• 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
  11. 11
    11
  • Level: GCSE
  • Subject: Maths
  • Word count: 2630

An investigation into Number Grids.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

An investigation into Number Grids

We are investigating the effect of number grids and to try and explain the pattern between a 2x2 selection grid on a 10x10 grid.  We found that if you multiply the bottom left number and the top right number and the bottom right number and top left number, then subtract one from the other you will find that the difference is 10.  As is shown in the below table and number 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

If we multiply 3x 14 we get 42 and if we multiply the sum of 4x13 we get 52.  42 subtracted from 52 equals 10. This occurs for any selection square sized grids ie 3x3, 4x4 etc in a 10x10 grid as is shown in the table below.(Blue minus Red)

Due to the fact that the difference is always 10 we have decided to show this in a table algebraically.  If we multiply the bottom left digit by the top right digit and the top left digit by the bottom right digit we can see that the N’s disappear to leave just 10 which is the difference.  As is shown below.

N(n+1)=n2+1                =see below

N(n+21)=n2+21        =N2+21-N2+1 =10

For a two by two grid we can see that there is an algebraic table This is shown below also:

N

N+1

N+10

N+11

N2+1

N2+21                                        

When subtracted the n cancels out leaving the number 10 which is actually the sized number grid I am working with.

First number multiplication (blue)

Second number multiplication (red)

Difference

13x4

3x14

10

98x89

88x99

10

54x45

44x55

10

69x60

69x80

10

17x8

7x18

10

47x38

37x48

10


We can see that for every multiplication we carry out the difference will always be 10.  We shall carry this on and see if this works for different sized selection grids i.e. a 3x3, 4x4 etc.

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

Note: when one number is both blue + red it is being used in separate number grid selections.

Below is the table for a three by three grid and the algebraic formula:

N

N+2

N+20

N+22

N2+2

N2+42                        

When subtracted I get 40 which is my difference.

First number multiplication(blue)

Second number multiplication

Difference

23x5

3x25

40

94x76

74x96

40

61x43

41x63

40

98x80

78x100

40

28x10

8x30

40

...read more.

Middle

6x6

250

90

7x7

360

110

NxN

N+p.d+20(previous Differnce)

N+20

* If I wanted to find out what the next difference would be I would add this to the difference previously.  For instance take 40 to be the difference of a 3x3-selection grid.  I want to find out what a 4x4 grids difference will be, I shall add 40 plus the p.d which happens to be 30 (difference between 2x2 and 3x3) and then add 20 to the result(because this is the p.d difference which increases by 20 each time) which gives me 90.  

The difference between each distance increases by 20 on the previous one each time.  Therefore this can be shown as n+20 where n is the difference previously for example If I wanted to find the difference for a 3x3 selection grid and a 4x4 selection grid I could find the difference between the 2x2 grid and 3x3 grid and call this n.  The difference between the 3x3 and 4x4 would be n+20.  The difference of the difference is basically the difference of this selection grid difference and the previous one.

I shall now see if this works on a difference-sized grid i.e. an 8x8 and 9x9.

image00.png

I shall do e

Exactly the same as the previous grid-10x10 but on this 8x8.  Also I shall do the equations in algebraic form.

N

N+1

N+8

N+9

N2+1

N2+17         This equals 16 when subtracted.  When divided by 2 we get 8 which is the size of the grid.  Below is the table full of our results for the 8x8 grids and different sized selection grids.  The above seems only to work when the selection grid size is a 2x2.(this to find the sized grid we are working from)

Top row

Bottom row

Difference

N2+1

N2+17

16

N2+99

N2+115

16

N2+79

N2+95

16

The difference is always 16.  If I divide 16 by 2 I get 8 which is the number sized grid we are working with.  As with my previous calculations I multiplied diagonally.  I chose not  to do this as it was harder when algebraic numbers appeared, however if I had done that this time I would have found the difference to be 8 initially.  As is shown in the singular example below.

56                        are my numbers I shall work with.

1314

13x6=78

5x14=70

78-70=8.

We tried the 8x8 grid with various different selection grid sizes and below are my results.

Grid Selection sizes

Difference

Difference of the difference each time

2x2

16

3x3

32

16

4x4

48

16

5x5

64

16

NxN

N+p.d(previous difference)

N+16

N being the difference of the previous result for instance if I  wanted to find the difference for a 5x5 grid then I would add 16 to 48.

I shall now produce a table for the 9x9 grid to show our findings from this.

image01.png

N

N+1

N+9

N+10

Below is the table for the differences of a basic 2x2 grid within this 9x9 grid.  I could predict that the difference would be 9 on the diagonal multiplications and 18 on the top and bottom separate multiplications.  Lets take a look to see if my results are correct in the table below.  I shall give one example of the top and bottom multiplications and one of the diagonal ones.

10x2=20

1x11=11

20-11 = 9(as I predicted)

N + N+1= N2+1

N+9 + N+10=N2 +19

19-1=18 (as I predicted)

One doubles the other because one set is multiplied whilst the other is added.

Top row

Bottom row

Difference

N+11

N + 30

18

N+101

N+119

18

N+51

N+69

18

N+143

N+161

18

N+17

N+35

18

NxN

NxN

18

I also changed the grid selection sizes for this grid below is the table for these.

Selection size

Difference

Differences of the differences

2x2

18

18

3x3

36

18

4x4

54

18

5x5

72

18

6x6

90

18

NxN

N+p.d(previous differnce)

N+18

Looking at these results at a whole I can see a pattern and to bring this all together I shall develop a formulae.

Firstly, I noticed that if you took the zeros off the difference, then you get square numbers for 1, 2, 3 and 4. So I tried to find a way where you get square numbers only:

2(0)-1(0)=1 x10= 10

The formula would be 10(s-1)

So I tried using this formula for a 3 by 3 square:

10(3-1) = 20

This was wrong as I had to get 40 not 20, so I would have to multiply the 10 by 4 somehow. So I squared the (3-1) to get 4.

10(3-1)²

This worked and so I substituted the number of rows and columns for letters and so the formula became:

10(r-1)² where s is the selection sized grid

Lets see if this works on a 10 x 10 number grid and a 5x5  selection grid.

10 (which is the size of the number grid) (5( which is the size of the selection grid)-1)2  So it works out at 10(5-1)2=160 which is actually the correct result.

I was right about the formulas and so an overall formula for any sized square would be: G(r-1)² where G is the grid size and r is the number of rows.

Furthering my Investigation

I have decided to further my investigation and to look into rectangles.  I shall change both the grid size and the rectangle size to try and construct a formulae linking length, size and width.

I shall start by using a 2x3 rectangle within a 10x10 grid.  Below are examples and results in a table.

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

N

N+2

N+10

N+12

N + N+2=N2+2

N+10 + N+12=N2+22

N2+22 – N2+2= 20

Top row

Bottom row

difference

N2+2

N2+22

20

N2+42

N2+62

20

N2+112

N2+132

20

...read more.

Conclusion

I decided to alter the equation by including some of the first part of the first equation by not actually including the multiplication or squaring of the numbers but to multiply one by the other.  Also I need to include the size of the actual grid that I was to use.

My new formulae I was t try was:

G(r-1)x(c-1)

To see if it worked I tried it out on my example of a 4x6 rectangle placed within an 8x8 grid.

8(4-1)x(6-1)=120

This could actually be the difference we were hoping for.  Below is the calculations for the difference before and after.

Grid-size

No. of rows

No. of Columns

Difference

Difference in-between

8x8

4

5

96

24

8x8

4

6

120

24

8x8

4

7

144

24

This shows that this equation does work with the result being constant and the difference being a multiple of 8 which is the grid size.

This is a table to show the differences in rectangles for a 10 by 10 grid.

Row

Column

Difference

Formula

2

3

20                

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

2

4

30                

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

2

5

40                

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

3

3

40                

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

3

4

60                

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

3

5

80        

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

4

3

60                

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

4

4

90        

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

4

5

120                

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

5

3

80        

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

5

4

120                

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

5

5

160                

(10(r-1))x(c-1)

From this I can produce my final equation that will find the difference in any rectangle to be:

G(r-1)x(c-1)

I have taken into account the length, width and grid size to produce an equation that gives precise differences at all times.

In this formula, r is the No. of Rows and c is the No. of columns.

Basically, you multiply (r-1) by 10 and then times your answer by (c-1).

...read more.

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

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Number Stairs, Grids and Sequences essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Number Grid Aim: The aim of this investigation is to formulate an algebraic equation ...

    3 star(s)

    331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 3620 As before, the highlighted boxes are the ones I am going to calculate, to see if the difference between

  2. Number Grids Investigation Coursework

    will prove this using algebra, to show that all 3 x 3 squares in 9 x 9 grids have a difference between the products of opposite corners of 36. Let the top left number in a square equal a, and therefore: a a+1 a+2 a+9 a+10 a+11 a+18 a+19 a+20

  1. Step-stair Investigation.

    2 I can prove this by saying n=5. This should give the 5th triangle number. n(n+1) = 5(5+1) = 15. The 5th triangle number is 15. This and the working 2 2 shown above proves that the formula works. This proven, I can now create the 1st part of the formula for any step stair on any grid size.

  2. Number Grid Investigation.

    40 90 I now need to attempt finding a formula connecting the size of the square inside the 10 wide grid. Finding a formula for size of square inside 10 wide grid Firstly I noticed that if you take the '0' of the product difference you are left with square numbers.

  1. Number Grid Coursework

    Justification The formula can be proven to work with the following algebra (where d = [p - 1], and e = [q - 1]): Difference = (a + d)(a + ze) - a(a + ze + d) a2 + zae + ad + zde - {a2 + zae +

  2. Mathematics - Number Stairs

    90 T = 10n + 100 T = 10n + 110 T = 10n + 120 T = 10n + 130 5 T = 15n + 180 T = 15n + 200 5 Step-Staircase / Grid Width 10 41 31 32 21 22 23 11 12 13 14 1 2

  1. Number Grid Investigation

    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 Squares The

  2. Number Stairs - Up to 9x9 Grid

    From 45 to 35 the difference is 10. From 26 to 25 the difference is 1. So therefore 10-9=1, this method works on any number square grid and anywhere on the grid. E.g. 4 by 4 number square grid 13 14 15 16 9 10 11 12 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 Top right corner number stair, the total is always higher.

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