Propositiones ad Acuendos Juvenes/Problems/5 - De Emptore in C Denariis
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Propositiones ad Acuendos Juvenes by Alcuin of York: Problem $5$
- De Emptore in $\text C$ Denariis
- A Merchant and $100$ Pence
- A merchant wanted to buy $100$ pigs at $100$ pence.
- For a boar he would pay $10$ pence;
- and for a sow $5$ pence;
- while he would pay $1$ penny for a couple of piglets.
- How many boars, sows and piglets must there have been for him to have paid exactly $100$ pence for the $100$ animals?
Solution
- $1$ boar
- $9$ sows
- $90$ piglets.
Proof
Let $x$, $y$ and $z$ denote the number of boars, sows and piglets respectively.
We are to solve for $x, y, z \in \N$:
\(\text {(1)}: \quad\) | \(\ds 10 x + 5 y + \dfrac z 2\) | \(=\) | \(\ds 100\) | |||||||||||
\(\text {(2)}: \quad\) | \(\ds x + y + z\) | \(=\) | \(\ds 100\) | |||||||||||
\(\text {(3)}: \quad\) | \(\ds \leadsto \ \ \) | \(\ds 19 x + 9 y\) | \(=\) | \(\ds 100\) | $(1) \times 2 - (2)$ |
Note that both $x$ and $y$ need to be (strictly) positive.
We need to find possible values of $x$ such that $100 - 19 x$ is divisible by $9$.
Inspecting possible contenders for such an $x$ individually:
\(\, \ds x = 1: \, \) | \(\ds 100 - 19 x\) | \(=\) | \(\ds 81\) | |||||||||||
\(\, \ds x = 2: \, \) | \(\ds 100 - 19 x\) | \(=\) | \(\ds 62\) | |||||||||||
\(\, \ds x = 3: \, \) | \(\ds 100 - 19 x\) | \(=\) | \(\ds 43\) | |||||||||||
\(\, \ds x = 4: \, \) | \(\ds 100 - 19 x\) | \(=\) | \(\ds 24\) | |||||||||||
\(\, \ds x = 5: \, \) | \(\ds 100 - 19 x\) | \(=\) | \(\ds 5\) |
Only one of these satisfies the condition, that is:
- $x = 1$
- $y = 9$
which leaves:
- $z = 100 - 1 - 9 = 90$
Hence the result.
$\blacksquare$
Historical Note
David Singmaster remarks that this is the first European appearance of a one hundred fowls problem.
Sources
- c. 800: Alcuin of York: Propositiones ad Acuendos Juvenes ... (previous) ... (next)
- 1992: John Hadley/2 and David Singmaster: Problems to Sharpen the Young (Math. Gazette Vol. 76, no. 475: pp. 102 – 126) www.jstor.org/stable/3620384