Alicia and Benjamin are thinking of 2 different positive integers, each less than 200.
Alicia says "My number has 16 positive factors, but one more than my number only has 3 positive factors." Benjamin says "Really? The same thing is true for my number!"
Find the sum of their two numbers.
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.
Let the numbers be A and B . Since A + 1 and B + 1 have an odd number of factors, they must be perfect squares, and since they have three factors, the square of a prime number. The squares of primes under 200 are 4, 9, 25, 49, 121, and 169. A and B must be fairly large to have 16 factors; so we check 120 and 168. 1 2 0 = 2 3 ⋅ 3 1 ⋅ 5 1 , which has ( 3 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) = 1 6 factors. 1 6 8 = 2 3 ⋅ 3 1 ⋅ 7 1 , which also has ( 3 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) = 1 6 factors. Our answer is 1 2 0 + 1 6 8 = 2 8 8 .
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Since the only integers that have 3 positive factors are squares of primes p , (as p 2 has factors 1 , p and p 2 ), we are looking for integers of the form n = p 2 − 1 < 2 0 0 which have 16 positive factors. As p = 1 3 is the largest primes such that p 2 − 1 < 2 0 0 , our options for n are:
2 2 − 1 = 3 ⟹ 2 factors,
3 2 − 1 = 2 3 ⟹ 4 factors,
5 2 − 1 = 2 4 = 2 3 × 3 ⟹ ( 3 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) = 8 factors,
7 2 − 1 = 4 8 = 2 4 × 3 ⟹ ( 4 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) = 1 0 factors,
1 1 2 − 1 = 1 2 0 = 2 3 × 3 × 5 ⟹ ( 3 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) = 1 6 factors,
1 3 2 − 1 = 1 6 8 = 2 3 × 3 × 7 ⟹ ( 3 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) ( 1 + 1 ) = 1 6 factors.
So the only two suitable values for n are 1 2 0 and 1 6 8 , wiich sum to 2 8 8 .
See this wiki for an explanation of the number-of-factor calculations made above.
Further Discussion:
Looking at the different ways to find n = p 1 a 1 p 2 a 2 . . . . p k a k so that ( a 1 + 1 ) ( a 2 + 1 ) . . . ( a k + 1 ) = 1 6 is another approach. With 1 6 = 1 6 × 1 the least integer we would be looking at is 2 1 5 > 2 0 0 . With 1 6 = 8 × 2 the least would be 2 7 × 3 > 2 0 0 . With 1 6 = 4 × 4 we would have 2 3 × 3 3 = 2 1 6 > 2 0 0 . With 1 6 = 4 × 2 × 2 we end up with only the two numbers found in the above solution being less than 2 0 0 , with the next smallest being 3 3 × 2 × 5 = 2 7 0 . Finally, with 1 6 = 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 the least would be 2 × 3 × 5 × 7 = 2 1 0 . So the only two suitable numbers that Alicia and Benjamin can choose from are 1 2 0 and 1 6 8 , both of which happen to be of the form p 2 − 1 for some prime p . Thus the information about being one less than an integer with 3 positive factors was in this case redundant, but starting from this condition did nevertheless make for a quicker solution.
Further, since all primes p > 3 are of the form 6 k ± 1 we can show that p 2 − 1 = ( p − 1 ) ( p + 1 ) is divisible by 2 4 = 2 3 × 3 . Also, at the very least one of p − 1 or p + 1 will introduce one more prime into the factorization other than 2 and 3 , which means that to keep the number of factors of p 2 − 1 down to 1 6 we must have one of p − 1 or p + 1 equal to 1 2 . So in fact 1 2 0 = 1 0 × 1 2 and 1 6 8 = 1 2 × 1 4 are the o n l y possible positive integers for Alicia and Benjamin to choose from, so the upper bound of 2 0 0 is ultimately superfluous.