28 views

Uploaded by Jose Arnaldo Bebita Dris

Part 2 of a series of papers of Arnie Dris, investigating Sorli's conjecture on odd perfect numbers

save

You are on page 1of 11

NEW RESULTS FOR SORLI’S CONJECTURE ON ODD PERFECT NUMBERS - PART II

arXiv:submit/0759047 [math.NT] 15 Jul 2013

JOSE ARNALDO B. DRIS Abstract. If N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form, then Sorli’s conjecture predicts that k = νq (N ) = 1. In this article, we give some further results related to this conjecture and those contained in the papers [4] 5 and [5]. In particular, we prove that I (n) < 3 .

1. Introduction If N ∈ N, then we denote the sum of the divisors of N by σ (N ). The positive integer N is said to be perfect if σ (N ) = 2N . It is currently an open problem to determine whether there are inﬁnitely many even perfect numbers, or if there are any odd perfect numbers. Ochem and Rao recently obtained the lower bound N > 101500 for an odd perfect number’s magnitude, and a lower bound of 1062 for its largest component (i.e., divisor pa ||N with p prime). This improves on previous results by Brent, Cohen and te Riele [2] in 1991 and Cohen [3] in 1987, respectively. An odd perfect number N = q k n2 is said to be given in Eulerian form if q is prime with q ≡ k ≡ 1 (mod 4) and gcd(q, n) = 1. (The number q is called the Euler prime, while the component q k is referred to as the Euler factor. Note that, since q is prime and q ≡ 1 (mod 4), then q ≥ 5.)1 In his Ph. D. thesis, Sorli [7] conjectured that k = νq (N ) = 1. The author conjectured in [4] that the components q k and n are related by the inequality q k < n. We denote the abundancy index I of the positive integer x as I (x) = σ (x) . x

2. New Results Related to Sorli’s Conjecture - Part II Three conditions equivalent to the inequality q k < n were given in [5]. We collect all these conditions in the following theorem. Theorem 2.1. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. The following inequalities are equivalent: • qk < n • σ (q k ) < σ (n)

Received by the editor July 8, 2013. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classiﬁcation. Primary 11A05; Secondary 11J25, 11J99. 1Key Words and Phrases: odd perfect number, Sorli’s conjecture, Euler prime

c XXXX American Mathematical Society

1

2

JOSE ARNALDO B. DRIS

σ (n) σ (q k ) < k n q σ (q k ) n σ (n) qk + k < + • n q σ (n) σ (q k ) • Remark 2.2. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. Using Theorem 2.1, it can be shown that q k < n is equivalent to qk σ (q k ) n σ (n) σ (q k ) σ (n) + k < + < + k . k n q σ (n) σ (q ) n q Likewise, we can show that n < q k is equivalent to σ (q k ) σ (q k ) σ (n) σ (n) qk n + < + k < + k . k σ (n) σ (q ) n q n q Remark 2.3. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. By Theorem 2.1, we have the biconditional: q k < n ⇐⇒ Suppose that q k < n. Consequently: σ (q k ) σ (n) qk n = I (q k ) < k I (n) = k , n n q q from which it follows that 2 I (n) qk < <2 n I (q k ) √ qk < 2. Hence: since 1 < I (q k ) < I (n) < 2. Therefore, n √ 1 qk n 4 < 2− √ − . 4 k n q 2 Squaring both sides of the last inequality, we get: √ qk 3 n 1 + k < 2 + √ = √ ≈ 2.12132. n q 2 2 qk n + k for the case q k < n, k > 1 n q later. (Note that, in general, this upper bound can be improved if we can obtain a sharper upper bound for I (n).) Now assume that n < q k . Consequently: We will get an improved upper bound for n qk σ (q k ) σ (n) k = I ( n ) < I ( q ) = , qk qk n n from which it follows that 2 I (q k ) n < . qk I (n) If k = 1, then 2 6 108 n I (q ) < < 5 = ≈ 0.929516 q I (n) 125 5

3

σ (n) σ (q k ) < k . n q

NEW RESULTS FOR SORLI’S CONJECTURE

ON ODD PERFECT NUMBERS - PART II 3

since I (q ) ≤

6 5

<

5 3

**< I (n) (see [5]). Hence, we have n < q
**

4

108 , 125 125 − 108 108 . 125

**from which it follows that q − n n q + > n q If k > 1, then n qk since I (q k ) <
**

5 4 2

n > q

8

8

**Squaring both sides of the last inequality, we get:
**

4

125 + 108

4

**108 ≈ 2.00133573154771263. 125
**

5 4 8 5

<

8 5

I (q k ) < I (n)

=

125 ≈ 0.9882117688. 128

<

**< I (n) (see [5]). Hence, we have n < qk
**

4

125 , 128 128 − 125 125 . 128

**from which it follows that qk − n n qk + k > n q n > qk 128 + 125
**

8 8

Squaring both sides of the last inequality, we get: 125 ≈ 2.0000351547. 128 √ Recall that we have the inequality I (q k ) < 3 2 < I (n). (See [5] for two improvements to this inequality.) In particular, it follows from I (q k ) < I (n) that

4 4

σ (q k ) qk < . σ (n) n By the biconditional q k < n ⇐⇒ σ (q k ) < σ (n) in Theorem 2.1 and the contrapositive k > 1 =⇒ q < n of the implication n < q =⇒ k = 1 from [4], we have two cases to consider: Case 1: q k < n In this case, we have (for k = 1, q k = q ) q σ (q ) n σ (q ) < < <1< , σ (n) n n q and 5 σ (n) σ (n) σ (n) < I (n) = < < . 3 n σ (q ) q since σ (q ) < n.

4

JOSE ARNALDO B. DRIS

Otherwise, we get (for k > 1) I (q k ) + qn I (q k ) σ (q k ) 1 < < = n 2 σ (n) qk I (n) + I (n) σ (q k ) qk 1 < < < 1, 2 σ (n) n 4 5 qk n < <1< k < , 5 n q 4 σ (q k ) σ (q k ) σ (n) n σ (n) < I (n) = < k < I (q k ) = < k < 2, n q qk n q 5 . since n < σ (q k ), q k < σ (n) and I (q k ) < 4 1< Case 2: n < q k In this case, we have (for k = 1, q k = q ) 1 < I (q ) = √ σ (n) q σ (q ) σ (q ) < I (n) = < < < 2 3, q n n n n σ (n) σ (n) 1 < < < < 1, 3 q σ (q ) q √ q σ (q ) < < 3, 1< σ (n) n √ σ (q ) q σ (q ) 1< < < < 2 3, σ (n) n n √ n q 1 3 5 < < < < < 3, 3 q 5 3 n √ since σ (n) < q , and k = 1 =⇒ q < n 3 (see [1]). Otherwise, we get (for k > 1) 1 σ (n) n < k < < 1, 2 q σ (q k ) n 1 < k < 2 q 4 1+ 13 and

8 5

4 k

125 , 128

and

and

125 < 128

4

**qk 128 < < 2, 125 n ,
**

8 5

<

σ (n) σ (q k ) 13 <1< < k σ (q ) σ (n) 4 1+

σ (n) σ (q k ) σ (n) σ (q k ) < I (q k ) = < I (n) = < < 2, k k q q n n since q k < σ (n) and n < σ (q k ). 1< Remark 2.4. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. If n < q k and k > 1, then it is currently unknown which of the following is true:

NEW RESULTS FOR SORLI’S CONJECTURE

ON ODD PERFECT NUMBERS - PART II 5

• I (q k ) <

• I (q k ) >

qk n qk n . qk n ,

Note that I (q k ) =

because otherwise we have nσ (q k ) = q 2k ,

whereupon we have the lefthand side is even while the righthand side is odd, a contradiction. k If qn < I (q k ), then we have the bounds 4 qk n 5 < k <1< < . 5 q n 4 We summarize the results in the preceding discussion in the following theorem. (The two succeeding corollaries also summarize further results.) Theorem 2.5. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. Then at least one of the following cases hold: • • • • k k k k =1 >1 =1 >1 and and and and q = q k < σ (q k ) = σ (q ) = q + 1 < n < σ (n) q < q k < n < σ (q k ) < σ (n) n < σ (n) < q = q k < σ (q k ) = σ (q ) = q + 1 q < n < q k < σ (n) < σ (q k ).

Corollary 2.6. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. If k > 1, then exactly one of the following cases hold: 5 σ (q k ) < < n 4 σ ( n ) 5 • q < n < q k and 1 < k < < q 4 • q < q k < n and 1 < σ (n) 8 < k <2 5 q 8 σ (q k ) < < 2. 5 n

Proof. If q k < n and k > 1, then by Theorem 2.5, we have q k < n < σ (q k ) < σ (n). From the biconditional mentioned in Remark 2.3, we have particular, since q k < n implies 1< 1 1 < k , we get n q σ (n) σ (q k ) . In < n qk

5 σ (q k ) σ (q k ) = I (q k ) < < < n qk 4

σ (n) σ (n) 8 < I (n) = < k < 2. 5 n q

σ (q k ) σ (n) < 2 follows from 1 < and k q n I (q k n) < 2 (since q k n is deﬁcient). The proof of the second part is very similar to the ﬁrst. Note that the inequality Note the rational approximation 8 ≈ 1.264911. 5 From Corollary 2.6, we can obtain the following result.

6

JOSE ARNALDO B. DRIS

Lemma 2.7. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. If k > 1, then σ (q k ) σ (n) 4 8 < + k < 3. 2 5 n q Proof. It suﬃces to prove the result for the case q k < n, as the proof for n < q k is very similar. To this end, suppose that N is an odd perfect number given in the Eulerian form N = q k n2 . Let k > 1 and q k < n. By Corollary 2.6, we have 1< and 8 σ (n) < k < 2. 5 q Taking square roots, we get 1< and 8 σ (n) √ < 2. < 5 qk Subtracting the last two inequalities, we obtain

4 4

σ (q k ) 5 < n 4

σ (q k ) < n

5 4

8 − 5

5 < 4

σ (n) − qk

σ (q k ) √ < 2 − 1. n

Squaring both sides of the last inequality and then adding 2 I (q k )I (n), we have 5 8 √ + − 10 + 2 4 5 But we also know that I (q k )I (n) < √ σ (q k ) σ (n) + k < 3 − 2 2 + 2 I (q k )I (n). n q

2 Consequently, we get

4

√ 8 < 2 I (q k )I (n) < 2 2. 5

**5 σ (q k ) σ (n) 8 √ 4 8 + − 10 + 2 < + k < 3. 4 5 5 n q Note the rational approximation 8 √ 5 4 8 + − 10 + 2 ≈ 1.60199870466. 4 5 5 Therefore, a sharper lower bound for σ (q k ) σ (n) + k n q when k > 1 is 2
**

4

8 < 2 I (q k )I (n) = 2 5

σ (q k ) n

σ (n) qk

<

σ (q k ) σ (n) + k , n q

by using the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality.

NEW RESULTS FOR SORLI’S CONJECTURE

ON ODD PERFECT NUMBERS - PART II 7

**Note the rational approximation 2
**

4

8 ≈ 2.2493653. 5

By employing a method similar to the proof of Lemma 2.7, we obtain the following results. Lemma 2.8. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. If k > 1, then the following inequalities hold: • If q k < n, then 2 < • If n < q k , then

4

41 n qk + k < = 2.05. n q 20 5 qk n 128 4 125 + < + k < = 2 .5 . 125 128 n q 2

Remark 2.9. Let N = q k n2 be an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. Suppose that k > 1. Taking oﬀ from Remark 2.2, and by applying Theorem 2.5, it can be shown that • The inequality q k < n is equivalent to qk σ (q k ) n σ (n) σ (q k ) σ (n) σ (q k ) σ (n) + + k < + < ≤ + k . n q σ (n) σ (q k ) qk n n q • The inequality n < q k is equivalent to σ (n) σ (q k ) σ (n) σ (q k ) σ (n) qk n σ (q k ) ≤ k + + < + k < + . k k σ (n) σ (q ) n q n q q n Note from Remark 2.9 that σ (q k ) σ (n) + = I (q k ) + I (n), qk n and qk n σ (q k ) σ (n) + k = I (q k ) + k I (n). n q n q Corollary 2.10. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. If k = 1, then exactly one of the following cases hold: σ (q ) <1< n σ (n) <1< • n < q = q k and q • q = q k < n and σ (n) 5 < 3 q σ (q ) 5 < . 3 n

5 3

Proof. The proof uses the lower bounds 1 < I (q ) and Note the rational approximation 5 ≈ 1.2909944487358. 3

< I (n).

8

JOSE ARNALDO B. DRIS

3. Improved Upper Bounds for the Abundancy Index I (n) In the conclusion to the paper [5], it was hinted that an improved upper bound for I (n) will be considered a (major) breakthrough. To this end, we derive the following results. Theorem 3.1. Let N = q k n2 be an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. 5 is true. Then the inequality I (n) < 3 Proof. Suppose that N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. Since n | n2 and 1 < n, we know that 2 I (n) < I (n2 ) = . I (q k ) But we also have the inequality q+1 = I (q ) ≤ I (q k ), q since q | q k and 1 ≤ k . In particular, we have 2 2 2q I (n) < I (n2 ) = ≤ = . k I (q ) I (q ) q+1 But q is the Euler prime (i.e., q satisﬁes q ≡ 1 (mod 4)), which implies that 1 6 5 ≤ q . Therefore, 1 q ≤ 5 , which implies that I (q ) ≤ 5 . 2q 2 Note the increasing trend in the values of the upper bound I (n) < I ( q) = q+1 for (successively larger) possible Euler primes q : 2 5 = = 1.6, I (5) 3 13 2 = = 1.857142, I (13) 7 2 17 = = 1.8, I (17) 9 2 29 = = 1.93, I (29) 15 2 37 = = 1.947368421052631578, I (37) 19 2 41 = = 1.952380, I (41) 21 2 53 = = 1.962, I (53) 27 2 61 = = 1.967741935483870, I (61) 31 2 73 = = 1.972, I (73) 37 2 89 = = 1.97, I (89) 45 97 2 = = 1.979591836734693877551020408163265306122448, I (97) 49

NEW RESULTS FOR SORLI’S CONJECTURE

ON ODD PERFECT NUMBERS - PART II 9

101 2 = = 1.9803921568627450, I (101) 51 ......... ......... ......... etc. In particular, we have proved that I (n) < 2q 2 = ≤ inf I (q ) q+1 2 I (q ) = 2 5 = . I (5) 3

Remark 3.2. The list in the proof of Theorem 3.1 gives all the possible Euler primes less than 105 = 3 · 5 · 7. Notice that the exact values of the fractions appearing as upper bounds for I (n) (which are actually particular values for I (n2 ) when k = 1) have repeating decimal representations. We can now state the following corollary to Theorem 3.1. Corollary 3.3. Let N = q k n2 be an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. If k = 1, then we have the chain of inequalities 3 43 √ < I (q k ) + I (n) < ≤ I (q k ) + I (n2 ) < 3. 3 15 2 Proof. The ingredients are contained in the papers [4] and [5], and of course, Theorem 3.1. If we assume an upper bound Q for the Euler prime q , then we get the following results. Lemma 3.4. Let N = q k n2 be an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. If q 2Q +1 ≤ I (q ) ≤ I (q k ) < I (n) < q2 q ≤ Q, then QQ +1 ≤ Q+1 . Proof. Suppose N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form, and assume that q ≤ Q. +1 1 1 First, we show that QQ ≤ I (q ). To this end, note that q ≤ Q implies Q ≤ q . Adding one to both sides of the last inequality gives the required result. From the proof of Theorem 3.1, we have the inequality 2 2 2q I (n) < ≤ = . I (q k ) I (q ) q+1 At this point, it suﬃces to prove that 2Q 2q ≤ q+1 Q+1 if q ≤ Q. To this end, assume to the contrary that 2q 2Q < . Q+1 q+1 This assumption implies that 2 2 . 1 < 1+ Q 1+ 1 q

10

JOSE ARNALDO B. DRIS

Cancelling 2 from both sides and cross-multiplying, we get 1 1 1+ <1+ . q Q Subtracting 1 from both sides and cross-multiplying again, we ﬁnally have Q < q , which is a contradiction. Remark 3.5. Note that, since q prime with q ≡ 1 (mod 4) implies that

2Q 5 we have inf( Q +1 ) ≥ 3 , where 2Q other hand, sup( Q +1 ) < 2.

equality occurs if and only if Q = q = 5. On the

5 ≤ q ≤ Q,

Remark 3.6. Since N > 101500 by [6] and q k < n2 by [4], if n < q k , we easily obtain the lower bounds n > 10375 and q k > 10500 . (Note that, in this case, k = 1 then implies that q > 10500 .) Similarly, if q k < n, we get n > 10500 . However, under the latter case, we still could not completely rule out q = 5, k = 1. 4. Conclusion In this article, we have given an improved upper bound for the abundancy index I (n), if N = q k n2 is an odd perfect number given in Eulerian form. The penultimate goal (see the theorem - page 14 in [5]) is to derive a contradiction from assuming either of the following: • k = 1 =⇒ σ (n) < q k • k = 1 =⇒ σ (q k ) < n. If (1) is ruled out, then the original conjecture q k < n from [4] is proved. On the other hand, if (2) disproved, then the conjecture k = 1 ⇐⇒ n < q from [5] follows. Either one is a signiﬁcant improvement to currently known results in research on odd perfect numbers. 5. Acknowledgments The author sincerely thanks the anonymous referees who have made several suggestions, which helped in improving the style of the paper. References

1. P. Acquaah, S. Konyagin, On prime factors of odd perfect numbers, Int. J. Number Theory, 08 (2012), 1537, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S1793042112500935 . 2. R. P. Brent, G. L. Cohen, H. J. J. te Riele, Improved techniques for lower bounds for odd perfect numbers, Math. Comp. 57 (1991), 857-868, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/S0025-5718-1991-1094940-3 . 3. G. L. Cohen, On the largest component of an odd perfect number, J. Austral. Math. Soc. Ser. A, 42 (1987), 280-286, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1446788700028251 . 4. J. A. B. Dris, The abundancy index of divisors of odd perfect numbers, J. Integer Seq., 15 (Sep. 2012), Article 12.4.4, https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/journals/JIS/VOL15/Dris/dris8.html , ISSN 1530-7638. 5. J. A. B. Dris, New results for Sorli’s conjecture on odd perfect numbers, to appear in Int. J. Pure Appl. Math., preprint:http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5991 . 6. P. Ochem, M. Rao, Odd perfect numbers are greater than 101500 , Math. Comp., 81 (2012), 1869-1877, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/S0025-5718-2012-02563-4 7. R. M. Sorli, Algorithms in the Study of Multiperfect and Odd Perfect Numbers, Ph. D. Thesis, University of Technology, Sydney, 2003, http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/research/handle/10453/20034 .

NEW RESULTS FOR SORLI’S CONJECTURE

ON ODD PERFECT NUMBERS - PART II 11

8. J. Ward, Does Ten Have a Friend?, http://arxiv.org/pdf/0806.1001v2.pdf . Far Eastern University, Nicanor Reyes Street, Sampaloc, Manila, Philippines E-mail address : jadris@feu.edu.ph, jabdris@yahoo.com.ph

- Handa Ka FundaUploaded byCatSniper
- CS2305_AUG_22_2017_Day_1.odtUploaded byNeilChaudhury
- Algebra for application.pdfUploaded byNgông Ngây Ngô
- Microsoft Word - HCF and LCMUploaded byapi-19746201
- Finding Meaning in Error TermsUploaded bypacinglife
- On the Characterization of Two Canonical Equations Generating Triples Terms Belonging to Beal's ConjectureUploaded byRodolfo Nieves
- tut19Uploaded byCarmita E Rodrigo
- Numerical Investigation of Dam-Break Flow over a Bottom Obstacle Using Eulerian Finite Element MethodUploaded byIJAERS JOURNAL
- ON THE ODD SIEVE SEQUENCEUploaded byDon Hass
- Practise QuestionsUploaded byAbraham Berhe
- Sheet (1) - Fluid Mechanics IIUploaded byAhmed Rabie Abd Elazeem
- Real Numbers Test SolutionsUploaded bydayanandan1
- 88Uploaded byremo1196
- mth202Uploaded byawadhesh786
- A01Uploaded bylksoo
- Ebooks Catalog 2011Uploaded byAtif Hussain
- Mathematics UnboundUploaded byCheenta Ganit Kendra
- test of QTUploaded byMelissa Jones
- CH FactoringUploaded byEmily Todd
- Mult Div FracNT2Uploaded bysalina
- Elitmus Tips and Tricks (1)Uploaded byhitesh091
- unit 2 plan overviewUploaded byapi-377875752
- b.tech III Sem Cie i Exam Timetable September 2017 (1)Uploaded byVignesh
- B.Tech_III_SEM_CIE_II_EXAM_TIMETABLE_SEPTEMBER_2017.pdfUploaded byVignesh
- ProjectUploaded bySg_manikandan
- Cs103x NotesUploaded byvandiver_09
- 19-1Uploaded byksr131
- EccWhite3Uploaded byAnkit Rawat
- ME 320 Fluid Flow Honors Option.docxUploaded bysaateh
- 15-Problems on H.C.F and L.C.MUploaded byHAFIZ IMRAN AKHTER

- New Results for the Descartes-Frenicle-Sorli Conjecture on Odd Perfect NumbersUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- IndexOutlaw_arXiv_submit1874825Uploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- Dris Conjecture ArXiv Submit1853544Uploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- OPNPaper_2017Uploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- Math Invs - Problem Set 1Uploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- NNTDM_-_ISSN_1310-5132_eISSN_2367-82_25Uploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- CSTRENDS IT1041 - Long Quiz 1, Trends in IT, FEU ManilaUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- A Criterion for Deficient Numbers Using the Abundancy Index and Deficiency FunctionsUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- 4th Shaping the Future Forum (2013) - Accenture PH - NotesUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- How To Login From an Internet Cafe Without Worrying About Keyloggers.pdfUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- Dris.spoofUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- DrisPaper2017 Prefinaldraft Ver3 ArXiv Submit1977864Uploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- Linear Algebra - Problem Set 1 Solutions - Arnie DrisUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- OPNPaper_2017.pdfUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- Deficiency ArXiv Submit1843147Uploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- Solving the Odd Perfect Number Problem: Some Old and New ApproachesUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- A Sufficient Condition for Disproving Descartes's Conjecture on Odd Perfect NumbersUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- NEW RESULTS FOR SORLI'S CONJECTURE ON ODD PERFECT NUMBERS - PART IIIUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- OPNPaper17 - On a Conjecture of Dris Regarding Odd Perfect NumbersUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- Euclid-Euler Heuristics for (Odd) Perfect NumbersUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- New Results on Odd Perfect NumbersUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- On Sorli’s Conjecture Regarding Odd Perfect NumbersUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- Math 1 - Chapter 2 - Algebraic ExpressionsUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- Some New Results on Bounds for the Abundancy Indices of the Components of Odd Perfect Numbers - V1.7Uploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- The Abundancy Index of Divisors of Spoof Odd Perfect NumbersUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- A short proof for the Descartes-Frenicle-Sorli conjecture on odd perfect numbersUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- The Abundancy Index of Divisors of Odd Perfect Numbers - Part IIUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- CRITERIA FOR ALMOST PERFECT AND DEFICIENT NUMBERSUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- First Responders Guide to Computer ForensicsUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris
- On Sorli’s Conjecture Regarding Odd Perfect Numbers - Part IIUploaded byJose Arnaldo Bebita Dris