unitary divisor
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

12
(FIVE YEARS 6)

H-INDEX

1
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 20-40
Author(s):  
Pentti Haukkanen ◽  
◽  
Varanasi Sitaramaiah

A divisor $d$ of a positive integer $n$ is called a unitary divisor if $\gcd(d, n/d)=1;$ and $d$ is called a bi-unitary divisor of $n$ if the greatest common unitary divisor of $d$ and $n/d$ is unity. The concept of a bi-unitary divisor is due to D. Surynarayana (1972). Let $\sig^{**}(n)$ denote the sum of the bi-unitary divisors of $n$. A positive integer $n$ is called a bi-unitary multiperfect number if $\sig^{**}(n)=kn$ for some $k\geq 3$. For $k=3$ we obtain the bi-unitary triperfect numbers. Peter Hagis (1987) proved that there are no odd bi-unitary multiperfect numbers. The present paper is part V in a series of papers on even bi-unitary multiperfect numbers. In parts I, II and III we determined all bi-unitary triperfect numbers of the form $n=2^{a}u$, where $1\leq a \leq 6$ and $u$ is odd. In parts IV(a-b) we solved partly the case $a=7$. In this paper we fix the case $a=8$. In fact, we show that $n=57657600=2^{8}.3^{2}.5^{2}.7.11.13$ is the only bi-unitary triperfect number of the present type.


2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-69
Author(s):  
Pentti Haukkanen ◽  
◽  
Varanasi Sitaramaiah

A divisor d of a positive integer n is called a unitary divisor if \gcd(d, n/d)=1; and d is called a bi-unitary divisor of n if the greatest common unitary divisor of d and n/d is unity. The concept of a bi-unitary divisor is due to D. Surynarayana (1972). Let \sig^{**}(n) denote the sum of the bi-unitary divisors of n. A positive integer n is called a bi-unitary multiperfect number if \sig^{**}(n)=kn for some k\geq 3. For k=3 we obtain the bi-unitary triperfect numbers. Peter Hagis (1987) proved that there are no odd bi-unitary multiperfect numbers. The present paper is part IV(b) in a series of papers on even bi-unitary multiperfect numbers. In parts I, II and III we considered bi-unitary triperfect numbers of the form n=2^{a}u, where 1\leq a \leq 6 and u is odd. In part IV(a) we solved partly the case a=7. We proved that if n is a bi-unitary triperfect number of the form n=2^{7}.5^{b}.17^{c}.v, where (v, 2.5.17)=1, then b\geq 2. We then solved completely the case b=2. In the present paper we give some partial results concerning the case b\ge 3 under the assumption 3\nmid n.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 2-32
Author(s):  
Pentti Haukkanen ◽  
◽  
Varanasi Sitaramaiah

A divisor d of a positive integer n is called a unitary divisor if \gcd(d, n/d)=1; and d is called a bi-unitary divisor of n if the greatest common unitary divisor of d and n/d is unity. The concept of a bi-unitary divisor is due to D. Surynarayana (1972). Let \sigma^{**}(n) denote the sum of the bi-unitary divisors of n. A positive integer n is called a bi-unitary multiperfect number if \sigma^{**}(n)=kn for some k \geq 3. For k=3 we obtain the bi-unitary triperfect numbers. Peter Hagis (1987) proved that there are no odd bi-unitary multiperfect numbers. The present paper is Part IV(a) in a series of papers on even bi-unitary multiperfect numbers. In parts I, II and III we found all bi-unitary triperfect numbers of the form n=2^{a}u, where 1\leq a \leq 6 and u is odd. There exist exactly ten such numbers. In this part we solve partly the case a=7. We prove that if n is a bi-unitary triperfect number of the form n=2^{7}.5^{b}.17^{c}.v, where (v, 2.5.17)=1, then b\geq 2. We then confine ourselves to the case b=2. We prove that in this case we have c=1 and further show that n=2^{7}.3^{2}.5^{2}.7.13.17=44553600 is the only bi-unitary triperfect number of this form.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 7235-7240
Author(s):  
C. Thilaga ◽  
P. B. Sarasija

2015 ◽  
Vol 97 (111) ◽  
pp. 175-180
Author(s):  
Tim Trudgian

We establish a new upper bound on the function ?*(n), the sum of all coprime divisors of n. The main result is that ?*(n)? 1.3007n log log n for all n ? 570571.


1976 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-35
Author(s):  
D. Suryanarayana ◽  
R. Sita Rama Chandra Rao

Let k be a fixed integer ≧ 2. A positive integer n is called unitarily k-free, if the multiplicity of each prime factor of n is not a multiple of k; or equivalently, if n is not divisible unitarily by the k-th power of any integer > 1. By a unitary divisor, we mean as usual, a divisor d> 0 of n such that (d, n/d) = 1. The interger 1 is also considered to be unitarily k-free. The concept of a unitarily k-free integer was first introduced by Cohen (1961; §1). Let denote the set of unitarily k-free integers. When k = 2, the set coincides with the set Q* of exponentially odd integers (that is, integers in whose canonical representation each exponent is odd) discussed by Cohen himself in an earlier paper (1960; §1 and §6). A divisor d > 0 of the positive integer n is called a unitarily k-free divisor of n if d ∈ . Let (n) denote the number of unitarily k-free divisors of n.


1975 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Suryanarayana ◽  
R. Sita Rama Chandra Rao

Let k be a fixed integer ≧2. A positive integer n is called unitarily k-free, if the multiplicity of each prime divisor of n is not a multiple of k; or equivalently, if n is not divisible unitarily by the kth power of any integer > 1. By a unitary divisor, we mean as usual a divisor d > 0 of n such that (d,(n/d)) = 1. The integer 1 is also considered to be unitarily k-free. These integers were first defined by Cohen (1961; § 1). Let Q*k denote the set of unitarily k-free integers. When k = 2, the set Q*2 coincides with the set Q* of exponentially odd integers (that is, integers in whose canonical representation each exponent is odd) discussed by Cohen himself in an earlier paper (1961; § 1 and § 6). Let x denote a real variable 1 and let Q*k denote the number of unitarily k-free integers ≦ x. Cohen (1961; Theorem 3.2) established by purely elementary methods that , where , the product being extended over all primes p and ζ(k) denotes the Riemann Zeta function. In the same paper Cohen (1961; Theorem 4.2) improved the order estimate of the error term in (1.1) to O(x1/k), by making use of the properties of real Dirichiet series. Later, he (Cohen; 1964) proved the same result by purely elementary methods eliminating the use of Dirichlet series.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document