Is there a relationship between these numbers from the Phi function?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lokolo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relationship
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the Phi function and its values for specific squares, with initial calculations suggesting a potential relationship. However, the first calculation for Φ(16) is corrected, revealing that Φ(16) actually equals 8, not 2. Participants share known formulas for the Phi function, including Φ(p²) = p² - p for prime numbers and properties related to the multiplication of coprime integers. The conversation highlights the need for further testing to explore a general formula for non-prime squares. The thread concludes with an acknowledgment of the complexity involved in understanding the Phi function's behavior.
Lokolo
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Doing maths cousework, Phi Function and i came out with these numbers (i dnt no if it has anything do to with phi number yet)

i) Φ (4²) = Φ(16) = 2
ii) Φ (6²) = Φ(36) = 12
iii) Φ (8²) = Φ(64) = 32

its looks as if there could b a relatonship between them but i can't see one, can you?
thanks

Lokolo
 
Physics news on Phys.org
phi(16) != 2, since 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15 are all coprime to 16. phi(16) = 8.
 
opps yeh sorry, so do you think there will be a general forumla? i have got one for prime squares
Φ(p²) = p² - p
where p = prime
but not one for all others
 
Well... phi(ab) = phi(a)phi(b) if a and b are relatively prime, and phi(p^n) = p^n - p^(n - 1) where p is a prime and n a natural number. Those are the ones I know of. And of course, those two formulas taken together provide an easy way to compute phi(x) if you know the prime factorization of x.
 
Last edited:
wow, i have a lot of testin to do...
thanks muzza
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K