You are on page 1of 4

# New Results on Odd Perfect Numbers

## Jose Arnaldo B. Dris

Far Eastern University
Manila, Philippines
jabdris@yahoo.com.ph
June 17, 2012
Let I(x) =

(x)
x

## Let N = q k n2 be an odd perfect number (hereinafter abbreviated as OPN)

given in Eulerian form (i.e. q k 1 (mod 4) and gcd(q, n) = 1). The
author wants to show that n < (q k ). (Note that n 6= (q k ) because of parity
constraints.)
In this note, we shall prove the following result:
Lemma 0.1. If N = q k n2 is an OPN with Euler factor q k , and if (q k ) < n,
then
"
r !#
1
25
(q k )
375 5
1
.
< 10

(n2 )
4 2
32
Proof. Let N = q k n2 beqan OPN with Euler factor q k . Suppose that (q k ) < n.
Since 1 < I(q k ) < 45 < 85 < I(n) < I(q k n) < 2, then we have:
r

8 k
q < (n).
5

Consequently,
r

8 k
q (q k ) < n(n)
5

## from which we get

n
(q k )
< k
(n)
q
Now, from I(q k ) <

5
4

<

8
5

5
.
8

I(q k )
<
I(n)

125
128

qk
(q k )
<
(n)
n
(q k )
(n) ,



(q k )
(n)

2

<

125
.
128

we have

25
625
=
1024
32

(q k )
<
(n)

25
0.88388.
32




 

 

 


(q k ) (n2 )
(q k ) [(n)]2
(q k ) (n) (n)
(q k ) (n2 )
.
=
<
=
2=
qk
n2
n2
qk
n2
qk
n
qk
n
It follows that

I(n2 )
(n2 )
=
< I(n)
I(n)
n(n)

## from which we get the lower bound

(n)
1
>
.
(n2 )
2n
(n)
8
2
We also want an upper bound for (n
2 ) . Since I(n) < 2 and I(n ) > 5 , we get
the following:
2n
5
(n)
< 8 2 =
.
2
(n )
4n
5n

(It is easy to verify that the upper bound thus obtained is indeedqgreater than
k
)
25
the lower bound that was previously calculated.) Since (q
(n) <
32 , we have
the following:
r
(n) (q k )
25
(q k )
=1
>1
.
(n)
(n)
32
Consequently:


(n) (q k )
(n)



"
r #

25
1
(n)
>
1
,
2
(n )
2n
32

"
r #
25
(n)
(q k )
1
1
.

>
(n2 ) (n2 )
2n
32
2

## Using the upper bound for

(n)
(n2 ) ,

we get

"
r #
25
5
(q k )
(n)
(q k )
1
1

>

>
4n (n2 )
(n2 ) (n2 )
2n
32
whence it follows that
"
1 5 1

n 4 2
(A rational approximation for

5
4

1
2

25
32

!#

25
32

>


(q k )
.
(n2 )
is 1.19194173824159220.) By

Ochem and Raos recent result on a lower bound of 101500 for OPNs [2], and
since q k < n2 as shown by the author in his M. Sc. thesis completed in 2008
[1], then we get the lower bound n > 10375 . Therefore,
"
"
r !#
r !#
(q k )
25
25
1 5 1
1
375 5
1
< 10
1
.
<

2
(n )
n 4 2
32
4 2
32

## Remark 0.1. This lemma improves on a previous result by the author:

(q k )
5
<
(n2 )
12
at least for the case (q k ) < n. This follows from the series of inequalities:
2
(q k )
5
8
(n2 )
(n2 )
(q k )

<
1
<
<
<
<
<
2
<
3

,
n2
3
qk
4
5
n2
qk
and
(q k )
=
(n2 )

(q k )
qk
(n2 )
qk

+
+

(q k )
n2
(n2 )
n2

<

+ 23
5
8 = 12 .
3+ 5
5
4

(q )
It remains to calculate a lower bound for (n
2 ) that will (perhaps) contradict
Lemma 0.1. This problem appears to be intractable.

References
[1] J. A. B. Dris, Solving the Odd Perfect Number Problem: Some Old and
New Approaches, M. Sc. Math thesis, De La Salle University, Manila,
Philippines, Aug. 2008. Available online: http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.
1450.
[2] P. Ochem, Odd perfect numbers, http://www.lirmm.fr/~ochem/opn/.
3

## 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 11A05; Secondary 11J25,

11J99.
Keywords: odd perfect number, Sorlis conjecture, Euler prime.