+3^2+3^3+3^4+3^5+... is divisible by 1, 2, 3 and 5 \boxed {\text{1, 2, 3 and 5}} .

A brute force way to demonstrate this is simply by factorizing a bit as follows:

3 + 3 2 + 3 3 + 3 4 + + 3 104 = 3 ( 1 + 3 ) + 3 3 ( 1 + 3 ) + + 3 103 ( 1 + 3 ) = 4 ( 3 1 + 3 3 + 3 5 + 3 7 + 3 9 + + 3 101 + 3 103 ) = 4 ( 3 1 ( 1 + 9 ) + 3 5 ( 1 + 9 ) + + 3 101 ( 1 + 9 ) ) = 4 × 10 × ( 3 1 + 3 5 + + 3 101 ) 3+3^2+3^3+3^4+\ldots +3^{104}\\ = 3(1+3)+3^3(1+3)+\ldots +3^{103}(1+3)\\ = 4\left(3^1+3^3+3^5+3^7+3^9+\ldots +3^{101}+3^{103}\right)\\ = 4\left(3^1(1+9)+3^5(1+9)+\ldots +3^{101}(1+9)\right)\\ = 4\times 10\times \left(3^1+3^5+\ldots +3^{101}\right)

It is obvious that the expression inside the brackets is a whole number and we have 4 4 and 10 10 as factors of the original expression. This trivially implies that the expression is divisible by 2 2 and 5 5 .

The reason for the expression being divisible by 1 1 and 3 3 is the same as you provided in your solution.

Prasun Biswas - 6 years, 3 months ago

In second case , it should be proved that S S is divisible by 4 4 because if it is only divisible by 2 2 , then the 2 2 in the denominator will cancel it off.

Vighnesh Raut - 6 years, 1 month ago

Good Solution sir

Sai Ram - 5 years, 11 months ago

Sir, in divisibility by 5 5 , why is it congruent to 1 1 ( m o d 5 ) \pmod 5 and not 1 -1 ( m o d 5 ) \pmod 5

Vinayak Srivastava - 11 months, 4 weeks ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...