Magic square from $2010$












0














A multiplicative magic square (MMS) is a square array of positive integers in which
the product of each row, column, and long diagonal is the same. The $16$ positive
factors of $2010$ can be formed into a $4times 4$ MMS. What is the common product of
every row, column, and diagonal? Write your answer in the corresponding blank on
the answer sheet



The answer:
That product raised to the 4th power should equal the product of the sixteen
factors of $2010$. Note that
$2010= (2)(3)(5)(67)$. Among the $16$ numbers, half of
them have a factor of $2$ with multiplicity $1$ while the rest don’t have the factor $2$.
Likewise, half of the 16 numbers have a factor of $3$ with multiplicity $1$ while the
rest don’t have the factor $3$. The same holds for $5$ and for $67$. I don't get why the product is to the $4$th power ??? And why it is equal to the $16$ factors ?? I DO get the part about the factors .. $8$ of them will have factor of $2$ etc. ..






magic-square







share|cite|improve this question
























  • Another way to find the product of all $16$ is to note you can form $8$ pairs, each with product $2010$. The product of all of them is then 2018^8$
    – Ross Millikan
    Jan 4 at 4:00
















0














A multiplicative magic square (MMS) is a square array of positive integers in which
the product of each row, column, and long diagonal is the same. The $16$ positive
factors of $2010$ can be formed into a $4times 4$ MMS. What is the common product of
every row, column, and diagonal? Write your answer in the corresponding blank on
the answer sheet



The answer:
That product raised to the 4th power should equal the product of the sixteen
factors of $2010$. Note that
$2010= (2)(3)(5)(67)$. Among the $16$ numbers, half of
them have a factor of $2$ with multiplicity $1$ while the rest don’t have the factor $2$.
Likewise, half of the 16 numbers have a factor of $3$ with multiplicity $1$ while the
rest don’t have the factor $3$. The same holds for $5$ and for $67$. I don't get why the product is to the $4$th power ??? And why it is equal to the $16$ factors ?? I DO get the part about the factors .. $8$ of them will have factor of $2$ etc. ..






magic-square







share|cite|improve this question
























  • Another way to find the product of all $16$ is to note you can form $8$ pairs, each with product $2010$. The product of all of them is then 2018^8$
    – Ross Millikan
    Jan 4 at 4:00














0












0








0







A multiplicative magic square (MMS) is a square array of positive integers in which
the product of each row, column, and long diagonal is the same. The $16$ positive
factors of $2010$ can be formed into a $4times 4$ MMS. What is the common product of
every row, column, and diagonal? Write your answer in the corresponding blank on
the answer sheet



The answer:
That product raised to the 4th power should equal the product of the sixteen
factors of $2010$. Note that
$2010= (2)(3)(5)(67)$. Among the $16$ numbers, half of
them have a factor of $2$ with multiplicity $1$ while the rest don’t have the factor $2$.
Likewise, half of the 16 numbers have a factor of $3$ with multiplicity $1$ while the
rest don’t have the factor $3$. The same holds for $5$ and for $67$. I don't get why the product is to the $4$th power ??? And why it is equal to the $16$ factors ?? I DO get the part about the factors .. $8$ of them will have factor of $2$ etc. ..






magic-square







share|cite|improve this question















A multiplicative magic square (MMS) is a square array of positive integers in which
the product of each row, column, and long diagonal is the same. The $16$ positive
factors of $2010$ can be formed into a $4times 4$ MMS. What is the common product of
every row, column, and diagonal? Write your answer in the corresponding blank on
the answer sheet



The answer:
That product raised to the 4th power should equal the product of the sixteen
factors of $2010$. Note that
$2010= (2)(3)(5)(67)$. Among the $16$ numbers, half of
them have a factor of $2$ with multiplicity $1$ while the rest don’t have the factor $2$.
Likewise, half of the 16 numbers have a factor of $3$ with multiplicity $1$ while the
rest don’t have the factor $3$. The same holds for $5$ and for $67$. I don't get why the product is to the $4$th power ??? And why it is equal to the $16$ factors ?? I DO get the part about the factors .. $8$ of them will have factor of $2$ etc. ..






magic-square




magic-square






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 4 at 4:23









max_zorn

3,29361328




3,29361328










asked Jan 4 at 3:23









RandinRandin

332116




332116












  • Another way to find the product of all $16$ is to note you can form $8$ pairs, each with product $2010$. The product of all of them is then 2018^8$
    – Ross Millikan
    Jan 4 at 4:00


















  • Another way to find the product of all $16$ is to note you can form $8$ pairs, each with product $2010$. The product of all of them is then 2018^8$
    – Ross Millikan
    Jan 4 at 4:00
















Another way to find the product of all $16$ is to note you can form $8$ pairs, each with product $2010$. The product of all of them is then 2018^8$
– Ross Millikan
Jan 4 at 4:00




Another way to find the product of all $16$ is to note you can form $8$ pairs, each with product $2010$. The product of all of them is then 2018^8$
– Ross Millikan
Jan 4 at 4:00










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















1














If the product of the values in each of the $4$ rows is $k$, it follows that the product of the whole square is $k^4$. That's quite plain to see, and is what the 4th power bit is trying to say.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Dang I saw this about 5 minutes ago when I got off work and looked back this problem!! But i didnt see the 4 rows , I saw if we consider the center of the MMS and look at the 2 diagonals and the row and the collumn I, -, /, these all will have the same product right? so multiplying them all together will give the big product of ALL 16 factors ..right?
    – Randin
    Jan 4 at 9:30



















0














As all $16$ factors are in the array, the product of all $4$ row products, for example, would be the same as the product of the $16$ factors. In particular, if $A_{ij}$ is the value of the $i$th row and $j$th column, then the $i$th row product would be



$$prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}$$



Multiplying each of these row products gives



$$prod_{i = 1}^{4}left(prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}right)$$



This is the same as the product of all values in the array as the double product uses each element once.



Note that as each row product is the same, this means that row product to the $4$th power is the same as the product of all $16$ factors.






share|cite|improve this answer























    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061286%2fmagic-square-from-2010%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1














    If the product of the values in each of the $4$ rows is $k$, it follows that the product of the whole square is $k^4$. That's quite plain to see, and is what the 4th power bit is trying to say.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • Dang I saw this about 5 minutes ago when I got off work and looked back this problem!! But i didnt see the 4 rows , I saw if we consider the center of the MMS and look at the 2 diagonals and the row and the collumn I, -, /, these all will have the same product right? so multiplying them all together will give the big product of ALL 16 factors ..right?
      – Randin
      Jan 4 at 9:30
















    1














    If the product of the values in each of the $4$ rows is $k$, it follows that the product of the whole square is $k^4$. That's quite plain to see, and is what the 4th power bit is trying to say.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • Dang I saw this about 5 minutes ago when I got off work and looked back this problem!! But i didnt see the 4 rows , I saw if we consider the center of the MMS and look at the 2 diagonals and the row and the collumn I, -, /, these all will have the same product right? so multiplying them all together will give the big product of ALL 16 factors ..right?
      – Randin
      Jan 4 at 9:30














    1












    1








    1






    If the product of the values in each of the $4$ rows is $k$, it follows that the product of the whole square is $k^4$. That's quite plain to see, and is what the 4th power bit is trying to say.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    If the product of the values in each of the $4$ rows is $k$, it follows that the product of the whole square is $k^4$. That's quite plain to see, and is what the 4th power bit is trying to say.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Jan 4 at 3:31









    Rhys HughesRhys Hughes

    5,0441427




    5,0441427












    • Dang I saw this about 5 minutes ago when I got off work and looked back this problem!! But i didnt see the 4 rows , I saw if we consider the center of the MMS and look at the 2 diagonals and the row and the collumn I, -, /, these all will have the same product right? so multiplying them all together will give the big product of ALL 16 factors ..right?
      – Randin
      Jan 4 at 9:30


















    • Dang I saw this about 5 minutes ago when I got off work and looked back this problem!! But i didnt see the 4 rows , I saw if we consider the center of the MMS and look at the 2 diagonals and the row and the collumn I, -, /, these all will have the same product right? so multiplying them all together will give the big product of ALL 16 factors ..right?
      – Randin
      Jan 4 at 9:30
















    Dang I saw this about 5 minutes ago when I got off work and looked back this problem!! But i didnt see the 4 rows , I saw if we consider the center of the MMS and look at the 2 diagonals and the row and the collumn I, -, /, these all will have the same product right? so multiplying them all together will give the big product of ALL 16 factors ..right?
    – Randin
    Jan 4 at 9:30




    Dang I saw this about 5 minutes ago when I got off work and looked back this problem!! But i didnt see the 4 rows , I saw if we consider the center of the MMS and look at the 2 diagonals and the row and the collumn I, -, /, these all will have the same product right? so multiplying them all together will give the big product of ALL 16 factors ..right?
    – Randin
    Jan 4 at 9:30











    0














    As all $16$ factors are in the array, the product of all $4$ row products, for example, would be the same as the product of the $16$ factors. In particular, if $A_{ij}$ is the value of the $i$th row and $j$th column, then the $i$th row product would be



    $$prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}$$



    Multiplying each of these row products gives



    $$prod_{i = 1}^{4}left(prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}right)$$



    This is the same as the product of all values in the array as the double product uses each element once.



    Note that as each row product is the same, this means that row product to the $4$th power is the same as the product of all $16$ factors.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      0














      As all $16$ factors are in the array, the product of all $4$ row products, for example, would be the same as the product of the $16$ factors. In particular, if $A_{ij}$ is the value of the $i$th row and $j$th column, then the $i$th row product would be



      $$prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}$$



      Multiplying each of these row products gives



      $$prod_{i = 1}^{4}left(prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}right)$$



      This is the same as the product of all values in the array as the double product uses each element once.



      Note that as each row product is the same, this means that row product to the $4$th power is the same as the product of all $16$ factors.






      share|cite|improve this answer


























        0












        0








        0






        As all $16$ factors are in the array, the product of all $4$ row products, for example, would be the same as the product of the $16$ factors. In particular, if $A_{ij}$ is the value of the $i$th row and $j$th column, then the $i$th row product would be



        $$prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}$$



        Multiplying each of these row products gives



        $$prod_{i = 1}^{4}left(prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}right)$$



        This is the same as the product of all values in the array as the double product uses each element once.



        Note that as each row product is the same, this means that row product to the $4$th power is the same as the product of all $16$ factors.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        As all $16$ factors are in the array, the product of all $4$ row products, for example, would be the same as the product of the $16$ factors. In particular, if $A_{ij}$ is the value of the $i$th row and $j$th column, then the $i$th row product would be



        $$prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}$$



        Multiplying each of these row products gives



        $$prod_{i = 1}^{4}left(prod_{j = 1}^{4} A_{ij}right)$$



        This is the same as the product of all values in the array as the double product uses each element once.



        Note that as each row product is the same, this means that row product to the $4$th power is the same as the product of all $16$ factors.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Jan 4 at 3:36

























        answered Jan 4 at 3:29









        John OmielanJohn Omielan

        1,14918




        1,14918






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061286%2fmagic-square-from-2010%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            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







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            An IMO inspired problem

            Image
            14 4 This problem from IMO 1988 is said to be one of the most elegant ones in functional equations. Problem : The function $f$ is defined on the set of all positive integers as follows: begin{align} f(1) = 1, f(3) &= 3, f(2n) = f(n), \ f(4n+1) &= 2f(2n+1) - f(n), \ f(4n+3) &= 3 f(2n+1) - 2f(n) end{align} Find the number of $n$ with $f(n) = n, 1 leq n leq 1988$. The main idea towards the solution is realizing that these conditions stand for the fact that $f(n)$ just reverses the digits in the binary representation of the number $n$. So, essentially the solution is finding the number of binary pallindromes $leq 1988_{10}$. My question is the following : How to reformulate the problem so that $f(n)$ reverses the digits of $n$ in its ternary representation. Or even better, can we reformulate it for a
            Read more

            Management

            Image
            Management From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search "Manager" redirects here. For other uses, see Management (disambiguation) and Manager (disambiguation). An organization chart for the United States Coast Guard shows the hierarchy of managerial roles in that organization. Business administration Management of a business Accounting Management accounting Financial accounting Financial audit Business entities Cooperative Corporation Limited liability company Partnership Sole proprietorship State-owned enterprise Corporate governance Annual general meeting Board of directors Supervisory board Advisory board Audit committee Corporate law Commercial law Constitutional documents Contract Corporate crime Corporate liability Insolvency law International trade law Mergers and acquisitions Economics Commodity Pu
            Read more

            Has there ever been an instance of an active nuclear power plant within or near a war zone?

            Image
            36 3 The question Has there ever been a military combat going on around an active (running or in outage but not decommissioned) commercial nuclear power plant? Or dangerously near it? If yes, how did the plant and its personnel fare in such situation? Why I ask Let's assume for the scope of this question modern commercial nuclear power plants (CANDU, PWR, BWR of generation II plus all of gen III and newer) are usually reasonably safe to operate given that the engineering has been done right and there is a whole cohort of very well trained personnel on-site at all times, well rested and with considerable resources on their hands. Things hard to get with an armed conflict like the recent Syrian war raging around. I can't seem to find any reference or a comprehensive article about this, hence this question.
            Read more