Dr. Frankenine (cousin of Dr. Frankenthree ) took positive integers, reversed their digits, and subtracted the two numbers. She noticed all the results were divisible by 9: 8 3 − 3 8 1 1 3 − 3 1 1 1 4 3 1 − 1 3 4 1 4 4 3 4 4 − 4 4 3 4 4 = 4 5 = 9 × 5 = − 1 9 8 = 9 × ( − 2 2 ) = 9 0 = 9 × 1 0 = 0 = 9 × 0 . Are the numbers Dr. Frankenine creates in this way always multiples of 9?
Note: This puzzle is in base 10.
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.
Why does the digital sum conserve with addition modulo 9 ?
Log in to reply
The digital sum is conserved because addition is commutative. The total of all the digits of a number is the same no matter which order you add them.
10^n-1 is divisible by 9 so there's a remainder of 1 each time something like 10^n-1 occurs. For example, 318 = 300+10+8 = 3(99+1)+1(9+1)+8=3+1+8 mod 9.
"which means the result is always divisible by 9." That wasn't the question - the question is whether the answer is always a multiple of nine. Even in their own example of -198, this is not a multiple (a negative number cannot be a "multiple".
Log in to reply
Um... (-22)*9=-198
b is a multiple of a if b = na for some integer n. Integers include negative numbers, so a multiple can be negative.
If it divisible by 9 with no remainder then 9 is a multiple...cool how multiplication is the reverse of division like that
0 is not divisible by 9.
Log in to reply
0 = 9 x 0, so it is a multiple of 9
Log in to reply
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-result-of-9-divided-by-0
Log in to reply
@Bill Purvis – we are doing 0 divided by 9 (which is 0), not 9 divided by 0 (which is undefined)
Log in to reply
@David Vreken – Sire I am just commenting to tell this to you: I have check my calculator many times as possible to reassure myself that I,Lucia, and David are correct. I wish you would treat this as a correction sire, not a form argue. Have a good day everyone!
Log in to reply
@Arianna Millondaga – I am sorry but this is a reply to Sire Bill Purvis.
If all of the numbers are divisible by 9, then it's obvious that the numbers she creates will always be multiples of 9. If I could do this problem again, I would have tried finding the LCM of 9 and see if any of these numbers were multiples of 9. I would rate this problem a 1 because it was very simple. I felt confident while solving this problem and I thought I was going to get it right which I did.
What about 11, 22, 33 etc. ?
Log in to reply
With those numbers the difference is 0, which is still a multiple of 9 (0 x 9)
that's what i thought too
I highly disagree because there are several examples of this being wrong 22-11,22-12,22-1,19-8,34-22.etc
Log in to reply
The problem states that the two numbers being subtracted have reversed digits, so those are not counterexamples.
Relevant wiki: Algebraic Manipulation Problem Solving - Intermediate
Number the digits from right to left as digits 0, 1, 2, etc. Let m < n . The m th digit has value a m ⋅ 1 0 m and the n th digit has value a n ⋅ 1 0 n . Swapping the two digits results to a change in the amount Δ = ( a n − a m ) ⋅ 1 0 m + ( a m − a n ) ⋅ 1 0 n = ( 1 0 n − 1 0 m ) ( a m − a n ) = 1 0 m ( 1 0 n − m − 1 ) ( a m − a n ) . Now 1 0 n − m − 1 = 9 ⋅ ( 1 0 n − m − 1 + 1 0 n − m − 2 + ⋯ + 1 0 + 1 ) is a multiple of 9; therefore Δ is a multiple of a 9, which means that any swapping of digits will result in a change by a multiple of 9. Therefore inverting the order of digits changes the number by a multiple of 9.
There is a condition - the digits must not be equal.
Log in to reply
If m = n or a m = a n , we obtain Δ = 0 , which is also a multiple of 9.
Relevant wiki: Divisibility Rules (2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,...)
If a positive integer N is reversed there we just exchange the place value digits of N in order of original place value in descending order 1 0 n , 1 0 n − 1 , 1 0 n − 2 ⋯ , 1 0 , 1 reversed place value in ascending order 1 , 1 0 , ⋯ , 1 0 n − 2 , 1 0 n − 1 , 1 0 n For example N = 1 2 3 4 5 = 1 0 4 , 1 0 3 , 1 0 2 , 1 0 , 1 N rv = 5 4 3 2 1 = 1 0 4 , 1 0 3 , 1 0 2 , 1 0 , 1 Now performing the subtraction we find it as 1 0 n − 1 , 1 0 n − 1 − 1 0 , ⋯ 1 0 n − 2 − 1 0 n − 2 , 1 0 − 1 0 n − 1 , 1 − 1 0 n The numbers in above form are always divisible by 9 even we can show that th numbers are divisible by 9 by factorization (see) of a n − b n .
Proof
If N is a positive integer and a 0 , a 1 , a 2 ⋯ a n − 1 , a n are the distinct or identical digits. N = 1 0 n a 0 + 1 0 n − 1 a 1 + ⋯ + 1 0 a n − 1 + a n On reversing its digits N r v = 1 0 n a n + 1 0 n − 1 a n − 1 + ⋯ + 1 0 a 1 + a 0 Now performing the subtraction we find N − N r v = a 0 ( 1 0 n − 1 ) + a 1 ( 1 0 n − 1 − 1 0 ) + ⋯ + ( 1 0 − 1 0 n − 1 ) a n − 1 + ( 1 − 1 0 n ) a n N − N r v = 9 . a 0 . n 11’s 1 1 ⋯ 1 + 9 . 1 0 a 1 . n-2 11’s 1 1 ⋯ 1 + ⋯ + 9 . 1 0 a n − 2 . n-1 11’s 1 1 ⋯ 1 + 9 . a n n 11’s 1 1 ⋯ 1 N − N r v = 9 k where k = a 0 . n 11’s 1 1 ⋯ 1 + 1 0 a 1 . n-2 11’s 1 1 ⋯ 1 + ⋯ + 1 0 a n − 1 . n-2 11’s 1 1 ⋯ 1 + a n n 11’s 1 1 ⋯ 1
Therefore, number created in this way are always divisible by 9 .
"Therefore, number created in this way are always divisible by 9." That wasn't the question you asked, Brilliant.org - the question is whether the answer is always a multiple of nine. Even in your own example of -198, this is not a multiple (a negative number cannot be a "multiple"). We know that multiples cannot include negatives, because if they did, this would render the definition of "least common multiple" meaningless or nonsensical, because to be "least", the least common multiple of any positive number, for example, would have to be negative infinity, to get it to the "least" (lowest) number.
Log in to reply
"is divisible by nine" means that if you divide it by nine you get a whole number. "A multiple of nine" means precisely the same thing, expressed differently - nine multiplied by a whole number. Having got the question wrong you have then erected a particularly weak straw man to defend yourself.
Log in to reply
the result of 11 is not divisible by 9. The answer provided is incorrect.
All you have to do is look up the definition of multiple before answering. In many areas of math, we limit the definition for beginners (e.g., sine is opposite over hypotenuse) but expand or redefine it for advanced students (sine is the y coordinate of the point where a radius intersects the unit circle and forms angle Theta with the positive x axis). This kind of formalization and extension is routine as one advances.
Yet even simple definitions like LCM are precise, if you only look them up. LCM is defined as the smallest positive integer that is divisible by both numbers. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least common multiple
What about single digit numbers
Log in to reply
0 7 reverse 7 0 , 7 − 7 0 = − 6 3 = 9 × − 7 . :)
It's actually quite simple. 7 - 7 = 0 and 0 = 0 x 9
Like with the example of 44344
What about 11
Log in to reply
i agree. what about 11?
It's like the 44344 case shown as an example. Zero counts as a "multiple" of 9.
11 - 11 = 0 = 0 x 9
If any number which, when reversed, is subtracted from the original number and the resulting answer is zero, then it's not divisible by 9.
111-111=0. Zero is not divisible by 9 nor any other number.
Log in to reply
Yeah, I said no because of this kind of example. Works for every singe digit or integers consisting of one same digit
0/9=0,which is a whole number, thus 0 is divisible by 9.
a b c − c b a 1 0 0 a + 1 0 b + c − ( 1 0 0 c + 1 0 b + a ) = 9 9 a − 9 9 c
Good solution, efficient and able to be understood by those with minimal mathematical background
Most elegant!
This only works for 3 digit numbers . I think
Log in to reply
Let us try a larger number ex) abcd - dcba
(1000a +100b + 10c + d) - (1000d + 100c +10b +a) = 999a + 90b - 90c - 999d
Let N be some positive integer and N r e v its reverse: N − N r e v = k = 0 ∑ n a k ⋅ 1 0 n − k − k = 0 ∑ n a k ⋅ 1 0 k ≡ k = 0 ∑ n a k ⋅ 1 n − k − k = 0 ∑ n a k ⋅ 1 k ≡ k = 0 ∑ n a k − k = 0 ∑ n a k = 0 ( mod 9 )
Remember that in base 10, adding the digits does not change the residue left by 9. Rearranging the digits does not change their addition. When we take the difference, the resulting number becomes divisible by 9.
However, this does not work for numbers with the same digits.
55 - 55 = 0.
0 is divisible by 9. (I also mention in the note that 0 is divisible by 9, just because this seems to be a mistake that comes up often.)
Log in to reply
How is 0 divisible by 9?
Log in to reply
By definition, a number is divisible by x if when dividing by x it leaves a remainder of 0.
9 / 0 leaves a remainder of 0.
You can also think of it as some integer a existing such that 9*a equals your original number.
10x + y - 10y - x = 9x - 9y = 9(x-y)
Case 1 : Two digit positive number .
Let us assume that the 2 digit positive number is 1 0 x + y . On reversing the number becomes 1 0 y + x
On subtracting them : 1 0 x + y − 1 0 y − x = 9 x − 9 y = 9 × ( x − y )
Therefore , the resultant 2 digit number will always be a multiple of 9 .
Case 2 : Three digit positive number.
Let us assume that the 3 digit positive number is 1 0 0 x + 1 0 y + z . On reversing the digits the number becomes 1 0 0 z + 1 0 y + x .
On subtracting them : 1 0 0 x + 1 0 y + z − 1 0 0 z − 1 0 y − x = 9 9 x − 9 9 z = 9 × ( 1 1 x − 1 1 z )
Therefore, the resultant 3 digit number will always be a multiple of 9.
Case 3 : Four digit positive number.
Let us assume that the four digit positive number is 1 0 0 0 a + 1 0 0 b + 1 0 c + d . On reversing the digits the number becomes 1 0 0 0 d + 1 0 0 c + 1 0 b + a .
On subtracting them : 1 0 0 0 a + 1 0 0 b + 1 0 c + d − 1 0 0 0 d − 1 0 0 c − 1 0 b − a = 9 9 9 a + 9 0 b − 9 0 c − 9 9 9 c = 9 × ( 1 1 1 a + 1 0 b − 1 0 c − 1 1 1 c )
Therefore, The resultant 4 digit number will always be a multiple of 9.
Final Conclusion :
General form of the resultant number :
Resultant number= 9 × a
Where a is the number left when the resultant number is divided by 9 .
Any number which has n numbers when reversed and when both are subtracted the resultant number will always be a multiple of 9 .
What if N = 1 millions digits 1 2 3 4 5 7 ⋯ 2 8 3 9 3 0 ? So I don't think working just for four or five different cases cannot be concluded as generalized form.
Doesn't 11 violate that rule? 11 is a 2 digit positive integer, whose switched digit value is 11 as well, making their difference 0, a number not divisible by 9?
Log in to reply
11 - 11 = 0 = 9 × 0
Log in to reply
I also thought of numbers like 11, 22, 505, etc., and I was expecting that the question was a “trick” question. The question should have asked if all non-zero differences were divisible by 9.
11 - 11 = 0 = 9 x 0 can be extended for any N x 0, so this isn’t proof of divisibility by N.
Log in to reply
@Jeff Verive – 0 is divisible by 9.
By definition, a number is divisible by x if when dividing by x it leaves a remainder of 0.
0 / 9 leaves a remainder of 0.
You can also think of it as some integer a existing such that 9*a equals your original number.
One of the examples given in the problem (44344) illustrates this.
Log in to reply
@Jason Dyer – Yes, I guess 0 is still a part of the solution set due to the odd symmetry of the solution set.
[BTW I think you meant 0/9 instead of 9/0, since the latter is undefined.]
Log in to reply
@Jeff Verive – Oof, yes. Fixed.
(10a + b) - (10b+ a) = 9( a - b). When a = b, the answer is 0. Is it valid to consider 0 divisible by 9?
I said no to this answer because they clearly showed the answer was zero in one of the problems. You can't divide zero by 9.
Consider one digit in a 6 digit setting e.g. 050000 - 000050 = 5 × 1 0 4 − 5 × 1 0 1 = 5 × 1 0 × ( 1 0 3 − 1 ) = 5 × 1 0 × 9 9 9 , clearly divisible by 9. This pattern applies to all the digits of any number as follows.
A number, N , with n + 1 digits denoted a i , i.e, a n a n − 1 . . . a 0 can be expressed as the sum N = a n 1 0 n + a 1 1 0 n − 1 + . . . + a 0 1 0 0 .
The same number with the digits reversed, N r , can be expressed as N r = a 0 1 0 n + a 1 1 0 n − 1 + . . . + a n 1 0 0
The difference can be expressed as N − N r = a n ( 1 0 n − 1 0 0 ) + a n − 1 ( 1 0 n − 1 − 1 0 2 ) + . . . a k ( 1 0 n − k − 1 0 k ) + . . . + a 0 ( 1 0 0 − 1 0 n )
In the case n-k > k ( 1 0 n − k − 1 0 k ) = 1 0 k ( 1 0 n − 2 k − 1 ) , the quantity in parentheses on the right hand side will be all 9's, divisible by 9.
In the case n-k = k ( 1 0 n − k − 1 0 k ) = 0 there is nothing to divide.
In the case n-k < k ( 1 0 n − k − 1 0 k ) = 1 0 n − k ( 1 − 1 0 2 k − n ) the quantity in parentheses on the right hand side will be all 9's, divisible by 9.
Thus every product in the expression is divisible by 9 therefore N − N r is divisible by 9.
The difference between any two-digit numbers whose numbers are reversed can be represented by the following expression: (10x + y) - (10y + x) If we simplify this expression, we obtain: 9x-9y, or 9(x-y), meaning that any number obtained is a multiple of 9. The same goes for three, four, five digit numbers, etc, considering that the simplification always involves subtracting two numbers that are powers of ten, which will always yield a multiple of nine.
My solution is just for some kids.... Lets start from the lowest pairs of preferably 3 :
10 - 1= 9 =1•9 , 11-11=0 =0•9 , 12-21=-9=-9•9 ,
Then, to a bit higher pairs:
42-24=18=2•9 , 43-34=18=2•9 , 44-44=0=0•9 ,
It can write as 1 0 n × k + 1 0 n − 1 × q + . . . + 1 0 1 × j + 1 0 0 × r − 1 0 0 × k − 1 0 1 × q − 1 0 n − 1 × j − . . . − 1 0 n × r . Infact, every 1 0 α × z − 1 0 β × z is multiples of 9. And we can write 1 0 n × k + 1 0 n − 1 × q + . . . + 1 0 1 × j + 1 0 0 × r − 1 0 0 × k − 1 0 1 × q − 1 0 n − 1 × j − . . . − 1 0 n × r as sum of many 1 0 α × z − 1 0 β × z . So it is multipies of 9.
We can generalize and rewrite any of the numbers in the form 10A + B. We can then express the Frankenine process as (10A + b) - (10B + A), which simplifies to: 9A -9B, dividing by 9 we get A - B. From this we can confirm that with this process the numbers will always be divisible by 9. We also get the interesting result that for two digit numbers after the entire process the final number is the tens digit minus the ones digit (Although this doesn't work for numbers with more digits)
For any number,we could treat them as many pairs (a, b). a and b will swap position. So their subtraction result is equal to 1 0 n ( a − b ) + ( b − a ) = ( 1 0 n − 1 ) ( a − b ) . Obviously 1 0 n − 1 could be divided by 9. So the statement is finally true.
Let the number be 10(x)+y. So if it's digits are reversed, the number becomes 10(y)+x. If we subtact the two, we get:- 10x+y -(10y+x) So this becomes -9y+9x Taking 9 common, we get 9(x-y). Therefore the number will be always divisible by 9
x = d m d m − 1 ⋯ d 2 d 1 = d m × 1 0 m − 1 + d m − 1 × 1 0 m − 2 + ⋯ + d 2 × 1 0 1 + d 1 × 1 0 0
y = d 1 d 2 ⋯ d m − 1 d m = d 1 × 1 0 m − 1 + d 2 × 1 0 m − 2 + ⋯ + d m − 1 × 1 0 1 + d m × 1 0 0
x − y = i = 1 ∑ ⌊ 2 m + 1 ⌋ ( d ( m + 1 ) − i − d i ) ( 1 0 m − i − 1 0 i − 1 ) = i = 1 ∑ ⌊ 2 m + 1 ⌋ ( d ( m + 1 ) − i − d i ) 1 0 i − 1 ( 1 0 ( m + 1 ) − 2 i − 1 )
Since 1 0 ( m + 1 ) − 2 i − 1 is one less than a power of 10, it must be divisible by 9 ∀ i ∈ { 1 , ⋯ , m } . Therefore, 9 ∣ x − y
let integer a be the sum of a i (i=0 to n) times 10 to the power of i, and then integer b (digits reversed) be the sum of a (n-i) (i=0 to n) times 10 to the power of i.
Then a-b = the sum of (a i - a (n-i)) times 10 to the power of i.
Now, 10 to the power of i can be written as 1 + 9 times the sum of 10 to the power of j (j=0 to i-1). (For example, 1000 = 1 + 9 times (100+10+1))
So, a-b = 9 times the sum of (a i - a (n-i)) times the sum of 10 to the power of j (j=0 to i-1) + the sum of a i - a (n-i) (i=0 to n) where the latter term is equal to zero.
The first term is obviously divisible by 9.
Sorry, I have to learn LaTeX again to make these more readable.
Assuming that the ten's place digit to be 'y' and unit's place digit to be 'x',then Any two digit number can be written as {10y+x} Reversing the numbers. {10x+y} Subtracting them (10y+x)- (10x+y)=9y-9x =9(y-x). It is divisible by 9. Same like this for other many digits numbers.
Remainder of a number when divided by 9 is simply the summation of digits. Reversing the order doesn't change the sum of digits. Let the number be r(mod 9) . Remainder of the New number(reverse digits) is also r. Difference of numbers leaves remainder of r-r=0 Hence always divisible by nine
Sample
69 and 96 let x=6 ; y=9 ; Z=difference
69=60+9
or 10x+y
96=90+6
or 10y+x
Then subtract Z= 96-69 Z=10x+y - (10y+x) Z= 9x-9y Z=9(x-y)
Therefore Z is always divisible by 9
General case is (10x + y) - (10y+x) = (10x-x)+ (y-10y) = 9x-9y = 9*(x-y) Therefore the equation is always divisible by 9.
There's some serious proofs here. I'm just going to put my thinking too.
(10X)+(y) is the first double digit number. Therefore (10y)+(X) is the reverse So the whole sum is (10x+y)-(10y+x) = z And the question asks whether z is a multiple of 9, well simplifying I got 9x-9y = z Or 9(x-y) = z and as X and y are integers so will x-y.
I did the same with 3 digits (100w+10x+y)-(100y+10x+w)= 99w-99y= z And seeing as the coefficient is 99 is a multiple of 9 I figured it was right again and it would continue like that. (1000p+100w+10x+y)-(1000y+100x+10w+p)= 999p+90w-90x-999y=z 9(111p+10w-10x-111y) = z etc etc
I know it's not proof but I think it should get partial marks.
Lets think about a 3 digit number ABC We know that ABC is:100A+10B+C We can write ABC-CBA as this: 100A+10B+C-100C-10B-A=99A-99C And we can get the common factor of 9 from there This also works for numbers with more/less digits than 3
For 2 digit no. ab (10a+b)-(10b+a)=9(a-b)
For three digit no. abc (100a+10b+c)-(100c+10b+a)=99(a-c)
And so on so it will be divisible by 9 always
Specificando che i numeri sono in base 10 quindi a base pari (2n) invertendo le cifre si avrà un numero divisibile per la base pari -1 Se sottraggo 203 a 302->302-203 però in base 4 otterrò un numero divisibile per 3 in base 4 ovvero 33
We know that:
d 1 d 2 ⋯ d n − 1 d n − d n d n − 1 ⋯ d 2 d 1 = k = 1 ∑ n 1 0 n − k d k − k = 1 ∑ n 1 0 k − 1 d k
A more "explicit" form would be:
d 1 d 2 ⋯ d n − 1 d n − d n d n − 1 ⋯ d 2 d 1 = 1 0 n − 1 d 1 + 1 0 n − 2 d 2 + ⋯ + 1 0 d n − 1 + d n − 1 0 n − 1 d n − 1 0 n − 2 d n − 1 − ⋯ − 1 0 d 2 − d 1
This can be further simplified to:
d 1 d 2 ⋯ d n − 1 d n − d n d n − 1 ⋯ d 2 d 1 = k = 1 ∑ n d k ( 1 0 n − k − 1 0 k − 1 )
And since the difference between two powers of 1 0 is always a multiple of 9 , are are summing n multiples of n, hence obtaining a multiple of 9 as well. Conclusion: Yes, the numbers Dr. Frankenine creates in this way are always multiples of 9 .
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Relevant wiki: Divisibility Rules (2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,...)
The digital sum of a number also gives the remainder of that number when it is divided by 9 (see Casting Out Nines ).
Reversing the order of the digits in a number does not change the digital sum, and therefore does not change the remainder of that number when it is divided by 9 .
Therefore, when two numbers with the same digits are subtracted, the same remainders are subtracted, which gives a resulting remainder of 0 , which means the result is always divisible by 9 .