That's one big number!

Let N N be the number that consists of 61 consecutive 3's, so N = 333 333 61 3 s N = \underbrace{333\ldots333}_{61 \, 3's} . Let M M be the number that consists of 62 consecutive 6's, so M = 6666 666 62 6 s M=\underbrace{6666\ldots666}_{62 \, 6's} . What is the digit sum of N × M N\times M ?

Details and assumptions

The digit sum of a number is the sum of all its digits. For example the digit sum of 1123 is 1 + 1 + 2 + 3 = 7 1 + 1 + 2 + 3 = 7 .


The answer is 558.

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.

12 solutions

Calvin Lin Staff
May 13, 2014

N = 3 9 ( 1 0 61 1 ) N = \frac {3}{9}(10^{61} -1 ) and M = 6 9 ( 1 0 62 1 ) M = \frac {6}{9} (10^{62}-1) , so their product is

N × M = 2 9 × ( 1 0 61 1 ) ( 1 0 62 1 ) = 2 9 ( 1 0 61 1 ) × 1 0 62 2 9 ( 1 0 61 1 ) = 22 2 61 2 s 00 0 62 0 s 22 22 61 2 s = 22 2 60 2 s 19 77 7 60 7 s 8 \begin{array}{l l} N \times M & = \frac {2} {9} \times (10^{61} -1 )(10^{62} -1 ) \\ & = \frac {2}{9} (10^{61} - 1)\times 10^{62}- \frac {2}{9} (10^{61}-1) \\ & = \underbrace{22 \ldots 2}_{61 \, 2's} \underbrace{00 \ldots 0}_{62 \, 0's} - \underbrace{22 \ldots 22}_{61\, 2's}\\ & = \underbrace{22\ldots 2}_{60 \,2's} 1 9 \underbrace{77 \ldots 7}_{60 \, 7's} 8 \\ \end{array}

Hence, the digit sum is 60 × 2 + 1 + 9 + 60 × 7 + 8 = 558 60\times 2 + 1 + 9 + 60\times 7 + 8 = 558 .

Note: A student can also recognize the pattern by looking at small cases.

Yes sir pattern is so easy .. thanks

Abdullah Ahmed - 5 years, 7 months ago

Same Method

Kushagra Sahni - 5 years, 8 months ago
Philip Sun
May 20, 2014

Note that a simple way of expressing a number with x x 1's is 1 0 x 1 9 \frac{10^x-1}{9} . This works because subtracting one from a power of ten gives a number with only nines, and then dividing by nine will result in only 1's. We can multiply such a number by 3 or 6 to get N N and M M . N = 1 3 ( 1 0 61 1 ) N=\frac{1}{3}(10^{61}-1) and M = 2 3 ( 1 0 62 1 ) M=\frac{2}{3}(10^{62}-1) . Thus, N × M = 2 9 ( 1 0 123 1 0 62 1 0 61 + 1 ) N\times M=\frac{2}{9}(10^{123}-10^{62}-10^{61}+1) .

1 0 123 10^{123} has 124 digits. Once 1 0 62 10^{62} is subtracted from it, it will have 123 digits--nines from the 123rd digit to the 62nd, zeroes from digit 61 until the end. Once we subtract 1 0 61 10^{61} , the 90 formed by the last nine and the first zero turn into an 89. Finally, we add one. Thus, our number has nines from digit 123 to digit 64, an eight at digit 63, a nine at digit 62, zeroes from digit 61 to digit 1, and a one at the units digits. Now we multiply by 2 9 \frac{2}{9} . The nines in the front of the number all turn into twos. We have 123 64 + 1 = 60 123-64+1=60 twos. Now we have to multiply the remaining part, 8900...001 8900...001 . If we first try multiplying with 891 891 , 8901 8901 , 89001 89001 , a pattern quickly emerges: the answer will be 1977...778 1977...778 . In our case, there will be 60 sevens. Adding up all the digits, 1 + 2 × 60 + 7 × 60 + 8 + 9 = 558 1+2\times60+7\times60+8+9=558 , the answer.

[Note: The simpler way to approach the second paragraph is to take N × M = 2 9 ( 1 0 61 1 0 1 ) × 1 0 62 2 9 ( 1 0 61 1 ) = 22 2 61 2 s 00 0 62 0 s 22 22 61 2 s . N \times M = \frac{2}{9}(10^{61}-10^{1})\times 10^{62}-\frac {2}{9}(10^{61}-1) = \underbrace{22 \ldots 2}_{61 \, 2's} \underbrace{00 \ldots 0}_{62 \, 0's} - \underbrace{22 \ldots 22}_{61\, 2's}. Having made that handy dandy observation in the first paragraph, feel free to use it again to simplify your working :) - Calvin]

Solutions which merely stated, but did not prove the pattern were given half credit.

Induction is a really ugly way to approach this problem.

Calvin Lin Staff - 7 years ago

Error there in 6th last line, it should be -1 in the bracket not -10

Kushagra Sahni - 5 years, 8 months ago

Did the exact same!

Kartik Sharma - 6 years, 6 months ago
Sean Lo
May 20, 2014

We let n(x) denote the number 333...333, with x 3's; we also let m(x) denote the number 666...666, with x 6's, where x is a positive integer. We let k(x) denote the following number 222...22219777...7778, with x 2's and x 7's, where similarly x is a positive integer.

Let the following statement "The product of n(x) and m(x+1) is k(x-1)" be labelled as P(x), where x is a positive integer. Clearly, P(1) is true because 3 x 66 = 198.

We wish to show that, assuming P(x) is true for a certain positive integer x, P(x+1) is also true; together with the fact that P(1) is true, the induction hypothesis will hence be complete.

Note the following: [n(x+1)][m(x+2)] = [n(x) + 3(10^x)][m(x+1) + 6(10^(x+1))] = [n(x)][m(x+1)] + [m(x+1)][3(10^x)] + [n(x)][6(10^(x+1))] + [3(10^x)][6(10^(x+1))]

By the induction hypothesis, n(x)m(x+1) = k(x-1). [3(10^x)][6(10^(x+1))] = 18(10^(2x+1)) [m(x+1)][3(10^x)] = 1999...9998000...000, with x 9's and x 0's. [n(x)][6(10^(x+1))] = 199...99980000...000, with (x-1) 9's and (x+1) 0's.

Hence, summing these four summands up we have the desired result, that n(x+1)m(x+2) = k(x); substituting x = 60 we find the digit sum of k(60) is simply (2 x 60 + 1 + 9 + 7 x 60 + 8) = 558.

Kasi Nadarajan
May 20, 2014

I guessed there has to be a pattern if not the question would not be of such big numbers. And my hunch was right

I just tried 66 * 3 at first since as the question goes there is 1 more time the digit 6 appears in M than the number of times the digit 3 appears in N. The digit sum for 66 * 3 is 18.

When I tried 666 * 33 and 6666 * 333, the digit sums are 27 and 36 respectively.

From these 3 examples, one can see the common difference is always 9 when the number of times the digit 6 and 3 appear increases by one.

So, it has to do with the 9 times table, and one can easily see the number of times the digit 6 appears multiplied by 9, would give the digit sum.

In the case of 62 6s, the answer would be 62 * 9 which is equals to 558

did exactly the same

Ravneet Singh - 5 years, 11 months ago

exactly! did it the same way!

Hrithik Nambiar - 5 years, 8 months ago
Fang Ni Goh
May 20, 2014

Since there is 1 more digit 6 of M than N, the following multiplication will have 1 more digit 6 than 3

66x3=198 The digit sum will be 1+9+8= 18 666x33=21978 The digit sum will be 1+9+8+2+7=27 6666x333=2219778 The digit sum will be 1+9+8+2+2+7+7=36

The above pattern shows that for every increase in 1 digit of 6 and 1 digit of 3, the digit sum will increase by 9. To get the digit of sum of NxM, 18+ (61-1)x9= 18+540=558

Vishal Goyal
May 20, 2014

66*3=198

666*33=21978

6666*333=2219778

66666*3333=222197778

simarly the numbers of 2's and 7's are same in every multiplication and 19 will come in between and 8 will come in last and the number of 2's and 7's are two less than the no of digits in the bigger number , so

66666..............6 * 333333333.................3 = 22222.........222219777777.......7777778 ,

then the sum of digits is ,

60 x 2 + 1 + 9 + 60 x 7 + 8 = 558

we perform a bit pattern and we can notice that: 3 66=198, 33 666=21978, 333 6666=2219778, . . . then we conclude that 333…33(61 3's) 666.....66(62 6's)=22....22(60 2's)1977....77(60 7's)8. and the generalization:333…33(x 3's) 666.....66(x+1 6's)=22....22(x-1 2's)1977....77(x-1 7's)8. hence the digit sum is 2 60+7*60+1+9+8=558

Athul Nambolan
May 20, 2014

The numbers given in the following sequence follow a pattern .

666 × 33 666\times 33 = 21978 6666 × 333 = 2219778 6666\times 333= 2219778

Similarly,

66.......6 × 33..........3 = 22....21977....78 66.......6\times 33..........3 = 22....21977....78 Where if there are 'n' 3's and n+1 6's then the solution contains n-1 2's and n-1 7's

Here n = 61 , therefore the digital sum =

60 × 2 + 1 + 9 + 60 × 7 + 8 ) = 120 + 18 + 420 = 558 60\times 2 + 1 + 9 + 60\times 7 + 8) = 120 + 18 +420 = 558

I did something that worked fine. Notice that if we have n n amount of 6 s 6's then the digit sum is 9 n 9*n .

This worked for lower cases so I simply got 9 62 = 558 9*62 = 558 :)

Rebaz Sharif
Apr 29, 2016

If you multiply 2 numbers both consist entirely of 3's but one has one more digit than the other, the sum of digit of the result is the sum of digit of the larger one x 3. i.e. number of digit of the large one x 9.

For example: 333 x 33 = 10989 , the sum of digit is 27 which is 3x9. Another example: 3333 x 333 = 1109889, the sum of digits is 36 which is 4x9 . This pattern remains the same when multiplied by 2. In example1: 2 x 10989 = 21978 the sum of digit is still 27. In example 2: 2 x 1109889 = 2219778 the sum of the digits is still 36.

In our question we have: 333....333 (61 times) x 666 ....666 (62 times) = 333...333 (61 times) x 2(333....333) {62 times} Hence the sum of the digits of the result is 62 x 9 = 558.

Do you know how to prove the truth of your first line, other than by observation of small cases?

Calvin Lin Staff - 5 years, 1 month ago
Ossama Ismail
Jun 13, 2015

Digit sum of ( 6 * N ) = digit sum of ( 6 x 333..........3) = 8 + 9 * 60 +1 = 549

Digit sum of (N * M) = 62 * 549 /61 = 558

Mehul Chaturvedi
Oct 20, 2014

The best Way Is INDUCTION

We will observerve sum of digits

1)3x66=18

2)33x666=27

i.e. 3333...(n-1)x666....(n)=9xn

therefore

9x62=558

But i Think Sir Calvin Lin's method better than mine

Mehul Chaturvedi - 6 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

You say in first line that your method - induction is the BEST and now you say that Sir's is better. I hope you are quite clear with the comparatives and superlatives.

Kartik Sharma - 6 years, 6 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...