That’s not particularly satisfying. Too many terms. Better ideas?
The next time we’ll have a year that is divisible by all those digits it will also be divisible by 5, but it won’t be until 2520. The last time was 1512. It is interesting to think how different the world was in 1512 compared to now. I can’t even imagine what 2520 will be like. Let’s hope that there are still people around to enjoy these silly little number facts then.
One I saw was:
2016 = 666+666+666+6+6+6.
It’s been a hell of a year.
Ah, clever. And strangely accurate.
I was amused by Rhema’s observation and post it on my FB. As someone just pointed out in response, also
2016 = 777 + 777 + 77 + 77 + 77 + 77 + 77 + 77
I suppose it’s a glass half-empty/half-full sort of thing. 🙂
That’s cool too, but I do particularly like the 666 theme. It seems to fit the year we just had. 🙁
I wonder whether anybody is going to work out solutions for each of the other seven non-zero digits.
Interesting to note that 2016 is divisible by every non-zero digit except 5.
So also, e.g.,
2016 = 999 + 999 + 9 + 9
= 888 + 888 + 88 + 88 + 8*8
= 4*(444 + 44 + 4*4)
= 3*(333 + 333 + 3 + 3)
= 2222 – 2 – 2 – 2
And I guess that answers your question. 🙂
Lots of possible expressions, of course. I’m not sure if there should be a rule about which form to prefer.
But yeah, the 6’s are the most apt 🙁
Oops, left out
= 1111 + 11*11 + 11*11 + 11*11 + 11*11 + 11*11 + 11*11 + 11*11 + 11 + 11 + 11 + 11 + 11 + 1 + 1 + 1
That’s not particularly satisfying. Too many terms. Better ideas?
The next time we’ll have a year that is divisible by all those digits it will also be divisible by 5, but it won’t be until 2520. The last time was 1512. It is interesting to think how different the world was in 1512 compared to now. I can’t even imagine what 2520 will be like. Let’s hope that there are still people around to enjoy these silly little number facts then.