Possible conjecture relating to factors and powers of 12

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the advantages of a base 12 number system, particularly its numerous factors compared to the decimal system. The original poster explores whether multiples of 12 can yield smaller numbers with more factors, finding exceptions like 120, which has more factors than 144. They also investigate integer powers of 12, noting that these consistently have a high number of factors. A conjecture is proposed that no smaller number than a power of 12 has more factors, but this is challenged by examples provided by other participants. The conversation highlights the concept of highly composite numbers and methods for calculating the number of factors.
Jack_O
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
I have read in the past that having a base 12 number system is superior to a decimal system because of the number of factors that 12 has. For instance we essentially use base 12 for time, it's better to have a 60 minute hour than a 100 minute hour as there are more 'convenient chunks' or factors of 1 hour with 60 minutes.

This led to me having a thought recently, are there any multiples of 12 for which there are smaller numbers with more factors? It looked briefly promising but it turns out there are lots of exceptions, for instance 132 (11*12) only has 10 factors, 126 has 12 factors. A few of the preceding multiples of 12 also have more factors than 132.

I then decided to try it with integer powers of 12. So far I haven't found any exceptions, all the integer powers of 12 appear to have lots of factors:

12: 6 factors
144: 15 factors
1728: 28 factors
20736: 45 factors

I can't find anywhere that will let me work out the number of factors for higher powers and don't have the programming skill to do so myself. (To get the value for the 2 larger values above I used http://www.mathsisfun.com/numbers/factors-all-tool.html" to get the factors and then pasted them into a blank word doc to quickly add them up using word count).

A neat way to pose the conjecture in words would be: There are no numbers smaller than a power of 12, x, with more factors than x.

Can anyone quickly disprove this? I'm not sure if it's even interesting at all but I got curious.

Edited for accuracy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
11*12=132. 10 factors.
 
Whoops, it still has fewer factors than the previous 6 multiples of 12 (5*12 to 10*12). 132 also has fewer factors than 126 which has 12 factors. So I am still correct in saying it doesn't work for multiples.
 
The way to count the number of factors is:

Factorize the number completely, as 2^a 3^b 5^c ...
The number of factors is then (a+1)(b+1)(c+1) ...

e.g. 60 = 2^2.3.5
The number of factors = (2+1)(1+1)(1+1) = 12

For powers of 12, this gives
12 = 2^2.3 Number of factors 3x2 = 6
12^2 = 2^4.3^2. Number of factors 5 x 3 = 15
...
12^1000 = 2^2000.3^1000. Number of factors = 2001 x 1001 = 2003001

You can use this "in reverse" to find small numbers that have a given number of factors. For example if you want a number with 20 factors, then
20 = 5x4 = 5x2x2
So a number with 20 factos must be either p^4q^3 or p^4qr, where p q and r are different primes.

So two small numbers with 20 factors are 2^4.3^3 = 432 and 2^4.3.5 = 240.
 
Good morning I have been refreshing my memory about Leibniz differentiation of integrals and found some useful videos from digital-university.org on YouTube. Although the audio quality is poor and the speaker proceeds a bit slowly, the explanations and processes are clear. However, it seems that one video in the Leibniz rule series is missing. While the videos are still present on YouTube, the referring website no longer exists but is preserved on the internet archive...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K