Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Now we will study divisibility by 7. One book on speed arithmetic says that these tests
are just too complicated, and you should just divide by 7. I agree to some extent, but my
calculator still will not let me enter really large numbers.
One interesting way (found in some books) is to take the two left-most digits, multiply
the left digit by 3 and add it to the second digit. Replace these two digits with the result.
Then we can keep repeating, always dealing with only the two left-most digits, until we
end up with a small number which is either divisible by 7 or not. Pretend we have a two
digit number, 10x+y. We multiply the left digit by 3 and add the second digit: 3x+y. All
we did was just subtract 7x. If 3x+y is divisible by 7, then so is 10x+y. This works at the
left end of a long number, too. The two left-most digits are 10x+y times some power of
10. Multiplying the left digit by 3 and adding the second digit gives us 3x+y times the
same power of 10. And we subtracted off 7 times the same power of 10. Again,
divisibility by 7 was not altered.
4712954379
1912954379
1212954379
512954379
162954379
92954379
29954379
15954379
8954379
3354379
1254379
554379
204379
64379
22379
8379
2779
1379
679
259
119
49
49 is divisible by 7. We could have stopped the process once we got a number that was
small enough for my calculator, and divided the current number by 7. Since 49 is
divisible by 7, every number above it is also divisible by 7.
Modular arithmetic gives us the following method. Start at the right digit, and go left. 1st
digit + 3 times the 2nd digit + 2 times the 3rd digit - the 4th digit - 3 times the 5th digit -
2 times the 6th digit. And then we repeat the sequence, + the 7th digit + 3 times the 8th
digit, etc. If the whole "sum" is divisible by 7, then the original number is divisible by 7.
4712954379
9+3(7)+2(3)-4-3(5)-2(9)+2+3(1)+2(7)-4=14
14 is divisible by 7. You can see that this is a much faster method. With really huge
numbers, you might need to repeat the above steps.
I use a different method. I separate the huge number into 6-digit numbers (4712 954379),
add them together (4712+954379=959091). I use my calculator to divide this by 7, and
there is no remainder (959091/7=137013 with no remainder), so the original number is
divisible by 7. With really huge numbers, I may have to repeat these steps. This method
works for divisibility by 13, by the way. The above number is not divisible by 13. Why
do we separate the number into 6-digit numbers? Well again, modular arithmetic
produces that information. For divisibility by 37, we separate the long number into 3-
digit numbers.
Addendum:
I received email from Jordan Baker, describing another test for divisibility by 7: "Take
the last digit off, double it, and subtract it from the rest of the numbers. If the result is
divisible by 7, so was the original number." And that can be repeated, of course. He gave
this example: "Take a number like 408254, which is divisible by 7. Take the 4 off the end,
and double it: 8. 40825 - 8=40817." Then he repeated the process.
A many digit number is 10x+y (for example, 3176 is 317(10)+6). 10x+y is divisible by 7
if and only if 20x+2y is divisible by 7 (that is twice the original number, doubling it does
not affect its divisibility by 7, as 2 and 7 are relatively prime). We can subtract 21x from
20x+2y without affecting its divisibility by 7 (21x is divisible by 7). That gives 2y-x
(which is usually a negative number, by the way). So, 10x+1 is divisible by 7 if and only
if 2y-x is divisible by 7. The method that Mr. Baker showed me was x-2y, which is -(2y-
x). So 10x+1 is divisible by 7 if and only if x-2y is divisible by 7.
I thought that I had seen that method before. Here is actually what I had seen before,
from The Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Numbers, by David Wells: Multiply the
right-most digit by 5 and add to the rest of the numbers. If this sum is divisible by 7, then
the original number is divisible by 7. And that too can be repeated. This is a slow method.
It is roughly as fast as the above methods (3x+y and x-2y) until near the end, and then it
can take 5 or 6 extra steps. Also, if you end up with 49, you get no further, as the next
number is also 49. Otherwise, you can keep repeating the process until you get a one digit
number (7). Why does it work?
Our original number is 10x+y. We can multiply that by 5 without affecting its divisibility
by 7: 50x+5y. We can subtract off 49x (which is divisible by 7) without affecting its
divisibility by 7: x+5y. And x+5y is the method described.
7a. , , , , , (mod 7), and the
sequence then repeats. Therefore, if
is divisible by 7, so is .
This method was found by Pascal .
7d. Given a number, form two numbers and such that consists of all
digits of the number except the last (units) digit and is the last digit.
Compute and repeat the procedure. Then the original number is
divisible by 7 iff the number in the last step is divisible by 7.
We know that to test for divisibility by (say) 15, we need only test for divisibility by 3
and 5. It follows that only the prime divisibility tests are required.
All the methods here work in the same recursive way. The number N1 is a multiple of
prime P if (and only if) the smaller number N2 is also a multiple of P. These algorithms
provide a way of reducing N1 to N2 (and N3, N4 etc.) until a multiple of P is recognised.
Some examples
We wish to test the number 742 (N1) for divisibility by 7. We get to the smaller number
(N2) by chopping off the units digit, multiplying it by 5 and adding it to the number of
tens in the orginal number (N1):
The algorithm "Multiply by 2 and subtract" also works as a test for divisibility by 7:
These two algorithms form a "conjugate pair", one being "add" and the other being
"subtract", as well as one being "multiply by m" and the other being "multiply by (p-m)",
where p in this case is 7.
All this is leading up to the remaining divisibility tests. Each one uses the basic procedure
of chopping off the units digit, multiplying it by m [or (p-m)] and then either adding to or
subtracting from the truncated number.
The simplest explanation, which is usually good enough for children, is that the
procedure is just a fancy way of doing division by "chunking" - i.e., removing known
multiples and just testing the remainder.
The algorithm creates a smaller number that is a multiple of the prime being tested if and
only if the original number was also a multiple. The explanation for the 7 test:
The original number (N1) can be written in the form 10a + b. For example, if N1 is 742
then a = 74 and b = 2.
Let's assume that 10a + b is a multiple of 7. Then 10a + b = 7k for some integer value of
k.
Then b = 7k - 10a.
Let’s use the table to test whether 3534 is divisible by 31. The algorithm is "Multiply by 3
and subtract":