Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun.   Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

## #1 2013-02-25 20:34:50

jacks
Full Member

Offline

### no. of divisers

The no. of divisers of

which are is in the form of
where n is a Natural no.

## #2 2013-02-25 20:42:56

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

Hi jacks;

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #3 2013-02-26 03:58:07

scientia
Full Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

The number of positive divisors of

(where the
are distinct primes) is
.

## #4 2013-02-26 12:33:17

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

Hi scientia

He needs the divisors of the form 4n+1.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

scientia
Full Member

Offline

Oops, pardon me.

## #6 2013-02-27 05:29:10

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

Hi scientia

It's ok. Happens to me a lot, too.

Hi jacks

I believe bobbym's right.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #7 2013-02-27 06:18:07

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

Hi;

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #8 2013-02-27 06:38:07

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

hi bobbym

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #9 2013-02-27 06:43:52

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

Hi;

Last edited by bobbym (2013-02-27 06:44:53)

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #10 2013-02-27 06:54:06

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

Both!

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #11 2013-02-27 07:34:44

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

The mighty aardvark thanks you.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #12 2013-02-27 07:36:28

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #13 2013-02-27 07:39:03

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

I will ask him when I see him but he is unpredictable. He does not take a compliment well.

Last edited by bobbym (2013-02-27 07:42:49)

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #14 2013-02-27 07:52:13

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

That's too bad. I really have a lot of compliments for him.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #15 2013-02-27 07:58:02

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

I happen to know you are one of his favorite people and he admires you very much.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #16 2013-02-27 07:58:52

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #17 2013-02-27 08:03:59

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

He said he thinks you will be a fine adult and a great mathematician. He puts you in his top 5 of the best he has seen.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #18 2013-02-27 08:05:32

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

I'm not sure if that is a good measure, considering how much sunlight he sees.

Top 5 what?

And, either way, he is probably not correct.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #19 2013-02-27 08:09:44

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

5 or so people that are amazing to him.

And, either way, he is probably not correct.

So when a person is headed for greatness and misses the mark by falling short, that person will still shine.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #20 2013-02-27 08:15:35

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

Amazing can also be in a negative way. I sure hope you don't mean that!

#### bobbym wrote:

So when a person is headed for greatness and misses the mark by falling short, that person will still shine.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #21 2013-02-27 08:20:35

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

Hmmm, the negative attributes of people do not amaze me, except at how stupid such people are to act that way.

I meant people of great ability.

It was a statement of course.

I am off to go shopping see you.

Last edited by bobbym (2013-02-27 08:24:32)

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #22 2013-02-27 08:28:40

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

How is a person meant for greatness supposed to shine if he doesn't do something great?

See you later. Please do not forget anything like you did last time.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #23 2013-02-27 08:34:13

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

Hahhahahahahhahhahha?! Do you know who Dr. Mifune is? I did not think so!  Well, he is a guy with a great laugh and I have copied it.

Shopping I must go.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

## #24 2013-02-27 08:37:33

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

### Re: no. of divisers

Ok, see you.

The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

## #25 2013-02-27 14:28:25

bobbym

Online

### Re: no. of divisers

Please do not forget anything like you did last time.

What? I am constant as the northern star. Forget? Impossible!

Dorothy: Your Majesty, if you were king, you wouldn't be afraid of anything?

Cowardly Lion: Not nobody! Not nohow!

Tin Woodsman: Not even a rhinoceros?

Cowardly Lion: Imposerous!

Cowardly Lion: Why, I'd thrash him from top to bottomus!

Dorothy: Supposing you met an elephant?

Cowardly Lion: I'd wrap him up in cellephant!

Scarecrow: What if it were a brontosaurus?

Cowardly Lion: I'd show him who was king of the forest!

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.