Re: Properties of Numbers


Proginoskes wrote:
aone1...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
I'm not a mathematics student, however I have keen interest in numbers
and their properties. With all I know about numbers, I tend to believe
that " For any property of numbers expressed generically( eg:- prime,
perfect number etc - ie., without specific reference to any of the
integers ), there would be either 1 or infinite number of numbers that
would have this property. ie., it cannot be 2, 3 or any other finite
number of numbers.

Is there any example that can disprove this assertion?

"Numbers which are equal to themselves squared" (3)

Oops. I was thinking "cubed" and typed "squared".

--- Christopher Heckman

"Perfect squares which can be written as n*n*n + n*n + n + 1, for some
integer n" (3)

"A triangular number which is the product of two consecutive triangular
numbers" (2)

(The last two are based on an AMM problem that was "leaked" to Usenet
this week.)

--- Christopher Heckman

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Difficult question
    ... Proginoskes wrote: ... has no solutions for odd x and y. ... --- Christopher Heckman ... The former replies make it likely that he was asking a question posed in the german competition "bundeswettbewerb mathematik" ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: prove it if you can
    ... Gerry Myerson wrote: ... >> Proginoskes wrote: ... --- Christopher Heckman ... Prev by Date: ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Recognize this equation ?
    ... Proginoskes wrote: ... It's the Surrogate Factoring equations that James Harris is looking ... --- Christopher Heckman ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: why are some limit laws only valid for "n is a positive integer"?
    ... > Proginoskes wrote: ... > DNE ... --- Christopher Heckman ... Prev by Date: ...
    (sci.math)