For any natural number $n>1$, we write the infinite decimal expansion of $\frac 1n$ (for example, $\frac 14$ is written as $0.24999$... instead of $0.25$). We need to determine the length of the non-periodic part of the infinite decimal expansion of $\frac 1n$.

I tried many methods, a somewhat promising one was to assume $\frac 1n$ to be some $0.abbbbb$..., where ‘$a$’ denotes the non-recurring part which has $r$ digits including zero, while ‘$b$’ is the recurring part. But I get stuck at deciding the lower and upper bounds for $r$. Please help.

(Please note: this is my first post on this website. So if I have to improve the way I should post the question in, please let me know how to correct the errors in my post. Thanks.)

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Leading question: can you prove that if $n$ is divisible by neither $2$ nor $5$, then the decimal fraction is immediately periodic (that is, the length of the non-periodic part is $0$)? (By the way, the standard name for that part is the "pre-periodic" part.) $\endgroup$ – Greg Martin Dec 31 '18 at 18:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Take the examples of $\frac{1}{3}=0.3333333...$, f $\frac{1}{7}=0.142857142857...$, and $\frac{1}{11}=0.09090909090909...$. If $n$ is not divisible by $2$ or $5$, the pre-periodic length will always be zero. $\endgroup$ – poetasis Dec 31 '18 at 19:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @GregMartin, It actually seemed intuitive for me, but I’m not able to come up with a rigorous proof for that. (Well, actually, every step of the solution seems very intuitive, but I don’t know how to write a rigorous solution by giving proofs for them :/ ) $\endgroup$ – Yellow Jan 1 '19 at 3:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ By the way, is there any way I can rigorously prove that the the length of the pre-periodic part is related to powers of $2$ and $5$? Because, if powers of any other prime are not going to affect the length of the pre- periodic part, then powers of $2$ or $5$ might have some relation with its length, right? $\endgroup$ – Yellow Jan 1 '19 at 15:30
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Yes, the length of the pre-periodic part is definitely going to be determined by the powers of $2$ and $5$! Do you know modular arithmetic? Do you know what the "order of $a$ modulo $n$" is? Because knowing that the period of $1/n$ is actually equal to the order of $10$ modulo $n$ (when $n$ is not divisible by $2$ or $5$) makes the periodicity easier to prove. $\endgroup$ – Greg Martin Jan 1 '19 at 20:01


For every number $n\in N$ that is not divisible by 2 and 5, there exists $k\in N$ such that $n\mid10^k-1$

Proof: Suppose that the statement is not true, i.e. $10^k-1\not\equiv0 \pmod n$ for all values of $k$. There are infinitely many values of $k$ and just $n-1$ possible values ($1\dots n-1$) for $10^k-1\pmod n$. So by pidgeon hole principle there are two different values $k_1, k_2$ such that:

$$10^{k_1}-1\equiv10^{k_2}-1\pmod n,\quad (k_1>k_2)$$

This simply means that:

$$10^{k_1}-10^{k_2}\equiv0\pmod n$$

$$10^{k_2}(10^{k1-k2}-1)\equiv0\pmod n$$

Number $n$ has no factors 2 and 5 so obviously $n\nmid 10^{k_2}$ which implies that $n\mid(10^{k_1-k_2}-1)$ or:


...where $k=k_1-k_2$.

End of lemma proof.

Part 1:

Let us now show that:

For every number $n$ such that $2\nmid n$ and $5\nmid n$, decimal representation of $1/n$ has no pre-periodic part. In other words, $1/n$ can be written as: $$\frac 1n=0.aaa\dots=0.\bar{a}\tag{1}$$

...where $a$ stands for a group of repeating digits (possibly starting with zero) of length $l_a$. For example for $n=7$: $1/7=0.\overline{142857}$, so $a=142857$ and $l_a=6$.

One can easily show that (1) can be rewritten in the following way:



According to our lemma, it's guaranted that there exists $l_a$ such that $n\mid 10^{l_a}-1$ so it's is possible to find $a$ for every $n$ such that $1/n=0.\bar{a}$, without a pre-periodic part.

Part 2

If $2\mid n$ or $5\mid n$, decimal representation of $1/n$ has a pre-periodic part: $$\frac1n=0.b\overline {a}\tag{2}$$

...with the lenght of pre-periodic group of digits $b$ equal to $l_b$ and length of periodic group of digits $a$ equal to $l_a$.

Suppose the pposite, that there is some number $n$ divisible by either 2 or 5 such that:



...which is impossible because the LHS is divisible by 2 or 5 and the RHS is clearly not.

Based on part 1 and 2 we now know that:

Decimal representation of $1/n$ has pre-periodic part if and only if $2\mid n$ or $5\mid n$.

Part 3

For a number $n$ of the form $n=2^p5^qm$ and $2,5\nmid m$ the length of pre-periodic part is exactly $\max(p,q)$.

It can be easily proved that any number of the form $0.b\bar{a}$ can be written as:


Because $m$ is not divisible by 2 or 5, we can write $1/m$ as:


which means that:

$$\frac1n=\frac1{2^p5^q} \cdot \frac1m$$

If we introduce:


we get:

$$\frac1n=\frac{2^{r-p}5^{r-q}}{10^r} \cdot \frac1m=\frac{2^{r-p}5^{r-q}a}{10^r(10^{l_a}-1)}\tag{4}$$

Now look at (4) carefully.

Case 1:


By comparing (3) and (4), the length of pre-periodic part is $r$, and the pre-periodic part is made of zeroes $b=0$. Periodic part is equal to $2^{r-p}5^{r-q}a$ and the length of the periodic part is $l_a$.

Case 2:


In that case you can write:


...and (4) becomes:


By comparing the last expression with (4), the length of the pre-periodic part $s$ is again $r$ and the length of repeating sequence $a_1$ is again $l_a$.


  1. The length of the periodic part in the decimal representation of $1/n$ is determined by the length of periodic part in $1/m$ with $m$ being the greatest divisor of $n$ such that $2\nmid m$ and $5\nmid m$.
  2. Pre-periodic part exists only if $n$ is of the form $2^p5^qm$.
  3. The length of the pre-periodic part is $\max(p,q)$

Interesting example


Periodic part has 18 digits. Now take a look at:


Pre-periodic part has length 3 (because the biggest power of 2 or 5 in $n=760$ is 3). And the periodic part has length 18, same length as in $1/19$.

  • $\begingroup$ I have a question: Are part $1$ and $2$ really necessary? Because stating that the length of the non-periodic part of $1/n$ if $ n = 2^m5^n p$ is $max(m,n)$ also takes care of the situations where $n$ is not at all divisible by $2$ and $5$, in which case $max(m,n)=0$ and so no non-periodic part. $\endgroup$ – Yellow Jan 7 '19 at 18:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.