Talk:Sequence: nth number with exactly n divisors: Difference between revisions
Talk:Sequence: nth number with exactly n divisors (view source)
Revision as of 13:56, 8 March 2021
, 3 years ago→Handy hints
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) m (→Handy hint: another hint) |
|||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 12:
Non prime odd terms are '''always''' a square number. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 18:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
: ''All'' odd terms are '''always''' a square number. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 01:02, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
:: You are 100% correct, but these were meant to be optimization hints, not statements of general fact. Sort of an either / or kind of thing. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 09:59, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
: That is one <strike>hel</strike> heck of some dandy hints!! -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 18:56, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
May this is a naive question: Why 2nd term of sequence is not 2 but 3.
<br>2 has exactly 2 divisors: 1 and 2 (CalmoSoft)
: 2 is the '''first''' number with exactly 2 divisors but 3 is the '''second''' such number. So, 3 is the second term of the sequence. --[[User:PureFox|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox|talk]]) 13:48, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
<br>
: Thanks PureFox, now I understand it (CalmoSoft)
| |||