Difference between revisions of "SANSKAR'S OG PROBLEMS"
m (→Solution 1 by ddk001 (Casework)) |
(→Solution 1 by ddk001 (Casework)) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==Solution 1 by ddk001 (Casework)== | ==Solution 1 by ddk001 (Casework)== | ||
'''Case 1: <math>a>b</math>''' | '''Case 1: <math>a>b</math>''' | ||
| + | |||
In this case, we have | In this case, we have | ||
| Line 16: | Line 17: | ||
, but this contradicts the original assumption of <math>b \ge 5</math>, so hence we must have <math>b \le 4</math>. | , but this contradicts the original assumption of <math>b \ge 5</math>, so hence we must have <math>b \le 4</math>. | ||
| + | |||
| + | With this in mind, we consider the unit digit of <math>\overline{ab}^2</math>. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Subcase 1.1: <math>a>b=1</math>''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | In this case, we have that | ||
| + | |||
| + | <cmath>a! \equiv \overline{ab}^2-b! \equiv (10a+1)^2-1 \equiv 0 \pmod{10} \implies 10|a! \implies a \ge 5</cmath>. | ||
| + | |||
| + | There is no apparent contradiction here, so we leave this as it is. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Subcase 1.2: <math>a>b=2</math>''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | In this case, we have that | ||
| + | |||
| + | <cmath>a! \equiv \overline{ab}^2-b! \equiv (10a+2)^2-2 \equiv 2 \pmod{10} \implies a! \equiv 2 \pmod{10} \implies a=2</cmath>. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This contradicts with the fact that <math>a>b</math>, so this is impossible. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Subcase 1.3: <math>a>b=3</math>''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | In this case, we have that | ||
| + | |||
| + | <cmath>a! \equiv \overline{ab}^2-b! \equiv (10a+3)^2-6 \equiv 3 \pmod{10}</cmath>. | ||
| + | |||
| + | However, this is impossible for all <math>a</math>. | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Subcase 1.4: <math>a>b=4</math>''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | In this case, we have that | ||
| + | |||
| + | <cmath>a! \equiv \overline{ab}^2-b! \equiv (10a+4)^2-24 \equiv 2 \pmod{10}</cmath>. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Again, this yields <math>a=2</math>, which, again, contradicts <math>a>b</math>. <math>\square</math> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Hence, we must have <math>b=1</math>. | ||
==Problem2 == | ==Problem2 == | ||
For any [[positive integer]] <math>n</math>, <math>n</math>>1 can <math>n!</math> be a [[perfect square]]? If yes, give one such <math>n</math>. If no, then prove it. | For any [[positive integer]] <math>n</math>, <math>n</math>>1 can <math>n!</math> be a [[perfect square]]? If yes, give one such <math>n</math>. If no, then prove it. | ||
Revision as of 21:19, 28 January 2024
Hi, this page is created by ...~ SANSGANKRSNGUPTA This page contains exclusive problems made by me myself. I am the creator of these OG problems. What OG stands for is a secret! Please post your solutions with your name. If you view this page please increment the below number by one:
Problem 1
Let
be a 2-digit positive integer satisfying
. Find
.
Solution 1 by ddk001 (Casework)
Case 1:
In this case, we have
.
If
, we must have
, but this contradicts the original assumption of
, so hence we must have
.
With this in mind, we consider the unit digit of
.
Subcase 1.1:
In this case, we have that
.
There is no apparent contradiction here, so we leave this as it is.
Subcase 1.2:
In this case, we have that
.
This contradicts with the fact that
, so this is impossible.
Subcase 1.3:
In this case, we have that
.
However, this is impossible for all
.
Subcase 1.4:
In this case, we have that
.
Again, this yields
, which, again, contradicts
.
Hence, we must have
.
Problem2
For any positive integer
,
>1 can
be a perfect square? If yes, give one such
. If no, then prove it.