| Author |
Message |
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 6 Dec 2006 11:39:37 IST
|
|
|
if m&n r natural numbers such that m/n=1/3+1/5+1/17+1/19+1/23+1/1979+1/1983+1/1985+1/1997+1/1999 will2001 or 2002 divides m?????
|
GBXDHNXDFNHBHRSDRGWEASGSEDH |
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 6 Dec 2006 15:23:10 IST
|
|
|
Yaar check ur question pls ... u can always say that 2001 and 2002 will divide m . If 2001 does not divide m then multiply both m and n by 2001. Now the m/n ratio remains same but m is divisible by 2001. So we are done ... But i think the question demands something else .. check it out . cheers
|
There is only one .. one best way !!!!!!!!! |
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 6 Dec 2006 16:46:51 IST
|
|
|
|
Praveen kumar gorakavi
Hyderabad.
gorakavipraveen@gmail.com |
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 6 Dec 2006 19:21:50 IST
|
|
|
I agree upon the logic suggested by Puneet1622, please mention whether m/n is the simplest ratio or any other ratio.
|
The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is
at all comprehensible. |
this reply: 5 points
(with 1 
in 1 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 6 Dec 2006 20:02:48 IST
|
|
|
m/n= 1/3 + 1/1999 + 1/5 + 1/1997 + 1/17 + 1/1985 + 1/19 + 1/1983 + 1/23 + 1/1979 m/n = 1999+3/3*1999 + 1997+5/5*1997 + 1985+17/17*1985 + 1983+19/19*1983 + 1979+23/23*1979 taking 2002 common m/n = 2002 (1/3*1999 + 1/5*1997 + 1/17*1985 + 1/ 19*1983 + 1/ 23*1979) let 1/3*1999 + 1/5*1997 + 1/17*1985 + 1/ 19*1983 + 1/ 23*1979 = k m/n = 2002*k m/n is divisible by 2002. This is how we can approach this problem. But k may or may not be an integer so we cant say surely wether it is divisible by 2002 or not.Since you have given two options i ll assume k is a number. so 2002 is right choice.
|
They say ITZ NOT THE APTITUDE BUT THE ATTITUDE WHICH DECIDES U R ALTITUDE . THEN WHY M I NOT AT THE TOP IN THIS SITE? LIFE IS JUST NOT FAIR. |
this reply: 7 points
(with 1 
in 2 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 6 Dec 2006 20:13:24 IST
|
|
|
Well done polymath keep it up. The way u cracked the problem is fantastic and appreciated
|
The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is
at all comprehensible. |
this reply: 5 points
(with 1 
in 1 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 6 Dec 2006 22:43:48 IST
|
|
|
hey polymath
whats your opinion on your build up constant k. I did the same but with the same( following) thought I have discharged my idea 2 hours ago.
Confirm me what exactly m/n gives. If it is a fraction, then no mind ,all m and n (I MEAN ALL CONSTANTS ARE DIVISIBLE BY ALL NUMBERS .HERE CONSTANT I MEAN IS IF WE CONSIDER M OR N AS CONSTANTS FOR A PERTICULAR CASE.)can be divided by what not every constant. For the given case its idle to condsider as m/2001 or m/2002 NOT A FRACTION.I THINK THIS IS THE REQUIRED CONDITION FOR A VARIABLE TO BE PERFECTLY DIVIDED BY SOME OTHER. So in accordanse to PUNEET, some data is missed. If your proof is climed correct, iI guess 1 can be dividedby 1,03,89,431 and what not every element on number line.so probably k according to me can not be a fraction as against your proof. I am sorry to say this but I am trying to explore more through this healthy debate.
|
Praveen kumar gorakavi
Hyderabad.
gorakavipraveen@gmail.com |
this reply: 0 points
(with 0 
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
|
|