Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Wiles's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem wikipedia , lookup
List of important publications in mathematics wikipedia , lookup
Positional notation wikipedia , lookup
Fundamental theorem of calculus wikipedia , lookup
Four color theorem wikipedia , lookup
Fermat's Last Theorem wikipedia , lookup
Fundamental theorem of algebra wikipedia , lookup
www.carom-maths.co.uk Activity 1-8: Repunits 111, 11111, 11111111111, 11111111111111 are all repunits. They have received a lot of attention down the years. In particular, when are they prime? R1 = 1, no, R2 = 11, yes, R3 = 111, no... Task: prove that any repunit having a composite (non-prime) number of digits must be composite. 111111111111111 = 111111111111111 = 111 1001001001001 A common move with repunits is to consider their value in bases other than 10. The above argument is exactly the same in bases other than 10. So for a repunit to be a prime in base 10 is rare. Conjecture: there are infinitely many repunit primes in base 10. When is a repunit square? Well, 1 is a square – but if we search for others, they seem hard to find. Conjecture: 1 is the only square repunit. Task: how could we prove this? How to approach this? Firstly, what remainders can a square have if you divide by 4? (2n)2 = 4n2, and so has remainder 0, while (2n+1)2 = 4n2 + 4n + 1, and so has remainder 1. Conclusion: a square can never have remainder 2 or 3 when divided by 4. Now consider 111...111. 1 is a square. 11 is not a square. For repunits bigger than these, We have 111...111 = 111...11100 + 11. 4 goes into 111...11100, and leaves a remainder 3 when it divides 11. So 111...111 cannot be a square, and 1 is the only square repunit. And so we have... Theorem: 1 is the only square repunit. Another theorem: if a number is not divisible by either 2 or 5, then some multiple of this number must be a repunit. 3 37 = 111 11 1 = 11 7 15873 = 111111 13 8547 = 111111 17 65359477124183 = 1111111111111111 19 5847953216374269 = 111111111111111111 215291=111111 How to prove this? We can use a theorem due to Euler. Leonhard Euler, Swiss (1707-1783) The numbers a and b are COPRIME if gcd(a, b) = 1, where gcd = ‘greatest common divisor’. Define (n) to be the number of numbers in {1, 2, 3…, n - 1} that are coprime with n. So (2) = 1, (3) = 2, (4) = 2, (5) = 4, (20) = 8. Task: find (5), (9), (45). What do you notice? It turns out that (n) (the totient function) is what we call multiplicative. That is to say, if a and b are coprime, then (ab) = (a) (b). Thus (45) = (9) (5). Now Euler’s Theorem tells us: if a and b are coprime, then a divides b(a) – 1. So, for example, since 11 and 13 are coprime, 11 divides 13(11) 1, 137858491848 = 11 x 12532590168 and 13 divides 11(13) 1, 3138428376720 = 13 x 241417567440 Note that a repunit is of the form (10n – 1)/9. Now suppose a and 10 have no common factor. Then 9a and 10 have no common factor. So by Euler’s Theorem, 9a divides 10(9a) 1. So 10(9a) 1 = 9a k, for some k. So a k = (10(9a) 1)/9, which is a repunit. Thus some multiple of a is a repunit. Are there any numbers that are repunits in more than one base? 31 = 111 (base 5) = 11111 (base 2) 8191 = 111 (base 90) = 1111111111111 (base 2) Goormaghtigh Conjecture: these are the only two. With thanks to: Shaun Stevens, for his help and advice. Wikipedia, for another excellent article. Carom is written by Jonny Griffiths, [email protected]