1 , 1 1 , 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 , …
Is it true that 1 is the only integer in this list of 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.
Your explanation is much more rigorous and formal, but I’m glad I read Abraham Zhang’s one-sentence explanation below first, to see where you’re going with this.
Log in to reply
Honestly, I didn't know, until now, about that rule. I think it's good to know that there's a faster sure-fire way to check for non-squares.
When a 2 = 1 , dividing by 10 does give you an integer. It's 0 on both sides.
Is sqrt(111111111111111111) = 333333333*333333333 not an integer?
Log in to reply
The last digit of 333333333² is going to be 9. So I think there's some premature rounding error in that result.
All numbers that end in 1 1 are congruent to 3 mod 4 and thus cannot be perfect squares.
Very neat and clear answer. Loved it!
Can u explain why if it is congruent to 3 mod 4 then it can’t be a square ?
Log in to reply
All square numbers can be written as (4n^2) or (4n^2+4n+1) Since all numbers can be written as 2n or 2n+1. Therefore, as you can see, all square numbers mod 4 is either 0 or 1.
Log in to reply
Your explanation really helped me understand mods
Let R n = 1 1 ⋯ 1 n 1 s . By observation, R 2 is not a perfect square. Note that, for n ≥ 3 , R n = 1 0 0 R n − 2 + 1 1 ≡ 3 m o d 4 . However, 0 2 ≡ 2 2 ≡ 0 m o d 4 and 1 2 ≡ 3 2 ≡ 1 m o d 4 . Thus no perfect square is congruent to 3 m o d 4 and no integer consisting of repeated 1 s (other than 1 ) can be a perfect square.
What subject of math is this? Discrete math? Number theory?
If there was a square rep-unit, since it ends in 1, it has to be (10n +- 1)^2. But that would give us 100n^2 + 20n + 1. Since 2 is even, and an even multiplied to any number is still even, it is impossible for the tens to be 1.
1 = 1 , now if any of the statements that follow that one are true, then there must be some number, which when squared, the rightmost two digits are 1 Since the last digit in the square number is 1, the rightmost digit can only be 1 or 9. The only digits that could possibly change the tens digit in the square number are the 2 rightmost digits. yet, no matter what digit you place in the tens digit, there will be an even number in the tens digit of the square number.
1 1 = 4 ∗ 2 + 3 , 1 1 1 = 4 ∗ 2 7 + 3 ,...in a same way 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . . . 1 1 = 4 ∗ k + 3 for some positive integer. Therefore 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . . . 1 1 ≡ 3 m o d 4 but we know that any perfect square integer is either congruent to 0 or 1 m o d 4 .Hence 1 is the only integer in the above sequence.
3 mod 4 was mentioned earlier, but I appreciate that you explained that any perfect square integer is either 0 or 1 mod 4. Thanks!
A perfect square whose single digit is 1 cannot have an odd tens digit. Let 111...=a 2, a’s single digit must be 1 or 9. so a=10k+1 or a=10k+9. <1> a=10k+1, a 2=20k(5k+1)+1; <2> a=10k+9, a**2=20k(5k+9)+81; So a’s tens digit must be even.
For any perfect square ending with 1, the root integer must either be ending with 1 or 9. Except for integer 1 which is square of itself, the square of any number ending with 1 or 9 will generate an output ending with 01, 21, 41, 61 or 81 only. So, it is not possible for any other numbers consisting of all 1s to be a perfect square.
Suppose x 2 = 1 1 1 … is such a solution. If its digits are x = ⋯ a 2 a 1 a 0 , we immediately see that a 0 must be 1, but then the second digit of x 2 is 2 a 1 , which cannot be 1.
Why A0 be only 1
Definitions:
1 1 1 . . . 1 1 n n o . o f 1 s can be written as ∑ i = 0 n 1 0 i .
Proof by contradiction:
Our assumption is that it's possible to write k 2 = ∑ i = 0 n 1 0 i for some integer k > 1 and n .
Our first lemma is that k 2 and by extension k must always be odd , because ∑ i = 0 n 1 0 i = 1 + ∑ i = 1 n − 1 1 0 i , which is just 1 + 2 m where m is some integer.
Consider the squares of odd numbers: 1 , 9 , 2 5 , 4 9 , . . .
Our second lemma is that squares of odd numbers can always be represented by the form 8 a + 1 for some integer a . Short proof: We have ( 2 c + 1 ) 2 for some integer c and odd number 2 c + 1 , this equals 4 c 2 + 4 c + 1 = 4 c ( c + 1 ) + 1 , note that c ( c + 1 ) is always even and can be written as 2 c instead, therefore ( 2 c + 1 ) 2 = 4 c ( c + 1 ) + 1 = 8 c + 1 .
Now for our assumption to be true, we need to be able to set 8 a + 1 = ∑ i = 0 n 1 0 i for some integer a and n .
Remove 1 from both sides, and divide by 8 to get:
a = 8 − 1 + ∑ i = 0 n 1 0 i = 8 1 − 1 + 8 1 0 + 8 1 0 0 + 8 1 0 0 0 + . . . = 0 + 1 . 2 5 + 1 2 . 5 + 1 2 5 + . . . = 0 . 7 5 + 1 + 1 2 + 1 2 5 + . . . b
This is the same as a = 0 . 7 5 + b where we have integer a and b , obviously this is a contradiction because we can't have an integer a with a fraction, this means our assumption that there is some integer k > 1 and n to write k 2 = ∑ i = 0 n 1 0 i is wrong and therefore outside of the trivial case k = 1 there exists no such k . □
Every perfect square leaves remainder 0 or 1, when divided by 4, as it follows from @Johanan Paul
We can check last two digits of 111...11 for divisibility for 4. It leaves remainder 3, hence it can't be a perfect square!
Let any odd number be 2k-1. The square of this number is 4(k^2-k)+1 which is always 1 (mod 8).
Any number of the form 111...111 which is >100 is 111 (mod 8) a.k.a 7 (mod 8) and is therefore not a perfect square.
11 is known not to be a perfect square, and so we are done.
(we have incidentally proven that NO number ending 111 is a perfect square).
Bcuz any number is divisible by 1 which is the square root of 1
Hmmm, I don't see the relevance here. yes, any integer is divisible by 1, but not all real numbers are divisible by 1.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Every integer can be written as 2 n or 2 n + 1 , thus every perfect square number can be written as 4 n 2 or 4 n 2 + 4 n + 1 for some integer n.
1 1 1 1 1 . . . can be written as 1 0 k + 1 0 k − 1 + . . . + 1 0 + 1 for positive integer k.
Proof by contradiction:
Let a = 1 1 1 1 1 . . . , which then implies a 2 = 1 1 1 1 1 . . . = 1 0 k + 1 0 k − 1 + . . . + 1 0 + 1 for positive integer k
Assume a 2 is a perfect square number, then 1 0 m + 1 0 m − 1 + . . . + 1 0 0 + 1 0 + 1 = 4 n 2 + 4 n + 1 for some positive integers m and n. ( a 2 = 4 n 2 is not regarded because a 2 is odd)
1 0 m + 1 0 m − 1 + . . . + 1 0 0 + 1 0 = 4 n ( n + 1 ) (subtract 1 on both sides)
1 0 m − 1 + 1 0 m − 2 + . . . 1 0 + 1 = 1 0 4 n ( n + 1 ) = 5 2 n ( n + 1 ) (divide both sides by 10)
5 2 n ( n + 1 ) has to be an odd integer, because 1 0 m − 1 + 1 0 m − 2 + . . . 1 0 + 1 is an odd integer, however, O d d E v e n = E v e n
So 5 2 n ( n + 1 ) is both even, and odd and that is a contradiction . Therefore no values of m and n can satisfy the equation.
Note that only a 2 = 1 is possible as dividing by 10 on both sides do not produce an integer (and the contradiction is avoided).