The multiple of nine mystery

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Post Reply
User avatar
Mysterio448
Posts: 393
Joined: May 3rd, 2013, 6:44 pm

The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Mysterio448 »

There is a strange mathematical pattern that has come to my attention. I don't know how many people have noticed this, but for any multiple of nine the sum of the digits in that number equals nine. Here is what I mean:

9*1=9
9*2=18, 1+8=9
9*3=27, 2+7=9
9*4=36, 3+6=9
9*5=45, 4+5=9
9*6=54, 5+4=9
9*7=63, 6+3=9
9*8=72, 7+2=9
9*9=81, 8+1=9
9*10=90, 9+0=9
9*11=99, 9+9=18, 1+8=9
9*12=108, 1+0+8=9
9*13=117, 1+1+7=9
9*14=126, 1+2+6=9
9*15=135, 1+3+5=9
9*16=144, 1+4+4=9
9*17=153, 1+5+3=9
9*18=162, 1+6+2=9
9*19=171, 1+7+1=9

. . . and so on.

My question is: Why does this happen? What is the logical or mathematical explanation for this strange pattern?
User avatar
Spiral Out
Posts: 5014
Joined: June 26th, 2012, 10:22 am

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Spiral Out »

Yeah I noticed that. I play around with numbers sometimes as well and noticed this phenomenon too.

Another interesting quality... when adding any string of numbers (as in number reduction), all of the 9s (or numbers adding up to 9) can be removed without affecting the sum.

Example:

3+7+12+27+5+43+19+9+2+6+54=187 / 1+8+7=16 / 1+6=7 - or just remove the 9 (the 1 & 8 from 187)

Remove all the 9s from the string above:

3&6, 7&2, 9

We are left with:

12+27+5+43+19+54=160 / 1+6+0=7

We can further remove the other 9s:

27 (2&7=9) and 54 (5&4=9)

We are then left with:

12+5+43+19=79 / 7+9=16 / 1+6=7 (or just remove the 9 from 79)

We can even remove the 9 from the 19:

12+5+43+1=61 / 6+1=7

The nines don't seem to matter!
Dedicated to the fine art of thinking.
Dolphin42
Posts: 886
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 8:05 am
Location: The Evening Star

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Dolphin42 »

I think the clue as to why it's true is to note that it's a rule that can be generalized to any number base. For number base N, the recursively calculated sum of the digits of any multiple of the number N-1 is equal to N-1. So it's because 9 is one less than the number base we're using (10). It's a property of the way that number base systems work.

For example, hexadecimal (Base 16. Digits: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, A, B, C, D, E, F):

F * 1 = F
F * 2 = 1E, 1 + E = F
F * 3 = 2D, 2 + D = F
F * 4 = 3C, 3 + C = F
.
.
F * 10 = F 0, F + 0 = F
etc

Binary (Base 2. Digits: 0, 1):

1 * 1 = 1
1 * 10 = 10, 1 + 0 = 1
1 * 11 = 11, 1 + 1 = 10, 1 + 0 = 1
1 * 100 = 100, 1 + 0 + 0 = 1
1 * 101 = 101, 1 + 0 + 1 = 10, 1 + 0 = 1
etc

Each time you add 1 to the multiplier on the right of the '*' operator you are adding N-1 to the sum. Because the number base is N, for any number not ending in 0, you are subtracting 1 from the last digit and, by carrying, adding 1 to the number which forms everything except the last digit. So their sum remains constant. When the number which forms everything except the last digit reaches a multiple of N-1, the last digit has always fallen to 0. So the next addition of N-1, on this occasion, doesn't cause a carry from the last digit. It simply flips the last digit back up to N-1. i.e. it adds N-1 to the sum.

That sounded a lot clearer in my head than it looks on the page.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7932
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by LuckyR »

Mysterio448 wrote:There is a strange mathematical pattern that has come to my attention. I don't know how many people have noticed this, but for any multiple of nine the sum of the digits in that number equals nine. Here is what I mean:

9*1=9
9*2=18, 1+8=9
9*3=27, 2+7=9
9*4=36, 3+6=9
9*5=45, 4+5=9
9*6=54, 5+4=9
9*7=63, 6+3=9
9*8=72, 7+2=9
9*9=81, 8+1=9
9*10=90, 9+0=9
9*11=99, 9+9=18, 1+8=9
9*12=108, 1+0+8=9
9*13=117, 1+1+7=9
9*14=126, 1+2+6=9
9*15=135, 1+3+5=9
9*16=144, 1+4+4=9
9*17=153, 1+5+3=9
9*18=162, 1+6+2=9
9*19=171, 1+7+1=9

. . . and so on.

My question is: Why does this happen? What is the logical or mathematical explanation for this strange pattern?
Does this hold true in base 6?
"As usual... it depends."
Dolphin42
Posts: 886
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 8:05 am
Location: The Evening Star

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Dolphin42 »

Yes. Try it and see.
User avatar
Renee
Posts: 327
Joined: May 3rd, 2015, 10:39 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Frigyes Karinthy

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Renee »

We were taught in Grade 7 in Hungary that you can check for divisibility by nine or by three by adding the digits, reductio-wise, and if the last reduction results in 3 or 9, or in a number that is divisible by 3 or 9, then the original (non-reduced) number is divisible by 3 or nine.

I suspect it works for any positive integer power of three. (1, 3, 9, 27, 3^4, 3^5, ... 3^n where n is a positive integer.)

I don't know why this works. Nine is not mysterious. There is a proof somewhere. But don't ask "why" as if there were a divine decree about numbers.

Actually, I am wrong. The real reason this works is because Pope Poncificatius XIV in the eighth century Holy Roman Empire decreed it in his inaugural Easter sermon.

-- Updated November 15th, 2016, 8:29 am to add the following --
LuckyR wrote:Does this hold true in base 6?
Dolphin42 wrote:Yes. Try it and see.
That was a trick question. There is no digit "9" in a base-six number system.

Plus, you are wrong. (Sorry.)

In base6,

nine=13

and an example of 9*4=36 3+6=9 does not work in base six;

13*4=100 and 1+0+0 does not equal 13.
Ignorance is power.
Dolphin42
Posts: 886
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 8:05 am
Location: The Evening Star

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Dolphin42 »

Renee:
That was a trick question. There is no digit "9" in a base-six number system.
See my post #3. In base 6, the relevant number is 5. In base N the relevant number is N-1.

As an example (in base 6):

5 * 4 = 32, 3 + 2 = 5

Try another one.
User avatar
Spiral Out
Posts: 5014
Joined: June 26th, 2012, 10:22 am

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Spiral Out »

Dolphin42 wrote:Renee:
That was a trick question. There is no digit "9" in a base-six number system.
See my post #3. In base 6, the relevant number is 5. In base N the relevant number is N-1.

As an example (in base 6):

5 * 4 = 32, 3 + 2 = 5

Try another one.
5 * 5 = 25, 2 + 5 = 7
5 * 6 = 30, 3 + 0 = 3

Doesn't seem to work.
Dedicated to the fine art of thinking.
User avatar
Renee
Posts: 327
Joined: May 3rd, 2015, 10:39 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Frigyes Karinthy

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Renee »

Dolphin42 wrote: As an example (in base 6):

5 * 4 = 32, 3 + 2 = 5

Try another one.
Spiral Out wrote:5 * 5 = 25, 2 + 5 = 7
5 * 6 = 30, 3 + 0 = 3

Doesn't seem to work.
Dolphin is actually right, Spiral.
5*5 in base six is 41. 4+1 = 5.
Ignorance is power.
User avatar
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 2116
Joined: May 25th, 2013, 8:41 pm

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Here's another twist:

First I define anagram numbers (note the plural) by using a specific three-digit number. If we have abc where a, b and c take on a specific value from 0 to 9 and rearrange the digits to say cab, then take the difference so we have abc - cab = r, then r, the result, is always evenly divisible by 9 (i.e. no remainder) and abc and cab are anagram numbers.

To extend this further, as long as the rearranged numbers have the same number of digits (the anagram numbers), then r will always be evenly divisible by nine.

PhilX
User avatar
Spiral Out
Posts: 5014
Joined: June 26th, 2012, 10:22 am

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Spiral Out »

Renee wrote:Dolphin is actually right, Spiral.
5*5 in base six is 41. 4+1 = 5.
Thanks for the clarification!
Dedicated to the fine art of thinking.
User avatar
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 2116
Joined: May 25th, 2013, 8:41 pm

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Here's another twist:

First I define anagram numbers (note the plural) by using a specific three-digit number. If we have abc where a, b and c take on a specific value from 0 to 9 and rearrange the digits to say cab, then take the difference so we have abc - cab = r, then r, the result, is always evenly divisible by 9 (i.e. no remainder) and abc and cab are anagram numbers.

To extend this further, as long as the rearranged numbers have the same number of digits (the anagram numbers), then r will always be evenly divisible by nine.

PhilX
Let's take this to the next level.

As explained above, I've already said that abc - cab = r is (always) evenly divisible by nine. Now how about (abc)n - (cab)n = r1 where n is a natural number? I still maintain that r1 is evenly divisible by nine, furthermore it doesn't matter how many digits are involved in the bases (as long as they're anagram numbers) and I challenge anyone to find an exception. Test it out on your computers and scientific calculators.

PhilX

-- Updated December 6th, 2016, 1:40 am to add the following --

I've checked my notes and I see this phenomenon extends to the binomial equation:

(x - y)n - (xn - yn) = remainder

It would be helpful to consider a more specific example:

(x - y)3 - (x3 - y3) =
-3x2y + 3xy2

The first term has already been covered by my first post on this thread and is completely proven to work with any anagram numbers. The second term is covered in my second post and is partially proven to be compatible with any anagram numbers, but I'm completely confident it'll work for all anagram numbers. The third term, on the right side of the equal sign, I'm also completely confident is evenly divisible by nine so it can be represented by any anagram numbers such as 213 and 231 or 348 and 483 or 1225 and 5212, etc.

Since we're talking about the binomial equation, then n can be any natural number and x and y are anagram numbers (but the algebra can be a bit messy).

PhilX
ChanceIsChange
Posts: 37
Joined: December 15th, 2016, 7:36 am

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by ChanceIsChange »

In the following, if a and b are integers, then a | b means that b is divisible by a. Also, ℕ is the set of (positive) natural numbers, ℕ = {1, 2, 3, 4, …}, and ℕ_0 is equal to {0, 1, 2, 3, …} = ℕ ∪ {0}.


Theorem: ∀ N, d, k, r, a_0, ..., a_r ∈ ℕ_0 :
((N ≥ 2) ∧ (d ≥ 2)∧ (k ≥ 1) ∧ (d^k = N – 1) ∧ (0 ≤ a_0, ..., a_r ≤ N – 1) ⇒
(d | (a_r * N^r + … + a_1 * N^1 + a_0 * N^0) ⇔ d | (a_r + … + a_1 + a_0)))


Proof: Let N, d, k, r, a_0, ..., a_r ∈ ℕ_0 be such that N ≥ 2 and d ≥ 2 and k ≥ 1 and d^k = N – 1 and 0 ≤ a_0, ..., a_r ≤ N – 1 and otherwise arbitrary.
For all j ∈ ℕ,
d * (d^(k – 1)) * (N^(j – 1) + … + N^2 + N + 1) + 1
= (d^k) * (N^(j – 1) + … + N^2 + N + 1) + 1
= (N – 1) * (N^(j – 1) + … + N^2 + N + 1) + 1
= (N – 1) * N^(j – 1) + … + (N – 1) * N^2 + (N – 1) * N + (N – 1) + 1
= (N – 1) * N^(j – 1) + … + (N – 1) * N^2 + (N – 1) * N + N
= N * ((N – 1) * N^(j – 2) + … + (N – 1) * N + (N – 1) + 1)
= N * ((N – 1) * N^(j – 2) + … + (N – 1) * N + N)
= N^2 * ((N – 1) * N^(j – 3) + … + (N – 1) + 1)
= …
= N^(j – 1) * ((N – 1) * N^(j – j) + 1)
= N^(j – 1) * ((N – 1) * 1 + 1)
= N^(j – 1) * N
= N^j,
from which it follows that
(N^j) mod d
= (d * (d^(k – 1)) * (N^(j – 1) + … + N^2 + N + 1) + 1) mod d
= (d mod d) * (((d^(k – 1)) * (N^(j – 1) + … + N^2 + N + 1)) mod d) + (1 mod d)
= 0 + 1 because d mod d = 0 and 1 mod d = 1 due to d > 1,
= 1 (equation 1).

Thus, we obtain the following:

d | (a_r * N^r + … + a_1 * N^1 + a_0 * N^0)
⇔ 0 = (a_r * N^r + … + a_1 * N + a_0 * 1) mod d
= ((a_r * N^r) mod d) + … + ((a_1 * N) mod d) + (a_0 mod d)
= (a_r mod d)*(N^r mod d) + … + (a_1 mod d)*(N mod d) + (a_0 mod d)
= (a_r mod d)*1 + … + (a_1 mod d)*1 + (a_0 mod d) because of equation (1),
= (a_r + … + a_1 + a_0) mod d
⇔ d | (a_r + … + a_1 + a_0). Q.E.D

If we substitute N = 10, d = 9 and k = 1 in the above theorem, we find that a natural number m = a_r * 10^r + … + a_1 * 10 + a_0 is divisible by 9 if and only if the sum of its digits a_r + … + a_1 + a_0 is divisible by 9.

If we substitute N = 10, d = 3 and k = 2 in the above theorem, we find that a natural number m = a_r * 10^r + … + a_1 * 10 + a_0 is divisible by 3 if and only if the sum of its digits a_r + … + a_1 + a_0 is divisible by 3.


As can be seen, there is nothing mysterious about this quite useful result, which we have shown to be true for every base greater than or equal to 2 and every number that has a power equal to that base – 1.

-- Updated January 10th, 2017, 5:39 pm to add the following --
Philosophy Explorer wrote: I challenge anyone to find an exception. Test it out on your computers and scientific calculators.
Still, you have to prove your assertion. Otherwise, it may turn out to be false for some really large numbers. In mathematics and logic, proofs must be that – proofs, not just assumptions based on empirical evidence. Experimentation should only be used to find candidates for new theorems or to find counterexamples to conjectures.
User avatar
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 2116
Joined: May 25th, 2013, 8:41 pm

Re: The multiple of nine mystery

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

With (abc)n - (cab)n = r1, I let n be any natural number.
Further checking reveals divisibility by nine holds when n is any integer: positive, negative or zero.

PhilX

-- Updated January 28th, 2017, 4:23 pm to add the following --
Renee wrote:We were taught in Grade 7 in Hungary that you can check for divisibility by nine or by three by adding the digits, reductio-wise, and if the last reduction results in 3 or 9, or in a number that is divisible by 3 or 9, then the original (non-reduced) number is divisible by 3 or nine.

I suspect it works for any positive integer power of three. (1, 3, 9, 27, 3^4, 3^5, ... 3^n where n is a positive integer.)

I don't know why this works. Nine is not mysterious. There is a proof somewhere. But don't ask "why" as if there were a divine decree about numbers.

Actually, I am wrong. The real reason this works is because Pope Poncificatius XIV in the eighth century Holy Roman Empire decreed it in his inaugural Easter sermon.

-- Updated November 15th, 2016, 8:29 am to add the following --
LuckyR wrote:Does this hold true in base 6?
Dolphin42 wrote:Yes. Try it and see.
That was a trick question. There is no digit "9" in a base-six number system.

Plus, you are wrong. (Sorry.)

In base6,

nine=13

and an example of 9*4=36 3+6=9 does not work in base six;

13*4=100 and 1+0+0 does not equal 13.
Here is a proof for the divisibility by nine:

"Rule for Divisibility by 9
A number is divisible by 9 if the sum of its digits is divisible by 9. For large numbers this rule can be applied again to the result. In addition, the final iteration will result in a 9.

Examples
A.) 2,880: 2 + 8 + 8 + 0 = 18, 1 + 8 = 9, so 9| 2,880.
B.) 3,564,213: 3+5+6+4+2+1+3=24, 2+4=6, so 9 does NOT divide 3,564,213.

Proof
The proof for the divisibility rule for 9 is essentially the same as the proof for the divisibility rule for 3.
For any integer x written as an· · · a3a2 a1a0 we will prove that if 9|(a0 + a1+ a2+ a3 ... + an), then 9|x and vice versa.

First, we can state that
x = a0 + a1×10 + a2×102 + a3×103... + an×10n

Next if we let s be the sum of its digits then

s = a0 + a1 + a2 + a3 + ... + an .

So
x - s = (a0 - a0) + (a1 × 10 - a1) + (a2×102 - a2) + ... + (an×10n - an)
= a1(10 - 1) + a2(102 - 1) + ... + an(10n - 1).
If we let bk = 10k - 1, then bk = 9...9 (9 occurs k times) and bk ­=9(1…1) and we can rewrite the previous equation as
x - s = a1(b1)+ a2(b2)+ ... + an (bn)
It follows that all numbers bk are divisible by 9, so the numbers ak×bk are also divisible by 9. Therefore, the sum of all the numbers ak×bk (which is x-s) is also divisible by 9.

Since x-s is divisible by 9, if x is divisible by 9, then so is s and vice versa."
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021