Determining Whether the Number $11111$ is Prime. Used Divisibility Tests.

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
I am asked to determine whether the number $11111$ is prime. Upon using the divisibility tests for the numbers 1 to 11, I couldn't find anything that divides it, so I assumed that it is prime. However, it apparently isn't prime. So what is the procedure to determine whether $11111$ is prime?
Thank you for any help.
prime-numbers divisibility prime-factorization
 |Â
show 8 more comments
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
I am asked to determine whether the number $11111$ is prime. Upon using the divisibility tests for the numbers 1 to 11, I couldn't find anything that divides it, so I assumed that it is prime. However, it apparently isn't prime. So what is the procedure to determine whether $11111$ is prime?
Thank you for any help.
prime-numbers divisibility prime-factorization
1
Why would you stop checking at $11$? $sqrt 11111>105$.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 1:59
@Lulu Because it's not feasible to keep checking by hand. Or is there a way to check? That's why I'm asking.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:00
2
Primality checking is really, really hard. There aren't short cuts. There are sophisticated tests you could use but with a very small number like this, those tests take more time than blind testing does.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 2:01
@Lulu So there's no simple way to check whether $11111$ is prime by hand? That's weird, because this was given in a problem set, so I assumed there was such a way.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:02
3
Of course it's feasible to check it by hand. It just takes some time and is tedious. In this case you only need to check divisibility by numbers ending in 1, 3, 7, 9 up to 105. That's about 40 trial divisions. Then you will see that $11111 = 41cdot 271$.
â Hans Engler
Aug 23 at 2:05
 |Â
show 8 more comments
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
I am asked to determine whether the number $11111$ is prime. Upon using the divisibility tests for the numbers 1 to 11, I couldn't find anything that divides it, so I assumed that it is prime. However, it apparently isn't prime. So what is the procedure to determine whether $11111$ is prime?
Thank you for any help.
prime-numbers divisibility prime-factorization
I am asked to determine whether the number $11111$ is prime. Upon using the divisibility tests for the numbers 1 to 11, I couldn't find anything that divides it, so I assumed that it is prime. However, it apparently isn't prime. So what is the procedure to determine whether $11111$ is prime?
Thank you for any help.
prime-numbers divisibility prime-factorization
asked Aug 23 at 1:57
The Pointer
2,7642830
2,7642830
1
Why would you stop checking at $11$? $sqrt 11111>105$.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 1:59
@Lulu Because it's not feasible to keep checking by hand. Or is there a way to check? That's why I'm asking.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:00
2
Primality checking is really, really hard. There aren't short cuts. There are sophisticated tests you could use but with a very small number like this, those tests take more time than blind testing does.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 2:01
@Lulu So there's no simple way to check whether $11111$ is prime by hand? That's weird, because this was given in a problem set, so I assumed there was such a way.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:02
3
Of course it's feasible to check it by hand. It just takes some time and is tedious. In this case you only need to check divisibility by numbers ending in 1, 3, 7, 9 up to 105. That's about 40 trial divisions. Then you will see that $11111 = 41cdot 271$.
â Hans Engler
Aug 23 at 2:05
 |Â
show 8 more comments
1
Why would you stop checking at $11$? $sqrt 11111>105$.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 1:59
@Lulu Because it's not feasible to keep checking by hand. Or is there a way to check? That's why I'm asking.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:00
2
Primality checking is really, really hard. There aren't short cuts. There are sophisticated tests you could use but with a very small number like this, those tests take more time than blind testing does.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 2:01
@Lulu So there's no simple way to check whether $11111$ is prime by hand? That's weird, because this was given in a problem set, so I assumed there was such a way.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:02
3
Of course it's feasible to check it by hand. It just takes some time and is tedious. In this case you only need to check divisibility by numbers ending in 1, 3, 7, 9 up to 105. That's about 40 trial divisions. Then you will see that $11111 = 41cdot 271$.
â Hans Engler
Aug 23 at 2:05
1
1
Why would you stop checking at $11$? $sqrt 11111>105$.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 1:59
Why would you stop checking at $11$? $sqrt 11111>105$.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 1:59
@Lulu Because it's not feasible to keep checking by hand. Or is there a way to check? That's why I'm asking.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:00
@Lulu Because it's not feasible to keep checking by hand. Or is there a way to check? That's why I'm asking.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:00
2
2
Primality checking is really, really hard. There aren't short cuts. There are sophisticated tests you could use but with a very small number like this, those tests take more time than blind testing does.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 2:01
Primality checking is really, really hard. There aren't short cuts. There are sophisticated tests you could use but with a very small number like this, those tests take more time than blind testing does.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 2:01
@Lulu So there's no simple way to check whether $11111$ is prime by hand? That's weird, because this was given in a problem set, so I assumed there was such a way.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:02
@Lulu So there's no simple way to check whether $11111$ is prime by hand? That's weird, because this was given in a problem set, so I assumed there was such a way.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:02
3
3
Of course it's feasible to check it by hand. It just takes some time and is tedious. In this case you only need to check divisibility by numbers ending in 1, 3, 7, 9 up to 105. That's about 40 trial divisions. Then you will see that $11111 = 41cdot 271$.
â Hans Engler
Aug 23 at 2:05
Of course it's feasible to check it by hand. It just takes some time and is tedious. In this case you only need to check divisibility by numbers ending in 1, 3, 7, 9 up to 105. That's about 40 trial divisions. Then you will see that $11111 = 41cdot 271$.
â Hans Engler
Aug 23 at 2:05
 |Â
show 8 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Best I can do:
Let $p$ be a prime dividing $11111$. Then I claim that $pequiv 1 pmod 5$
Pf: Indeed, $11111=frac 19times (10^5-1)$ so $p,|,11111implies p,|,10^5-1$ which implies that $10$ has order $5pmod p$. Thus $5,|,p-1$ and we are done.
Thus you should just check $11,31,41cdots$ and stop since $41$ already works.
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Here is a list for test of prime factor of less than $50$.
Test for divisibility by $41$. Subtract four times the last digit from the remaining leading truncated number. If the result is divisible by $41$, then so was the first number. Apply this rule over and over again as necessary.
$$1111-4(1)=1107$$
$$110-4(7)=110-28=82$$
$$8-4(2)=0$$
The number is divisible by $41$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Not a clean method though but I used Fermat's factorization to find that,
$(105)^2<11111<(106)^2$
Now applying the fact that a perfect square should end only in $0,1,4,5,6,9$, concentrate only on those numbers, the difference of whose square and $11111$ give these digits in the last place. For instance, omit $113,123,133,143$ because the squares of these numbers end with $9$ and would result in $8$ as the last digit and thus this difference will not be a perfect square.
Similarly omit numbers like $112, 122, 132, 142, 152$ (Can you see the reason why?)
On omitting more of such numbers and a little bit of trial, we find that $(156)^2 - 11111 = 13225=(115)^2$
Therefore, $11111 = (156-115)(156+115) = 41.271$
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
If an integer is all $1$s, then it's of the form $$frac10^n - 19,$$ which we notate $R_n$ either for convenience or to be dull, take your pick. For your number, then, we have $n = 5$. Since $5$ is prime, $11111$ could be prime.
Notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $11$ if $n$ is even. Also notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $3$ if $n$ is a multiple of $3$. And $R_n$ is divisible by $41$ is $n$ is a multiple of $5$.
How am I coming up with those? I just know, I'm a demon, and if I don't know, I ask a wood nymph. But if I was just a mere mortal like you, I would look in Sloane's OEIS and notice the remark "These indices $p$ must also be prime." Meaning that if $R_n$ is prime, then so is $n$.
Wait, there's another way a mere mortal like you could have figured this one out: simple trial division. Since $sqrt11111 approx 105.4$, you only need to try dividing $11111$ by each prime from $3$ to $103$.
If you had just kept going in ascending order, you would have hit upon $41$.
Betsy DeVos is doing a great job. Mwahahahahahahahahahaha!
add a comment |Â
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Best I can do:
Let $p$ be a prime dividing $11111$. Then I claim that $pequiv 1 pmod 5$
Pf: Indeed, $11111=frac 19times (10^5-1)$ so $p,|,11111implies p,|,10^5-1$ which implies that $10$ has order $5pmod p$. Thus $5,|,p-1$ and we are done.
Thus you should just check $11,31,41cdots$ and stop since $41$ already works.
add a comment |Â
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Best I can do:
Let $p$ be a prime dividing $11111$. Then I claim that $pequiv 1 pmod 5$
Pf: Indeed, $11111=frac 19times (10^5-1)$ so $p,|,11111implies p,|,10^5-1$ which implies that $10$ has order $5pmod p$. Thus $5,|,p-1$ and we are done.
Thus you should just check $11,31,41cdots$ and stop since $41$ already works.
add a comment |Â
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Best I can do:
Let $p$ be a prime dividing $11111$. Then I claim that $pequiv 1 pmod 5$
Pf: Indeed, $11111=frac 19times (10^5-1)$ so $p,|,11111implies p,|,10^5-1$ which implies that $10$ has order $5pmod p$. Thus $5,|,p-1$ and we are done.
Thus you should just check $11,31,41cdots$ and stop since $41$ already works.
Best I can do:
Let $p$ be a prime dividing $11111$. Then I claim that $pequiv 1 pmod 5$
Pf: Indeed, $11111=frac 19times (10^5-1)$ so $p,|,11111implies p,|,10^5-1$ which implies that $10$ has order $5pmod p$. Thus $5,|,p-1$ and we are done.
Thus you should just check $11,31,41cdots$ and stop since $41$ already works.
answered Aug 23 at 2:15
lulu
36.1k14275
36.1k14275
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Here is a list for test of prime factor of less than $50$.
Test for divisibility by $41$. Subtract four times the last digit from the remaining leading truncated number. If the result is divisible by $41$, then so was the first number. Apply this rule over and over again as necessary.
$$1111-4(1)=1107$$
$$110-4(7)=110-28=82$$
$$8-4(2)=0$$
The number is divisible by $41$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Here is a list for test of prime factor of less than $50$.
Test for divisibility by $41$. Subtract four times the last digit from the remaining leading truncated number. If the result is divisible by $41$, then so was the first number. Apply this rule over and over again as necessary.
$$1111-4(1)=1107$$
$$110-4(7)=110-28=82$$
$$8-4(2)=0$$
The number is divisible by $41$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
Here is a list for test of prime factor of less than $50$.
Test for divisibility by $41$. Subtract four times the last digit from the remaining leading truncated number. If the result is divisible by $41$, then so was the first number. Apply this rule over and over again as necessary.
$$1111-4(1)=1107$$
$$110-4(7)=110-28=82$$
$$8-4(2)=0$$
The number is divisible by $41$.
Here is a list for test of prime factor of less than $50$.
Test for divisibility by $41$. Subtract four times the last digit from the remaining leading truncated number. If the result is divisible by $41$, then so was the first number. Apply this rule over and over again as necessary.
$$1111-4(1)=1107$$
$$110-4(7)=110-28=82$$
$$8-4(2)=0$$
The number is divisible by $41$.
answered Aug 23 at 2:06
Siong Thye Goh
80.5k1453101
80.5k1453101
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Not a clean method though but I used Fermat's factorization to find that,
$(105)^2<11111<(106)^2$
Now applying the fact that a perfect square should end only in $0,1,4,5,6,9$, concentrate only on those numbers, the difference of whose square and $11111$ give these digits in the last place. For instance, omit $113,123,133,143$ because the squares of these numbers end with $9$ and would result in $8$ as the last digit and thus this difference will not be a perfect square.
Similarly omit numbers like $112, 122, 132, 142, 152$ (Can you see the reason why?)
On omitting more of such numbers and a little bit of trial, we find that $(156)^2 - 11111 = 13225=(115)^2$
Therefore, $11111 = (156-115)(156+115) = 41.271$
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Not a clean method though but I used Fermat's factorization to find that,
$(105)^2<11111<(106)^2$
Now applying the fact that a perfect square should end only in $0,1,4,5,6,9$, concentrate only on those numbers, the difference of whose square and $11111$ give these digits in the last place. For instance, omit $113,123,133,143$ because the squares of these numbers end with $9$ and would result in $8$ as the last digit and thus this difference will not be a perfect square.
Similarly omit numbers like $112, 122, 132, 142, 152$ (Can you see the reason why?)
On omitting more of such numbers and a little bit of trial, we find that $(156)^2 - 11111 = 13225=(115)^2$
Therefore, $11111 = (156-115)(156+115) = 41.271$
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Not a clean method though but I used Fermat's factorization to find that,
$(105)^2<11111<(106)^2$
Now applying the fact that a perfect square should end only in $0,1,4,5,6,9$, concentrate only on those numbers, the difference of whose square and $11111$ give these digits in the last place. For instance, omit $113,123,133,143$ because the squares of these numbers end with $9$ and would result in $8$ as the last digit and thus this difference will not be a perfect square.
Similarly omit numbers like $112, 122, 132, 142, 152$ (Can you see the reason why?)
On omitting more of such numbers and a little bit of trial, we find that $(156)^2 - 11111 = 13225=(115)^2$
Therefore, $11111 = (156-115)(156+115) = 41.271$
Not a clean method though but I used Fermat's factorization to find that,
$(105)^2<11111<(106)^2$
Now applying the fact that a perfect square should end only in $0,1,4,5,6,9$, concentrate only on those numbers, the difference of whose square and $11111$ give these digits in the last place. For instance, omit $113,123,133,143$ because the squares of these numbers end with $9$ and would result in $8$ as the last digit and thus this difference will not be a perfect square.
Similarly omit numbers like $112, 122, 132, 142, 152$ (Can you see the reason why?)
On omitting more of such numbers and a little bit of trial, we find that $(156)^2 - 11111 = 13225=(115)^2$
Therefore, $11111 = (156-115)(156+115) = 41.271$
edited Aug 24 at 5:41
answered Aug 23 at 9:09
naveen dankal
4,49321347
4,49321347
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
If an integer is all $1$s, then it's of the form $$frac10^n - 19,$$ which we notate $R_n$ either for convenience or to be dull, take your pick. For your number, then, we have $n = 5$. Since $5$ is prime, $11111$ could be prime.
Notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $11$ if $n$ is even. Also notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $3$ if $n$ is a multiple of $3$. And $R_n$ is divisible by $41$ is $n$ is a multiple of $5$.
How am I coming up with those? I just know, I'm a demon, and if I don't know, I ask a wood nymph. But if I was just a mere mortal like you, I would look in Sloane's OEIS and notice the remark "These indices $p$ must also be prime." Meaning that if $R_n$ is prime, then so is $n$.
Wait, there's another way a mere mortal like you could have figured this one out: simple trial division. Since $sqrt11111 approx 105.4$, you only need to try dividing $11111$ by each prime from $3$ to $103$.
If you had just kept going in ascending order, you would have hit upon $41$.
Betsy DeVos is doing a great job. Mwahahahahahahahahahaha!
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
If an integer is all $1$s, then it's of the form $$frac10^n - 19,$$ which we notate $R_n$ either for convenience or to be dull, take your pick. For your number, then, we have $n = 5$. Since $5$ is prime, $11111$ could be prime.
Notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $11$ if $n$ is even. Also notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $3$ if $n$ is a multiple of $3$. And $R_n$ is divisible by $41$ is $n$ is a multiple of $5$.
How am I coming up with those? I just know, I'm a demon, and if I don't know, I ask a wood nymph. But if I was just a mere mortal like you, I would look in Sloane's OEIS and notice the remark "These indices $p$ must also be prime." Meaning that if $R_n$ is prime, then so is $n$.
Wait, there's another way a mere mortal like you could have figured this one out: simple trial division. Since $sqrt11111 approx 105.4$, you only need to try dividing $11111$ by each prime from $3$ to $103$.
If you had just kept going in ascending order, you would have hit upon $41$.
Betsy DeVos is doing a great job. Mwahahahahahahahahahaha!
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
If an integer is all $1$s, then it's of the form $$frac10^n - 19,$$ which we notate $R_n$ either for convenience or to be dull, take your pick. For your number, then, we have $n = 5$. Since $5$ is prime, $11111$ could be prime.
Notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $11$ if $n$ is even. Also notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $3$ if $n$ is a multiple of $3$. And $R_n$ is divisible by $41$ is $n$ is a multiple of $5$.
How am I coming up with those? I just know, I'm a demon, and if I don't know, I ask a wood nymph. But if I was just a mere mortal like you, I would look in Sloane's OEIS and notice the remark "These indices $p$ must also be prime." Meaning that if $R_n$ is prime, then so is $n$.
Wait, there's another way a mere mortal like you could have figured this one out: simple trial division. Since $sqrt11111 approx 105.4$, you only need to try dividing $11111$ by each prime from $3$ to $103$.
If you had just kept going in ascending order, you would have hit upon $41$.
Betsy DeVos is doing a great job. Mwahahahahahahahahahaha!
If an integer is all $1$s, then it's of the form $$frac10^n - 19,$$ which we notate $R_n$ either for convenience or to be dull, take your pick. For your number, then, we have $n = 5$. Since $5$ is prime, $11111$ could be prime.
Notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $11$ if $n$ is even. Also notice that $R_n$ is divisible by $3$ if $n$ is a multiple of $3$. And $R_n$ is divisible by $41$ is $n$ is a multiple of $5$.
How am I coming up with those? I just know, I'm a demon, and if I don't know, I ask a wood nymph. But if I was just a mere mortal like you, I would look in Sloane's OEIS and notice the remark "These indices $p$ must also be prime." Meaning that if $R_n$ is prime, then so is $n$.
Wait, there's another way a mere mortal like you could have figured this one out: simple trial division. Since $sqrt11111 approx 105.4$, you only need to try dividing $11111$ by each prime from $3$ to $103$.
If you had just kept going in ascending order, you would have hit upon $41$.
Betsy DeVos is doing a great job. Mwahahahahahahahahahaha!
answered Aug 23 at 21:53
The Short One
6981622
6981622
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2891615%2fdetermining-whether-the-number-11111-is-prime-used-divisibility-tests%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
1
Why would you stop checking at $11$? $sqrt 11111>105$.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 1:59
@Lulu Because it's not feasible to keep checking by hand. Or is there a way to check? That's why I'm asking.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:00
2
Primality checking is really, really hard. There aren't short cuts. There are sophisticated tests you could use but with a very small number like this, those tests take more time than blind testing does.
â lulu
Aug 23 at 2:01
@Lulu So there's no simple way to check whether $11111$ is prime by hand? That's weird, because this was given in a problem set, so I assumed there was such a way.
â The Pointer
Aug 23 at 2:02
3
Of course it's feasible to check it by hand. It just takes some time and is tedious. In this case you only need to check divisibility by numbers ending in 1, 3, 7, 9 up to 105. That's about 40 trial divisions. Then you will see that $11111 = 41cdot 271$.
â Hans Engler
Aug 23 at 2:05