m − ⌊ 2 0 0 5 m ⌋ = 2 0 0 5
Find m that satisfies the equation above.
Notation : ⌊ ⋅ ⌋ denotes the floor function .
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.
did the same way...+1
Log in to reply
Hey you did hit and trial. Dont lie!
Log in to reply
Hit and trial ?
Log in to reply
@Jason Chrysoprase – Ayush did hit and trial as deeparaj posted a solution
Log in to reply
@Prince Loomba – yes i did hit and trial.
Log in to reply
@Ayush G Rai – How did you guys know ayush is hit ad trial, u guys didn't make the problem
Log in to reply
@Jason Chrysoprase – Because while solving he was chatting with me in slack!
Log in to reply
@Prince Loomba – ohhh lol, ayush being silly
Log in to reply
@Jason Chrysoprase – Now you come to slack
Log in to reply
@Prince Loomba – i am playing chess
Log in to reply
@Jason Chrysoprase – Ok read when you get time
@Jason Chrysoprase – Read my messages in slack
@Prince Loomba – What is hit and TRIAL
Log in to reply
@Jason Chrysoprase – Meaning guessing the answer as deeparaj did
@Jason Chrysoprase – i trying out substituting m with some values so that the equation satisfies.
@Prince Loomba – Yeah. And I got the answer in a sec. While you used a page of paper for such a trivial question. If however it had asked the number of solutions or anything as such, I'd go by your method.
But, for the question as it stands, I'd rather go by trial and error than waste so much time. Of course as long as proper logic is used, the solution is correct.
Secondly, two liner solutions are much more elegant than a really big one that answers more than what is asked.
Plus, you had to use a calculator and I didn't. ;)
Log in to reply
@A Former Brilliant Member – Nope. I also did hit and trial. Got the answer. But jason demanded complete solution. Here is it
Log in to reply
@Prince Loomba – As long as the intuition is provided for the values that are tested, the solution is complete in my opinion.
Log in to reply
@A Former Brilliant Member – Whose solution?
Log in to reply
@Prince Loomba – Any solution (which uses trial and error) with the above characteristic for that matter.
Log in to reply
@A Former Brilliant Member – I am not against it, I am saying that such a good question got solved easily due to it!
@Jason Chrysoprase – I wrote complete solution. Good question but can be solved by hit and trial. Thats the weak point
We note that
⌊ 2 0 0 5 m ⌋ = { 0 1 m < 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 5 ≤ m < 4 0 1 0
Therefore,
m − ⌊ 2 0 0 5 m ⌋ = { m m − 1 m < 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 5 ≤ m < 4 0 1 0
Now, if m < 2 0 0 5 , we have m = 2 0 0 5 , which is contradicting itself
If 2 0 0 5 ≤ m < 4 0 1 0 , we have m − 1 = 2 0 0 5 , which gives m = 2 0 0 6
Formal solution
m − ⌊ 2 0 0 5 m ⌋ = 2 0 0 5 m − ( 2 0 0 5 m − { 2 0 0 5 m } ) = 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 4 m + { 2 0 0 5 m } = 2 0 0 5 { 2 0 0 5 m } = 2 0 0 5 − 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 4 m
Now, we know that the fractional part function, { 2 0 0 5 m } has this range:
0 ≤ { 2 0 0 5 m } < 1
This implies that
0 ≤ 2 0 0 5 − 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 4 m < 1 − 2 0 0 5 ≤ − 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 4 m < − 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 5 ≥ 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 4 m > 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 4 < 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 4 m ≤ 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 5 < m ≤ 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 5 2 ≈ 2 0 0 6 . 0 0 0 5
Now, we know that m must be an integer to yield the value 2 0 0 5 , therefore the only possible value of m = 2 0 0 6
We first off note that 2 0 0 5 = m − ⌊ 2 0 0 5 m ⌋ ≤ m ⟹ m ≥ 2 0 0 5
So, we try m = 2 0 0 5 (which doesn't work) and then m = 2 0 0 6 (which works).
Yours is hit and trial and mine perfect
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Write floor function as 2 0 0 5 m − { 2 0 0 5 m } i.e. in terms of fractional part. You will get 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 4 m + { 2 0 0 5 m } = 2 0 0 5 . Let m = 2 0 0 5 x . Equation reduces to 2 0 0 4 x + { x } = 2 0 0 5 . Or { x } = 2 0 0 5 − 2 0 0 4 x . Since fractional part lies between 0 and 1, we get 0 ≤ 2 0 0 5 − 2 0 0 4 x < 1 Multiplying by − 1 , we get − 1 < 2 0 0 4 x − 2 0 0 5 ≤ 0 . Adding 2 0 0 5 , we get 2 0 0 4 < 2 0 0 4 x ≤ 2 0 0 5 . Dividing by 2 0 0 4 , we get 1 < x ≤ 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 5 . Substituting x = 2 0 0 5 m , we get m ∈ ( 2 0 0 5 , 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 5 2 ] . Which is approximately equal to 2 0 0 6 . 0 0 0 4 . Only integer in the range is 2 0 0 6 . Thus 2 0 0 6 is the answer.