#1
|
|||
|
|||
Fun with Exponents
Find the last 5 digits of 9^9^9^9^....^9 which contains 2007 9's .
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fun with Exponents
"00000", if we use base 9 units.
That was easy. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fun with Exponents
lol
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fun with Exponents
||||9 (the '|'s are upward pointing arows) is this cheating? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fun with Exponents
EDIT: If this post conveys too much confidence, I didn't mean it. It's merely my best guess. Answer at the bottom.
OK, this is a very very un-mathematical method.. I made an excel sheet with a function that multiplies five digits by 9, and then takes the modulus 100k, so it will always remain five digits. Turns out this function has a period of 2500 iterations (is that the right terminology?). In other words, 9^2500 ends in 00001, as does 9^5k, 9^7500 etc. I verified this with Mathematica. (The fact that I use this method to solve the problem probably means I don't deserve to have Mathematica, but that's another discussion [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) So, it's one of 2500 possibilities. How big is 9^9^9^9.. with 2007 nines? I'm gonna assume that the formula is evaluated right to left, ie. 9^(9^(9^.. etc. Prolly standard for most, but again I'm a noobie. We probably don't need to know. Since the last five digits repeat every 2500 iterations, all I need is 9^... with 2006 nines, mod 2500. Yay! Once we know which it is, we can take the last five digits of 9^(whatever that number). It turns out that this function has a period of 250. So, our 2500 options are cut down to 250. The period of 9^x mod 250 is 50. (using the same Excel method) Period of 9^x mod 50: 10 Period of 9^x mod 10: 2 Recap: We start with 100k options. We cut this down to 2500 possible combinations of the last five digits of 9^x.. 9^2500 mod 100k = 9^0 mod 100k = 1. Because I barely understand this myself, and I assume somebody knows the answer, I won’t go into too much detail; I don’t expect anyone who didn’t understand before to understand it now. The formula I get is: 9^( 9^( 9^( 9^( 9^( 9^(gazillion) mod 2) mod 10) mod 50) mod 250) mod 2500) mod 100k Solving step by step: 9^gazillion mod 2 = 1, so we get: 9^( 9^( 9^( 9^( 9^(1) mod 10) mod 50) mod 250) mod 2500) mod 100k Step 2: ( 9^(1) mod 10) = 9, so 9^( 9^( 9^( 9^9 mod 50) mod 250) mod 2500) mod 100k Step 3: ( 9^9 mod 50) = 39 9^( 9^( 9^39 mod 250) mod 2500) mod 100k Step 4: 9^39 mod 250 = 39 9^( 9^39 mod 2500) mod 100k Step 5: 9^39 mod 2500 = 289 9^289 mod 100k = 45289 Cliff Notes: 45289. That’s my final answer. I probably didn’t use the most elegant method to solve this problem; it probably can (and should) be done without long tables in Excel, and Mathematica. I’d be interested to hear a better method. Provided of course I didn’t get it wrong, period.. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fun with Exponents
Very entertaining post Dale .
Your answer is crazy, but right !! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fun with Exponents
That's one out of two. Glad I didn't completely waste my too lazy to play cards time.
I will take your calling my answer crazy as a confirmation that there does in fact exist a more elegant, likely not computer-intensive, solution. I'm curious now! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fun with Exponents
Not exactly elegant, but here goes:
Lemma: 9^10 = 1 mod 100 9^100 = 1 mod 1000 9^1000 = 1 mod 10000 etc Let f(n) = 9^9^...^9 containing n nines. f(1) = 9 = -1 mod 10 f(n+1) = f(1)^9 = (-1)^9 = -1 mod 10 So f(n) = -1 mod 10 , for all n>1. Therefore the last digit is 9. Now for n>2: f(n) = 9^f(n-1) = 9^(10a + b) where b = f(n-1) mod 10 But 9^10 = 1 mod 100 (by lemma), and f(n-1) = -1 mod 10, therefore: f(n) = 9^b = 9^(-1) = -11 = 89 mod 100 Similarly f(n) = 9^89 = 289 mod 1000 f(n) = 9^289 = 5289 mod 10000 f(n) = 9^5289 = 45289 mod 100000 Note that this holds for all n > 5 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fun with Exponents
Thanks. I'm gonna hit Wikipedia now to see if I can get to a point where I understand all that.
PS I blame this thread for at LEAST two hours of forgone +EV at the tables tonight. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fun with Exponents
Do you have a very "elegant" solution? Why not the last six
digits? First off, if there is a "tower of nines" by exponentiation, and the last d digits are to be found (where d is small enough), the question is equivalent to one where the "tower" only has 3d-3 nines (the reason being that 9 is congruent to 1 when the modulus 2^3=8 is eventually attained) by successive application of Euler's theorem where a^phi(m) is congruent to 1 (mod m) because the moduli are products of powers of 2 and 5 whereas the base a is some power of 3. By "going up" the tower, the moduli are reduced from 10^d = (5^d)(2^d) to (2^2)(5^(d-1))(2^(d-1)), ... , 2^2d, 2^2d-1, ..., 2^3. Secondly, 9^9^9^x = 9 (mod 32) by successive application of Fermat's little theorem where x is a "smaller tower" [x=1 mod 8 so 9^x = 9 (mod 16) so 9^9 = 9 (mod 32). It also turns out that also 9^9 = 9 (mod 64) so why not six digits? ] Thus, congruence to 9 (mod 32) holds. The above seems to be a start of a better solution although I don't yet see the idea for the moduli starting with 5^5. It's true that in two steps you get to 1000 and it's quite easy to find the last three digits from there. The other interesting observation is that 9^289 = 289 (mod 5^4). In any case, it seems that a very elegant solution has eluded some of us. Also, did you check the lemma used in the other post? |
|
|