• Join over 1.2 million students every month
• Accelerate your learning by 29%
• Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
1. 1
1
2. 2
2
3. 3
3
4. 4
4
5. 5
5
6. 6
6
7. 7
7
8. 8
8
9. 9
9
10. 10
10
• Level: GCSE
• Subject: Maths
• Word count: 1834

# Number Grids

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Introduction

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100

We were given this number grid and shown that if a two–by-two square was drawn anywhere on the grid, encompassing four numbers, the difference between the product of the top left number and the bottom right number and the top left number.

For example        (13x22) - (12x23) = 10

Also                (16x25) - (15x26) = 10

We were then told to investigate further.

To give us an idea of where we were headed, our teacher told us we should be aiming at least to find a formula that would allow a person to work out the difference between the products of the corners of any rectangle on such a grid of any length.

The Investigation

The fact that the difference came out to ten no matter where the square was drawn made sense, it could be easily demonstrated algebraically.

Let’s say the top left number was ‘n’. If followed along the grid, the other numbers would come to be: (bottom right) n+11, (top right) n+1 and (bottom left) n+10.

So if worked out, the sum would look like:

After this, I tried squares of different sizes around the grid.

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100

I found that the differences in all the 3x3 squares came out to 40

Eg.

(14x32) - (12x34) = 40

(18x36)

Middle

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

2x2:

(2x12) - (1x13) = 11

(5x15) – (4x16) = 11

3x3:

(36x56) – (34x58) = 44

(40x60) – (38x62) = 44

4x4:

(81x111) – (78x114) = 99

(86x116) – (83x119) = 99

The pattern came out as:

 2x2 3x3 4x4 5x5 11 44 99 176

So,

11        44        99        176

33         55       77                1st Difference

22        22                2nd Difference

, determining the coefficient to be used for n2.

 n 2 3 4 5 pattern 11 44 99 176 11n2 44 99 176 275 pattern – 11n2 -33 -55 -77 -99

Formula:

-22        -22       -22         Formula for linear part:

Put together:

(Simplifying down to this)

Indeed the only part of the end formula that changed, was the part hypothesized to be directly linked to the length of the grid. With the grid length 10, the formula came out to be, with the grid length as 11, it came out to be. As this part of the formula appeared to be linked to the grid length, it could now be replaced with an expression representing the grid length so it would work for any grid. Thus the formula now became. If the assumption that one of the s were in fact the length, and the other the width continued, the formula then became.

To prove this formula, I looked at the situation algebraically and came up with a list of expressions to represent the real life values.

Conclusion

Simplifying down to

This was my first 3D formula.

Now for the second set, the calculation was -. When the respective expressions were substituted for these values, it came out to:

Simplifying down to

This was my second 3D formula.

I tested the both of these to check that everything was ok with them.

The example I came up for the test was:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90

 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135

In the example, , , , , , ,  and . Other than that, , , , , .

For the first formula,

If done with the formula instead,

For the second formula,

If done with the formula instead,

In both cases, the answer came out the same, both formulas worked. One slight problem was that somewhere in the process I managed to mix up the order I subtracted in so that my first formula always gave a negative answer (as I subtracted a larger value from a smaller one) and my second formula always gave a positive answer (as I subtracted a smaller value from a larger one, like I was supposed to). This isn’t that much of a problem as what the actual number was would always came out the same, the sign in front of it solely depends on the order in which the numbers were subtracted from one another. As the investigation asks for a mere difference, the sign could be ignored altogether.

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Number Stairs, Grids and Sequences section.

## Found what you're looking for?

• Start learning 29% faster today
• 150,000+ documents available
• Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
• Join over 1.2 million students every month
• Accelerate your learning by 29%
• Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

# Related GCSE Number Stairs, Grids and Sequences essays

1. ## Number Grids Investigation Coursework

= (a + 3) (a + 10) - a (a + 13) = a2 + 3a + 10a + 30 - a2 - 13a = a2 + 13a + 30 - a2 - 13a = (a2 - a2) + (13a - 13a) + 30 = 30 As I have proved the difference between the

2. ## Algebra Investigation - Grid Square and Cube Relationships

It is the sum of these that equal the bottom right, or: Formula 1: Bottom Right (BR) = Top Right (TR) + Bottom Left (BL) As also shown by the summary boxes and examples above, the formula for the top right number remains constant, and is linked with the width,

1. ## Investigate the differences between products in a controlled sized grid.

� =72 I am now going to show this numerically without using the equation to make sure it is correct. 1 2 3 4 9 10 11 12 17 18 19 20 25 26 27 28 1*28=28 4*25=100 DIFFRENCE=72 This proves that the equation does show the difference for any size square box in any size square grid.

2. ## Investigate The Answer When The Products Of Opposite Corners on Number Grids Are Subtracted.

out other number grid answers and a pattern might present itself from the graph. From the graph, I have realised that you cannot find out other answers accurately because the line is not linear. It is a curve so the next answer could be anything.

1. ## number grid investigation]

Algebraic Investigation 2: Rectangular Boxes on a 10x10 Grid The second investigation comprises of two main parts Part A: Changing the Width, 'w' In order to investigate the formulae and trends that occur when different dimension grids are used, it is necessary to examine various different widths of rectangular box

2. ## number grid

= 10w-10 When finding the general formula for any number (n), both answers begin with the equation n2+nw+9n, which signifies that they can be manipulated easily. Because the second answer has +10w-10 at the end, it demonstrates that no matter what number is chosen to begin with (n), a difference of 10w-10 will always be present.

1. ## Investigating when pairs of diagonal corners are multiplied and subtracted from each other.

= x� + 33x (x + 3)(x + 30) = x� + 3x + 30x + 90 = x� + 33x + 90 x� + 33x - x� + 33x + 90 = 90 Box Size Difference 2 x 2 10 3 x 3 40 4 x 4 90 I can see that there is a pattern in the differences on the diagonals of the boxes.

2. ## Maths - number grid

60x96 - 56x100 5760 - 5600 Difference = 160 2) 6x42 - 2x46 252 - 92 Difference = 160 By looking at these calculations it can be assumed that they are correct because they give the same defined difference of 160.

• Over 160,000 pieces
of student written work
• Annotated by
experienced teachers
• Ideas and feedback to