Prove that $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$












1














Prove that $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$



Since $underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}=frac{2(10^{1980}-1)}{10-1}$ then I need to show that $9cdot 1982cdot 1983| 2(10^{1980}-1)$, or $9cdot 991cdot 1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ since $(9,991,1983)=1$ if I show that $9|(10^{1980}-1)$, $991|(10^{1980}-1)$, $1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ then I finish the task.



Since $10equiv 1 (mod{9})$ then $10^{1980}equiv 1(mod{9})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{9})$ so we show that $9|(10^{1980}-1)$.



In $991|(10^{1980}-1)$ we can use Euler's function since $(991,10)=1$ so $10^{varphi (991)}equiv 1 (mod 991)$ so $10^{990}equiv 1 (mod{9})$ then if I square $10^{2cdot 990}equiv 1 (mod{991})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{991})$.



Then $1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ $1983=3cdot 661$ $3|10^{1980}-1$ it is trivial, and we can you Euler's theorem then $10^{660}equiv 1(mod{661})$ and then $10^{3cdot 660}equiv 1 (mod{661})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{661})$.



But I just not so sure when you show something like this and number $x,y,z in mathbb N$ (x,y,z)=1 and if say (y,x)=3 then that not change anything in task, if we want to show that x|n y|n and z|n? If you understand what I ask, here $(9,1983)=3$, but $(9,1982,1983)=1$










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    You need a backslash before "underbrace".
    – Shaun
    Nov 23 at 6:58
















1














Prove that $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$



Since $underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}=frac{2(10^{1980}-1)}{10-1}$ then I need to show that $9cdot 1982cdot 1983| 2(10^{1980}-1)$, or $9cdot 991cdot 1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ since $(9,991,1983)=1$ if I show that $9|(10^{1980}-1)$, $991|(10^{1980}-1)$, $1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ then I finish the task.



Since $10equiv 1 (mod{9})$ then $10^{1980}equiv 1(mod{9})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{9})$ so we show that $9|(10^{1980}-1)$.



In $991|(10^{1980}-1)$ we can use Euler's function since $(991,10)=1$ so $10^{varphi (991)}equiv 1 (mod 991)$ so $10^{990}equiv 1 (mod{9})$ then if I square $10^{2cdot 990}equiv 1 (mod{991})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{991})$.



Then $1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ $1983=3cdot 661$ $3|10^{1980}-1$ it is trivial, and we can you Euler's theorem then $10^{660}equiv 1(mod{661})$ and then $10^{3cdot 660}equiv 1 (mod{661})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{661})$.



But I just not so sure when you show something like this and number $x,y,z in mathbb N$ (x,y,z)=1 and if say (y,x)=3 then that not change anything in task, if we want to show that x|n y|n and z|n? If you understand what I ask, here $(9,1983)=3$, but $(9,1982,1983)=1$










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    You need a backslash before "underbrace".
    – Shaun
    Nov 23 at 6:58














1












1








1







Prove that $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$



Since $underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}=frac{2(10^{1980}-1)}{10-1}$ then I need to show that $9cdot 1982cdot 1983| 2(10^{1980}-1)$, or $9cdot 991cdot 1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ since $(9,991,1983)=1$ if I show that $9|(10^{1980}-1)$, $991|(10^{1980}-1)$, $1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ then I finish the task.



Since $10equiv 1 (mod{9})$ then $10^{1980}equiv 1(mod{9})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{9})$ so we show that $9|(10^{1980}-1)$.



In $991|(10^{1980}-1)$ we can use Euler's function since $(991,10)=1$ so $10^{varphi (991)}equiv 1 (mod 991)$ so $10^{990}equiv 1 (mod{9})$ then if I square $10^{2cdot 990}equiv 1 (mod{991})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{991})$.



Then $1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ $1983=3cdot 661$ $3|10^{1980}-1$ it is trivial, and we can you Euler's theorem then $10^{660}equiv 1(mod{661})$ and then $10^{3cdot 660}equiv 1 (mod{661})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{661})$.



But I just not so sure when you show something like this and number $x,y,z in mathbb N$ (x,y,z)=1 and if say (y,x)=3 then that not change anything in task, if we want to show that x|n y|n and z|n? If you understand what I ask, here $(9,1983)=3$, but $(9,1982,1983)=1$










share|cite|improve this question















Prove that $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$



Since $underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}=frac{2(10^{1980}-1)}{10-1}$ then I need to show that $9cdot 1982cdot 1983| 2(10^{1980}-1)$, or $9cdot 991cdot 1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ since $(9,991,1983)=1$ if I show that $9|(10^{1980}-1)$, $991|(10^{1980}-1)$, $1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ then I finish the task.



Since $10equiv 1 (mod{9})$ then $10^{1980}equiv 1(mod{9})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{9})$ so we show that $9|(10^{1980}-1)$.



In $991|(10^{1980}-1)$ we can use Euler's function since $(991,10)=1$ so $10^{varphi (991)}equiv 1 (mod 991)$ so $10^{990}equiv 1 (mod{9})$ then if I square $10^{2cdot 990}equiv 1 (mod{991})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{991})$.



Then $1983|(10^{1980}-1)$ $1983=3cdot 661$ $3|10^{1980}-1$ it is trivial, and we can you Euler's theorem then $10^{660}equiv 1(mod{661})$ and then $10^{3cdot 660}equiv 1 (mod{661})$ so $10^{1980}-1equiv 0 (mod{661})$.



But I just not so sure when you show something like this and number $x,y,z in mathbb N$ (x,y,z)=1 and if say (y,x)=3 then that not change anything in task, if we want to show that x|n y|n and z|n? If you understand what I ask, here $(9,1983)=3$, but $(9,1982,1983)=1$







discrete-mathematics modular-arithmetic divisibility






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 23 at 7:04

























asked Nov 23 at 6:57









Marko Škorić

70310




70310








  • 1




    You need a backslash before "underbrace".
    – Shaun
    Nov 23 at 6:58














  • 1




    You need a backslash before "underbrace".
    – Shaun
    Nov 23 at 6:58








1




1




You need a backslash before "underbrace".
– Shaun
Nov 23 at 6:58




You need a backslash before "underbrace".
– Shaun
Nov 23 at 6:58










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2














While $gcd(9,1982,1983)=1$, you have $gcd(9,1983)ne 1$. You should rather factor
$ 9cdot 1982cdot 1983$ as $27cdot 661cdot 991$.






share|cite|improve this answer





























    0














    $$1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$$
    $$2cdot991cdot 1983|underbrace{left(11 ldots1right)}_{1980}cdot2$$


    This implies that $gcd geq 2$ and therefore it is $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$






    share|cite|improve this answer























      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3010051%2fprove-that-1982-cdot-1983-underbrace22-ldots2-1980%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      2














      While $gcd(9,1982,1983)=1$, you have $gcd(9,1983)ne 1$. You should rather factor
      $ 9cdot 1982cdot 1983$ as $27cdot 661cdot 991$.






      share|cite|improve this answer


























        2














        While $gcd(9,1982,1983)=1$, you have $gcd(9,1983)ne 1$. You should rather factor
        $ 9cdot 1982cdot 1983$ as $27cdot 661cdot 991$.






        share|cite|improve this answer
























          2












          2








          2






          While $gcd(9,1982,1983)=1$, you have $gcd(9,1983)ne 1$. You should rather factor
          $ 9cdot 1982cdot 1983$ as $27cdot 661cdot 991$.






          share|cite|improve this answer












          While $gcd(9,1982,1983)=1$, you have $gcd(9,1983)ne 1$. You should rather factor
          $ 9cdot 1982cdot 1983$ as $27cdot 661cdot 991$.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Nov 23 at 7:16









          Hagen von Eitzen

          275k21268495




          275k21268495























              0














              $$1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$$
              $$2cdot991cdot 1983|underbrace{left(11 ldots1right)}_{1980}cdot2$$


              This implies that $gcd geq 2$ and therefore it is $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$






              share|cite|improve this answer




























                0














                $$1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$$
                $$2cdot991cdot 1983|underbrace{left(11 ldots1right)}_{1980}cdot2$$


                This implies that $gcd geq 2$ and therefore it is $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$






                share|cite|improve this answer


























                  0












                  0








                  0






                  $$1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$$
                  $$2cdot991cdot 1983|underbrace{left(11 ldots1right)}_{1980}cdot2$$


                  This implies that $gcd geq 2$ and therefore it is $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$






                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  $$1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$$
                  $$2cdot991cdot 1983|underbrace{left(11 ldots1right)}_{1980}cdot2$$


                  This implies that $gcd geq 2$ and therefore it is $1982cdot 1983|underbrace{22 ldots2}_{1980}$







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited Nov 23 at 8:48

























                  answered Nov 23 at 7:37









                  Darío A. Gutiérrez

                  2,59141530




                  2,59141530






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                      Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                      Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3010051%2fprove-that-1982-cdot-1983-underbrace22-ldots2-1980%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Plaza Victoria

                      Puebla de Zaragoza

                      Musa