Mathematical guessing
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
A total of 2,879 votes have been distributed among the seven candidates in a one-party primary election. It is known that none of the candidates has obtained the same number of votes as another and that if the number of votes obtained by any of the candidates is divided by the number of votes obtained by any other candidate who has obtained fewer votes, the result is always a whole number. How many votes has each candidate obtained?
I was thinking of solving it by means of congruences and the Chinese Theorem of the Rest, but I don't know very well how to solve this riddle, which has been proposed to me by an acquaintance.
puzzle
asked Nov 16 at 19:13
Carlos
354
|
show 8 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
A total of 2,879 votes have been distributed among the seven candidates in a one-party primary election. It is known that none of the candidates has obtained the same number of votes as another and that if the number of votes obtained by any of the candidates is divided by the number of votes obtained by any other candidate who has obtained fewer votes, the result is always a whole number. How many votes has each candidate obtained?
I was thinking of solving it by means of congruences and the Chinese Theorem of the Rest, but I don't know very well how to solve this riddle, which has been proposed to me by an acquaintance.
puzzle
asked Nov 16 at 19:13
Carlos
354
4
Hint: order the candidates vote count as $v_1<v_2<cdots <v_7$. Then $v_1$ divides each of the $v_i$, so $v_1$ must divide the total. Reason from there.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:16
I don't understand very well the hint @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:20
2
Let $v_i=n_iv_1$. Then $2879=v_1+v_2+cdots+v_7=v_1+n_2v_1+cdots +n_7v_1=v_1times (1+n_1+n_2+cdots +n_7)$ thus $v_1$ must divide $2879$. Now factor that number.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:22
But how can I factor in a number I don't know? @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:25
Just factor $2879$. Nobody is asking you to "factor in a number you don't know."
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:28
|
show 8 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
A total of 2,879 votes have been distributed among the seven candidates in a one-party primary election. It is known that none of the candidates has obtained the same number of votes as another and that if the number of votes obtained by any of the candidates is divided by the number of votes obtained by any other candidate who has obtained fewer votes, the result is always a whole number. How many votes has each candidate obtained?
I was thinking of solving it by means of congruences and the Chinese Theorem of the Rest, but I don't know very well how to solve this riddle, which has been proposed to me by an acquaintance.
puzzle
asked Nov 16 at 19:13
Carlos
354
A total of 2,879 votes have been distributed among the seven candidates in a one-party primary election. It is known that none of the candidates has obtained the same number of votes as another and that if the number of votes obtained by any of the candidates is divided by the number of votes obtained by any other candidate who has obtained fewer votes, the result is always a whole number. How many votes has each candidate obtained?
I was thinking of solving it by means of congruences and the Chinese Theorem of the Rest, but I don't know very well how to solve this riddle, which has been proposed to me by an acquaintance.
puzzle
puzzle
asked Nov 16 at 19:13
Carlos
354
asked Nov 16 at 19:13
Carlos
354
asked Nov 16 at 19:13
Carlos
354
asked Nov 16 at 19:13
Carlos
354
asked Nov 16 at 19:13
Carlos
354
354
4
Hint: order the candidates vote count as $v_1<v_2<cdots <v_7$. Then $v_1$ divides each of the $v_i$, so $v_1$ must divide the total. Reason from there.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:16
I don't understand very well the hint @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:20
2
Let $v_i=n_iv_1$. Then $2879=v_1+v_2+cdots+v_7=v_1+n_2v_1+cdots +n_7v_1=v_1times (1+n_1+n_2+cdots +n_7)$ thus $v_1$ must divide $2879$. Now factor that number.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:22
But how can I factor in a number I don't know? @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:25
Just factor $2879$. Nobody is asking you to "factor in a number you don't know."
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:28
|
show 8 more comments
4
Hint: order the candidates vote count as $v_1<v_2<cdots <v_7$. Then $v_1$ divides each of the $v_i$, so $v_1$ must divide the total. Reason from there.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:16
I don't understand very well the hint @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:20
2
Let $v_i=n_iv_1$. Then $2879=v_1+v_2+cdots+v_7=v_1+n_2v_1+cdots +n_7v_1=v_1times (1+n_1+n_2+cdots +n_7)$ thus $v_1$ must divide $2879$. Now factor that number.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:22
But how can I factor in a number I don't know? @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:25
Just factor $2879$. Nobody is asking you to "factor in a number you don't know."
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:28
4
4
Hint: order the candidates vote count as $v_1<v_2<cdots <v_7$. Then $v_1$ divides each of the $v_i$, so $v_1$ must divide the total. Reason from there.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:16
Hint: order the candidates vote count as $v_1<v_2<cdots <v_7$. Then $v_1$ divides each of the $v_i$, so $v_1$ must divide the total. Reason from there.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:16
I don't understand very well the hint @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:20
I don't understand very well the hint @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:20
2
2
Let $v_i=n_iv_1$. Then $2879=v_1+v_2+cdots+v_7=v_1+n_2v_1+cdots +n_7v_1=v_1times (1+n_1+n_2+cdots +n_7)$ thus $v_1$ must divide $2879$. Now factor that number.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:22
Let $v_i=n_iv_1$. Then $2879=v_1+v_2+cdots+v_7=v_1+n_2v_1+cdots +n_7v_1=v_1times (1+n_1+n_2+cdots +n_7)$ thus $v_1$ must divide $2879$. Now factor that number.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:22
But how can I factor in a number I don't know? @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:25
But how can I factor in a number I don't know? @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:25
Just factor $2879$. Nobody is asking you to "factor in a number you don't know."
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:28
Just factor $2879$. Nobody is asking you to "factor in a number you don't know."
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:28
|
show 8 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
Call the number of votes the candidate that gotten the fewest votes for $a_1$.
The candidate that got the second lowest number of votes must then have gotten a multiplum of $a_1$, let's define $a_2$ so that $a_2a_1$.
We can continue and define $a_3, ldots, a_7$ similarly.
As $a_i$ for $igeq 2$ is the factor between the number of votes for candidate $i-1$ and candidate $i$, they can't be $1$.
If we add the number of votes we get
$$
2879 = a_1+a_2a_1+cdots+a_7a_6a_5a_4a_3a_2a_1
= a_1(1+a_2(1+a_3(1+cdots)))
$$
So we can conclude that $a_1 | 2879$, but that number is prime, so the only factors are $1$ and $2879$. $a_1=2879$ is obviously absurd, so $a_1 = 1$.
Putting that into the equation above we get $2879=1+a_2(1+cdots)$, or $2878=a_2(1+cdots)$. Factoring $2878$ (and ruling out the absurd possibility) we conclude $a_2=2$.
Try to go on from there.
Addition: If anyone tries to complete the calculations, the $a_i$'s are not the number of votes, and thus don't have to be different (hint: they won't be).
answered Nov 16 at 19:35
Henrik
5,93282030
Ooops... let me check again. Thanks.
– David G. Stork
Nov 16 at 20:55
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
Call the number of votes the candidate that gotten the fewest votes for $a_1$.
The candidate that got the second lowest number of votes must then have gotten a multiplum of $a_1$, let's define $a_2$ so that $a_2a_1$.
We can continue and define $a_3, ldots, a_7$ similarly.
As $a_i$ for $igeq 2$ is the factor between the number of votes for candidate $i-1$ and candidate $i$, they can't be $1$.
If we add the number of votes we get
$$
2879 = a_1+a_2a_1+cdots+a_7a_6a_5a_4a_3a_2a_1
= a_1(1+a_2(1+a_3(1+cdots)))
$$
So we can conclude that $a_1 | 2879$, but that number is prime, so the only factors are $1$ and $2879$. $a_1=2879$ is obviously absurd, so $a_1 = 1$.
Putting that into the equation above we get $2879=1+a_2(1+cdots)$, or $2878=a_2(1+cdots)$. Factoring $2878$ (and ruling out the absurd possibility) we conclude $a_2=2$.
Try to go on from there.
Addition: If anyone tries to complete the calculations, the $a_i$'s are not the number of votes, and thus don't have to be different (hint: they won't be).
answered Nov 16 at 19:35
Henrik
5,93282030
Ooops... let me check again. Thanks.
– David G. Stork
Nov 16 at 20:55
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
Call the number of votes the candidate that gotten the fewest votes for $a_1$.
The candidate that got the second lowest number of votes must then have gotten a multiplum of $a_1$, let's define $a_2$ so that $a_2a_1$.
We can continue and define $a_3, ldots, a_7$ similarly.
As $a_i$ for $igeq 2$ is the factor between the number of votes for candidate $i-1$ and candidate $i$, they can't be $1$.
If we add the number of votes we get
$$
2879 = a_1+a_2a_1+cdots+a_7a_6a_5a_4a_3a_2a_1
= a_1(1+a_2(1+a_3(1+cdots)))
$$
So we can conclude that $a_1 | 2879$, but that number is prime, so the only factors are $1$ and $2879$. $a_1=2879$ is obviously absurd, so $a_1 = 1$.
Putting that into the equation above we get $2879=1+a_2(1+cdots)$, or $2878=a_2(1+cdots)$. Factoring $2878$ (and ruling out the absurd possibility) we conclude $a_2=2$.
Try to go on from there.
Addition: If anyone tries to complete the calculations, the $a_i$'s are not the number of votes, and thus don't have to be different (hint: they won't be).
answered Nov 16 at 19:35
Henrik
5,93282030
Ooops... let me check again. Thanks.
– David G. Stork
Nov 16 at 20:55
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
Call the number of votes the candidate that gotten the fewest votes for $a_1$.
The candidate that got the second lowest number of votes must then have gotten a multiplum of $a_1$, let's define $a_2$ so that $a_2a_1$.
We can continue and define $a_3, ldots, a_7$ similarly.
As $a_i$ for $igeq 2$ is the factor between the number of votes for candidate $i-1$ and candidate $i$, they can't be $1$.
If we add the number of votes we get
$$
2879 = a_1+a_2a_1+cdots+a_7a_6a_5a_4a_3a_2a_1
= a_1(1+a_2(1+a_3(1+cdots)))
$$
So we can conclude that $a_1 | 2879$, but that number is prime, so the only factors are $1$ and $2879$. $a_1=2879$ is obviously absurd, so $a_1 = 1$.
Putting that into the equation above we get $2879=1+a_2(1+cdots)$, or $2878=a_2(1+cdots)$. Factoring $2878$ (and ruling out the absurd possibility) we conclude $a_2=2$.
Try to go on from there.
Addition: If anyone tries to complete the calculations, the $a_i$'s are not the number of votes, and thus don't have to be different (hint: they won't be).
answered Nov 16 at 19:35
Henrik
5,93282030
Call the number of votes the candidate that gotten the fewest votes for $a_1$.
The candidate that got the second lowest number of votes must then have gotten a multiplum of $a_1$, let's define $a_2$ so that $a_2a_1$.
We can continue and define $a_3, ldots, a_7$ similarly.
As $a_i$ for $igeq 2$ is the factor between the number of votes for candidate $i-1$ and candidate $i$, they can't be $1$.
If we add the number of votes we get
$$
2879 = a_1+a_2a_1+cdots+a_7a_6a_5a_4a_3a_2a_1
= a_1(1+a_2(1+a_3(1+cdots)))
$$
So we can conclude that $a_1 | 2879$, but that number is prime, so the only factors are $1$ and $2879$. $a_1=2879$ is obviously absurd, so $a_1 = 1$.
Putting that into the equation above we get $2879=1+a_2(1+cdots)$, or $2878=a_2(1+cdots)$. Factoring $2878$ (and ruling out the absurd possibility) we conclude $a_2=2$.
Try to go on from there.
Addition: If anyone tries to complete the calculations, the $a_i$'s are not the number of votes, and thus don't have to be different (hint: they won't be).
answered Nov 16 at 19:35
Henrik
5,93282030
edited Nov 16 at 21:57
answered Nov 16 at 19:35
Henrik
5,93282030
answered Nov 16 at 19:35
Henrik
5,93282030
answered Nov 16 at 19:35
Henrik
5,93282030
5,93282030
Ooops... let me check again. Thanks.
– David G. Stork
Nov 16 at 20:55
add a comment |
Ooops... let me check again. Thanks.
– David G. Stork
Nov 16 at 20:55
Ooops... let me check again. Thanks.
– David G. Stork
Nov 16 at 20:55
Ooops... let me check again. Thanks.
– David G. Stork
Nov 16 at 20:55
add a comment |
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3001532%2fmathematical-guessing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
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
4
Hint: order the candidates vote count as $v_1<v_2<cdots <v_7$. Then $v_1$ divides each of the $v_i$, so $v_1$ must divide the total. Reason from there.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:16
I don't understand very well the hint @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:20
2
Let $v_i=n_iv_1$. Then $2879=v_1+v_2+cdots+v_7=v_1+n_2v_1+cdots +n_7v_1=v_1times (1+n_1+n_2+cdots +n_7)$ thus $v_1$ must divide $2879$. Now factor that number.
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:22
But how can I factor in a number I don't know? @lulu
– Carlos
Nov 16 at 19:25
Just factor $2879$. Nobody is asking you to "factor in a number you don't know."
– lulu
Nov 16 at 19:28