MHB Prove that n is not divisible by 105.

  • Thread starter Thread starter lfdahl
  • Start date Start date
lfdahl
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
747
Reaction score
0
Problem: Suppose that a natural number $n$ is an odd perfect number, i.e.:

$n$ is odd and $n$ is equal to the sum of all its positive divisors (including $1$ and excluding $n$).Prove that $n$ is not divisible by $105$.P.S.: To this day, no one knows, whether such a number exists. Here
is a comment on the subject from Wolfram Mathworld.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Suggested solution:
Suppose that $n$ is divisible by $105 = 3 \cdot 5 \cdot 7$. Consider the prime factorization of $n$:

\[n = 3^{\alpha_1}\cdot 5^{\alpha_2 } \cdot 7^{\alpha_3}\cdot p_4^{\alpha_4}\cdot ...\cdot p_k^{\alpha_k},\: \: \: \alpha_1,\alpha_2 , \alpha_3 \geq 1.\]

Let $S(n)$ be the sum of all positive divisors of $n$ (including $1$ and $n$):

\[S(n)= n\left ( 1+\frac{1}{3}+...+\frac{1}{3^{\alpha_1}} \right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{5}+...+\frac{1}{5^{\alpha_2}} \right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{7}+...+\frac{1}{7^{\alpha_3}} \right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{p_4}+...+\frac{1}{p_4^{\alpha_4}} \right )...\left ( 1+\frac{1}{p_k}+...+\frac{1}{p_k^{\alpha_k}} \right )\]

Since $n$ is an odd perfect number $S(n) = 2n$ and $S(n)$ is not divisible by $4$. Since all primes in the decomposition of $n$ are odd, $\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_3$ are at least $2$, - otherwise

$\left ( 1+\frac{1}{3}+...+\frac{1}{3^{\alpha_1}} \right )=\frac{4}{3}$ and $\left ( 1+\frac{1}{7}+...+\frac{1}{7^{\alpha_3}} \right )=\frac{8}{7}$ and $S(n)$ is divisible by $4$. Finally:
\[2 = \frac{S(n)}{n}= \left ( 1+\frac{1}{3}+\frac{1}{3^{2}} \right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{5}\right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{7}+\frac{1}{7^2} \right )=\frac{13}{9}\cdot \frac{6}{5} \cdot \frac{57}{49}= \frac{4446}{2205}>2.\]
Contradiction.
 
lfdahl said:
Suggested solution:
Suppose that $n$ is divisible by $105 = 3 \cdot 5 \cdot 7$. Consider the prime factorization of $n$:

\[n = 3^{\alpha_1}\cdot 5^{\alpha_2 } \cdot 7^{\alpha_3}\cdot p_4^{\alpha_4}\cdot ...\cdot p_k^{\alpha_k},\: \: \: \alpha_1,\alpha_2 , \alpha_3 \geq 1.\]

Let $S(n)$ be the sum of all positive divisors of $n$ (including $1$ and $n$):

\[S(n)= n\left ( 1+\frac{1}{3}+...+\frac{1}{3^{\alpha_1}} \right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{5}+...+\frac{1}{5^{\alpha_2}} \right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{7}+...+\frac{1}{7^{\alpha_3}} \right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{p_4}+...+\frac{1}{p_4^{\alpha_4}} \right )...\left ( 1+\frac{1}{p_k}+...+\frac{1}{p_k^{\alpha_k}} \right )\]

Since $n$ is an odd perfect number $S(n) = 2n$ and $S(n)$ is not divisible by $4$. Since all primes in the decomposition of $n$ are odd, $\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_3$ are at least $2$, - otherwise

$\left ( 1+\frac{1}{3}+...+\frac{1}{3^{\alpha_1}} \right )=\frac{4}{3}$ and $\left ( 1+\frac{1}{7}+...+\frac{1}{7^{\alpha_3}} \right )=\frac{8}{7}$ and $S(n)$ is divisible by $4$. Finally:
\[2 = \frac{S(n)}{n}= \left ( 1+\frac{1}{3}+\frac{1}{3^{2}} \right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{5}\right )\left ( 1+\frac{1}{7}+\frac{1}{7^2} \right )=\frac{13}{9}\cdot \frac{6}{5} \cdot \frac{57}{49}= \frac{4446}{2205}>2.\]
Contradiction.
why $S(n)=2n\, ?$ ,can you give me an example ?
 
Albert said:
why $S(n)=2n\, ?$ ,can you give me an example ?

Yes: Take $n = 6$, which is an even perfect number, because the sum of its divisors (except for $n$) is:

$1+2+3 = 6$. The proof defines $S(n)$ as the sum of all divisors of $n$ including $n$ itself.

Thus: $S(6) = 1+2+3+6 = 12 = 2 \cdot 6$.

I would like to give you an example with $n$ odd, but this would be a hard task, since math researchers have shown, that the
smallest possible odd perfect number $n > 10^{1500}$.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top