Re: Why has no one confirmed or refuted this?
- From: Danny <fasttrack2a@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:30:31 EDT
Danny wrote:
That there are no more than 5 knowndeficient by just 2 triangle numbers!
Where each of the 5 have a one to one
relationship to the Fermat primes.
These deficient by 2 triangle numbers are
even more rare than the even perfect
numbers which are also triangle numbers
and with a one to one relationship
to the Mersenne primes.
Dan
are you the same danny who investigated Leroy >sequences ?...
Yes!
your statement seems intresting , but forgive me i dont >understand;
my english is not so good :s
what is deficient ? plz explain.
tommy1729
(((Correction!!)))
____________________
Starting with the even perfect numbers --
6,28,496..
The sum of its divisors but not including itself.
6 = 1+2+3
28 = 1+2+4+7+14
496 = 1+2+4+8+16+31+62+124+248
etc.
Where an integer is deficient --
3 = 1 + no other devisors therefore 3 is deficient
by just 2
10 = 1+2+5 = 8 so 10 is deficient by just 2.
Wrong below --
136 = 1+2+8+17+34+68 = 134 etc.
Should be--
136 = 1+2+4+8+17+34+68 = 134 etc.
The other 2 known deficient by 2 triangle numbers
are --
32896
2147516416
All triangle numbers and each having a one to one
relationship with the 5 known Fermat primes.
3,5,17,257,65537
Dan
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why has no one confirmed or refuted this?
- From: tommy1729
- Re: Why has no one confirmed or refuted this?
- References:
- Why has no one confirmed or refuted this?
- From: Danny
- Why has no one confirmed or refuted this?
- Prev by Date: Re: Why has no one confirmed or refuted this?
- Next by Date: Re: Distance problem
- Previous by thread: Re: Why has no one confirmed or refuted this?
- Next by thread: Re: Why has no one confirmed or refuted this?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
