In article <18gtko9u67fij$.1bbn6thkqlgjh.dlg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Coos Haak <chforth@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Op Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:08:50 -0500 schreef Rod Pemberton:
>
>> Marcel,
>>
>> I've got a couple of problems with the examples on your "Perfect Number
>> code" webpage:
>> http://home.iae.nl/users/mhx/perfect.html
>>
>> You state:
>>
>> "The perfect number A can be characterized by a unique number n, where
A =
>> 2^n * (2^n-1 - 1). "
>
>2^(n - 1)*(2^n - 1)
The above is false.
Marcel Hendrix doesn't acknowledge the fact that nobody has succeeded
in characterising odd perfect numbers.
The above observation about even perfect numbers is pretty trivial.
Euclides made it in his "Elements". Yes, that was ancient Greece, B.C.
(Not that I want to belittle Euclides, who was one of the godfathers
of science.)
The search for odd perfect numbers continues to this day (AFAIK).
A result from 1993 proves that it has at least 300 digits, so it
is not likely that Marcel can come up with one, but nonetheless.
>--
>Coos
Groetjes Albert
--
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.
albert@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
&=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
|
