Re: Why has no one confirmed or refuted this?

snip --
so 134 is a sum of two triangles ?

No, not what I meant at all.
136 is a triangle number and the sum of its devisors =
134.
A triangle number defined as any integer (n)
then (n*(n+1))/2
t(16) = 136
(16*17)/2 = a triangle number.

and no other integer have a deficient that is the sum >of 2 triangles ?

what about primes ?? prime = triangle + triangle + 1 ??

how do you mean related to fermat primes ?

in what way ??

Comparing the Mersenne primes and their pure triangle
number counter parts.

Where p = 2 then 2^p -1 = 3
Its' pure number counterpart is -- 2^1 * 3 = 6
Where p = 3 then 2^p -1 = 7
Its' pure number counterpart is -- 2^2 * 7 = 28
Where p = 5 then 2^p -1 = 31
Its' pure number counterpart is -- 2^4 * 31 = 496
Where p = 7 then 2^p -1 = 127
Its pure number counterpart is -- 2^6 * 127 = 8128
etc.

Where the relationship of the Fermat primes and their
deficient by 2 triangle numbers ---
Where n = 1 then 2^n +1 = 3
Its' deficient by 2 counterpart is -- 2^0 * 3 =3
Where n = 2 then 2^n +1 = 5
Its' deficient by 2 counterpart is -- 2^1 * 5 =10
Where n = 4 then 2^4 +1 = 17
Its' deficient by 2 counterpart is -- 2^3 * 17 =136
Where n = 8 then 2^8 +1 = 256
Its' deficient by 2 counterpart is -- 2^7 * 257 =32896
Where n = 16 then 2^16 +1 = 65537
Its' deficient by 2 counterpart is -- 2^15 * 65537 =
2147516416.
Now from here on no more deficient by 2 triangle
numbers nor Fermat primes unless of course another
Fermat prime is found. ;-)

Dan
.

Relevant Pages