Friday, 19 June 2026

Sierpinski Numbers

I watched this video on YouTube video about Sierpiński numbers. It's quite informative but I thought I'd find out more.


I asked Gemini to find out more. Here is its report:

The Sierpiński Problem: An Exhaustive Analysis of Covering Systems, Primality, and Distributed Computational Number Theory

The intersection of abstract Diophantine number theory and large-scale computational mathematics has produced some of the most rigorous and collaborative problem-solving efforts in modern scientific history. At the center of this nexus lies the Sierpiński problem, a profound question that challenges mathematicians to determine the smallest odd natural number $k$ for which the expression $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ never yields a prime number for any positive integer $n$. Such numbers, known formally as Sierpiński numbers, represent a striking anomaly in the asymptotic distribution of primes, guaranteeing an infinite sequence of composite integers.

This comprehensive report explores the mathematical properties of Sierpiński numbers, the life and theoretical contributions of their discoverer Wacław Sierpiński, the foundational proof mechanisms involving cyclotomic covering sets, and the ongoing, decades-long distributed computing efforts—most notably the "Seventeen or Bust" initiative—that seek to resolve the Sierpiński problem and its associated mathematical variants.

Historical Context: The Life and Legacy of Wacław Sierpiński

To fully grasp the significance of Sierpiński numbers, it is essential to examine the historical and intellectual environment of their namesake, Wacław Franciszek Sierpiński (1882–1969). An eminent Polish mathematician, Sierpiński made outstanding and foundational contributions to set theory, point set topology, the theory of functions of a real variable, and number theory [cite: 1, 2, 3].

Born in Warsaw during the Russian Empire's occupation of Poland, Sierpiński’s early education was severely constrained by the systematic suppression of Polish culture [cite: 4, 5]. Following sweeping educational mandates implemented between 1869 and 1874, the Russian authorities forced all secondary schools and universities in the territory to operate entirely in the Russian language [cite: 3, 6]. The implicit geopolitical aim was to suppress Polish intellectual advancement; however, this hostile environment inadvertently forged Sierpiński's resilience and fierce intellectual independence [cite: 5].

Despite these formidable barriers, Sierpiński enrolled in the Department of Mathematics and Physics at the Czar's University (the official, Russian-controlled iteration of the University of Warsaw) in 1899 [cite: 1, 7]. His prodigious talent in number theory was recognized almost immediately. In 1903, the department announced a competition for an essay on the number theory contributions of the distinguished Russian mathematician Georgy Voronoy [cite: 3]. Sierpiński submitted a dissertation that won the university's gold medal in 1904 [cite: 1, 7].

His prize-winning work significantly advanced the famous Gauss circle problem. Specifically, if $R(r)$ denotes the number of integer lattice points $(m, n)$ contained within a circle of radius $r$ centered at the origin, there exists a constant $C$ and a number $k$ such that the error term is bounded by $|R(r) - \pi r^2| < C r^k$ [cite: 1, 7]. Carl Friedrich Gauss had originally proved in 1837 that the minimal value $d$ for $k$ is $d \le 1$. Sierpiński's major contribution was proving that this inequality could be tightened to $d \le 2/3$ [cite: 1, 7]. In 1913, the prominent German mathematician Edmund Landau shortened Sierpiński's proof, publicly describing the underlying mathematics as exceptionally profound [cite: 1, 7].

Despite his academic triumph, Sierpiński's Polish nationalism led him to withdraw his gold-medal essay from the university's Russian-language Izvestia journal, choosing instead to publish it years later in a Polish mathematical magazine [cite: 7]. Following his graduation in 1904, his academic journey pivoted toward set theory and topology. He became deeply fascinated by the continuum hypothesis, the axiom of choice, and fractal curves, eventually introducing geometric concepts that bear his name, such as the Sierpiński triangle (or gasket), the Sierpiński carpet, and the Sierpiński space-filling curve [cite: 4]. He was also the first to provide a concrete example of an absolutely normal number in 1916—a number whose digits occur with equal asymptotic frequency in any given base [cite: 6].

During World War II, Sierpiński courageously continued his academic work within the "Underground Warsaw University" while officially employed as a municipal clerk, smuggling his mathematical papers out of occupied Poland to be published in Italy [cite: 1]. However, his enduring fascination with the structural properties of integers eventually led his focus back to pure number theory. In 1960, utilizing advanced techniques in modular congruences, Sierpiński published a seminal proof establishing the existence of the numbers that now bear his name [cite: 8, 9, 10].

Mathematical Foundations and Polignac's Conjecture

The expression $k \cdot 2^n + 1$, where $k$ is an odd positive integer and $n$ is a positive integer, generates a specific class of integers. When the exponentiated term overtakes the multiplier (specifically, when $2^n > k$), the resulting integer is known as a Proth number, named after the 19th-century French mathematician François Proth [cite: 1, 3]. Proth numbers are highly significant in computational number theory because their primality can be tested with exceptional algorithmic efficiency using Proth's theorem, circumventing the need for exhaustive trial division [cite: 1, 11].

A Sierpiński number is defined specifically as an odd natural number $k$ such that the Proth expression $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ is composite for every integer $n \ge 1$ [cite: 10, 12]. For the vast majority of $k$ values, evaluating successive values of $n$ quickly yields a prime number. For instance, if $k = 3$, setting $n = 2$ produces $3 \cdot 2^2 + 1 = 13$, which is prime; thus, 3 is immediately disqualified as a Sierpiński number [cite: 2, 3]. The core mathematical anomaly of a Sierpiński number is that its sequence completely evades the infinitely many prime numbers scattered throughout the integers.

The conceptual architecture of Sierpiński's 1960 proof relies heavily on addressing a flawed hypothesis known as Polignac's conjecture. In 1849, the French mathematician Alphonse de Polignac conjectured that every odd integer greater than 1 could be expressed as the sum of a prime number and a power of two (i.e., $p + 2^k$) [cite: 13, 14]. While Leonhard Euler had previously noted isolated counterexamples like 127 and 959, Polignac's conjecture remained a subject of intense debate until 1950 [cite: 14].

In 1950, the prolific Hungarian mathematician Paul Erdős and the Dutch mathematician J. G. van der Corput independently disproved Polignac's conjecture with rigorous finality [cite: 15]. Erdős proved that there exists an infinite arithmetic progression of odd numbers that cannot under any circumstances be represented as a sum of a prime and a power of two [cite: 9]. To achieve this, Erdős utilized a mathematical construct known as a "covering set" (or covering system) of congruences [cite: 13]. Erdős observed that by carefully selecting a finite set of prime numbers—specifically $\{3, 5, 7, 13, 17, 241\}$—one could create a modular interlocking system where every possible exponent $n$ aligns with a modulus that forces the resulting expression to be divisible by at least one of those selected primes [cite: 9, 16].

Sierpiński’s 1960 Proof and the Mechanics of Covering Sets

Building directly upon Erdős's foundational concept of covering systems, Sierpiński proved his eponymous theorem: there exist infinitely many odd positive integers $k$ such that $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ is strictly composite for all positive integers $n$ [cite: 17].

The proof mechanism relies on a finite covering set of congruences. A covering set $P = \{p_1, p_2, \dots, p_m\}$ is a finite set of prime numbers constructed so that for every positive integer $n$, the expression $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ is divisible by at least one $p_i \in P$ [cite: 18, 19]. Sierpiński constructed a precise covering of exponents $n$ using the moduli $\{2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64\}$. This specific covering ensures that every integer $n$ satisfies at least one modular condition, triggering divisibility by a corresponding prime.

The mechanics of Sierpiński’s 1960 proof can be modeled by mapping the exponent conditions to their required prime divisors and the resulting congruences for $k$.

Index | Modulus for n | Exponent Congruence | Prime Divisor (p_i) | Required Congruence for k
1 | 2 | n = 1 mod 2 | 3 | k = 1 mod 3
2 | 4 | n = 2 mod 4 | 5 | k = 1 mod 5
3 | 8 | n = 4 mod 8 | 17 | k = 1 mod 17
4 | 16 | n = 8 mod 16 | 257 | k = 1 mod 257
5 | 32 | n = 16 mod 32 | 65537 | k = 1 mod 65537
6 | 64 | n = 32 mod 64 | 641 | k = 1 mod 641
7 | 64 | n = 0 mod 64 | 6700417 | k = -1 mod 6700417

Table 1: The covering system utilized in Wacław Sierpiński's 1960 proof [cite: 18].

The primes $\{3, 5, 17, 257, 641, 65537, 6700417\}$ form the covering set $C$ [cite: 1]. This specific set is highly delicate and demonstrates a deep structural connectivity to Fermat numbers. It functions explicitly because the fifth Fermat number, $F_5 = 2^{32} + 1$, factors cleanly into two distinct prime divisors: 641 and 6,700,417 [cite: 1].

By invoking the Chinese Remainder Theorem, Sierpiński proved that there exists a simultaneous solution $k$ to all the modular constraints listed in Table 1 [cite: 1]. Furthermore, because the prime moduli are pairwise coprime, the solutions for $k$ repeat periodically, forming an infinite arithmetic progression [cite: 1]. Any $k$ falling within this progression ensures that $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ is divisible by at least one prime in the covering set $C$ for any conceivable $n$, thus guaranteeing absolute compositeness [cite: 17, 19]. Solving this system of congruences yields the smallest $k$ native to Sierpiński's original method—an unwieldy 20-digit integer: 15,511,380,746,462,593,381 [cite: 17, 20].

John Selfridge and the Formulation of the Sierpiński Problem

While Sierpiński brilliantly proved the existence of these infinite progressions, he did not attempt to hunt for the absolute smallest example of such a number. In 1962, the American mathematician John Selfridge—renowned for his work on Fermat numbers, primality testing, and his proof alongside Erdős that the product of consecutive integers is never a power—addressed this gap [cite: 8, 21].

Selfridge discovered a far more elegant and numerically compact covering set [cite: 1, 22]. He demonstrated that $k = 78557$ is a Sierpiński number by employing a covering set consisting of only seven small primes: $\{3, 5, 7, 13, 19, 37, 73\}$ [cite: 3, 8]. For $k = 78557$, the covering functions beautifully over the modulus 36 [cite: 19]. Selfridge proved that every number of the form $78557 \cdot 2^n + 1$ is perfectly divisible by at least one prime in this covering set, thereby ensuring that no prime number can ever be generated by the sequence [cite: 8, 18, 21].

A critical nuance in the definition of a Sierpiński number is the strict requirement that $k$ must be an odd integer [cite: 8]. If this constraint were removed, the number $k = 65536$ ($2^{16}$) would likely be a smaller candidate [cite: 23]. For $k = 65536$, the expression becomes $2^{16} \cdot 2^n + 1 = 2^{n+16} + 1$ [cite: 24]. This sequence only yields primes if $n+16$ is a power of 2, generating Fermat numbers. Since it is widely believed (though unproven) that $2^{16} + 1$ is the largest prime Fermat number, $65536 \cdot 2^n + 1$ would technically be composite for all $n > 0$ [cite: 23, 25]. To avoid entangling the Sierpiński problem with the unproven finiteness of Fermat primes, the definition strictly excludes even numbers, solidifying 78,557 as the premier candidate [cite: 3, 24].

Following his discovery, Selfridge engaged in private correspondence with Paul Erdős, conjecturing that 78,557 was not merely a Sierpiński number, but the absolute smallest possible Sierpiński number [cite: 8, 26]. Determining the mathematical truth of this conjecture is known as the Sierpiński Problem [cite: 8, 10].

Algebraic Compositeness: Aurifeuillean Factorizations

While covering sets represent the dominant mathematical paradigm for proving that a number is a Sierpiński number, they are not the sole mechanism. In 1995, the mathematician A. S. Izotov demonstrated that certain fourth powers could be proven to be Sierpiński numbers without establishing a comprehensive covering set for all possible values of $n$ [cite: 8, 27].

Izotov's proof relied on an advanced algebraic identity known as Aurifeuillean factorization [cite: 1]. He showed that expressions of the form $t^4 \cdot 2^{4m+2} + 1$ can be factored purely algebraically, independent of modular prime divisibility:

$$t^4 \cdot 2^{4m+2} + 1 = (t^2 \cdot 2^{2m+1} + t \cdot 2^{m+1} + 1) \cdot (t^2 \cdot 2^{2m+1} - t \cdot 2^{m+1} + 1)$$ [cite: 1, 28].

Because this polynomial factorization always splits the expression into two distinct integers strictly greater than 1, it proves that any exponent of the form $n \equiv 2 \pmod 4$ natively gives rise to a composite number [cite: 8]. Therefore, a covering set is only required to eliminate the remaining exponent classes: $n \equiv 0, 1, \text{ and } 3 \pmod 4$ [cite: 8]. Izotov's technique provides a profound second-order insight: the compositeness of the $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ sequence can arise from inherent algebraic geometry and polynomial expansion, rather than relying solely on the cyclical, interlocking gears of prime modular arithmetic.

The Distributed Computation Era: Solving the Sierpiński Problem

To rigorously prove Selfridge's conjecture that 78,557 is indeed the smallest Sierpiński number, mathematicians face a daunting task of exhaustive elimination. They must prove that every single odd integer $k < 78557$ is not a Sierpiński number [cite: 3, 8]. A candidate $k$ is successfully eliminated if and only if a positive integer $n$ can be found such that $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ is prime [cite: 8].

Pre-Internet Computational Efforts

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, testing these numbers was an arduous process constrained by the hardware limitations of early academic mainframes. By 1983, computational searches had determined that there were 70 values of $k < 78557$ for which no prime had been found for exponents $n \le 8000$ [cite: 10, 16]. Over the subsequent 14 years, targeted algorithmic testing slowly eliminated 48 of those multipliers [cite: 10].

A major paradigm shift occurred in August 1997 with the introduction of the Proth.exe software developed by Yves Gallot [cite: 2]. This program heavily optimized Proth's theorem for standard consumer personal computers, allowing amateur mathematicians to participate in the search. Utilizing Proth.exe, a decentralized group of enthusiasts (including Lew Baxter, Marc Thibeault, and Janusz Szmidt) systematically eliminated more candidates [cite: 22]. By the end of 2001, the list of unsolved multipliers below 78,557 had been reduced to exactly 17 [cite: 1, 10].

The "Seventeen or Bust" Project (2002–2016)

Recognizing that the exponent $n$ required to find a prime for the remaining 17 values was reaching into the hundreds of thousands—necessitating vast, decentralized amounts of computational power—two college undergraduates, Louis Helm and David Norris, along with Michael Garrison, conceived the distributed computing project "Seventeen or Bust" in March 2002 [cite: 16, 29]. The project's public client was released on April 1, 2002, allowing volunteers worldwide to donate their idle CPU cycles to test specific $k$ and $n$ pairings [cite: 29, 30].

The project was immensely successful and heralded the golden era of crowdsourced mathematics. Within its first year, it eliminated five $k$ values. Over its 14-year lifespan as an independent project, Seventeen or Bust found massive primes that eliminated 11 of the 17 candidates [cite: 16]. The primes discovered were mathematically significant; for instance, the prime found for $k = 19249$ by Konstantin Agafonov in 2007 contained nearly 4 million digits, making it the largest known non-Mersenne prime at the time [cite: 2, 30].

In 2010, the global volunteer platform PrimeGrid officially partnered with Seventeen or Bust to accelerate the search using the BOINC (Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing) infrastructure [cite: 31, 32]. Unfortunately, in April 2016, the Seventeen or Bust project suffered a catastrophic datacenter failure resulting in the loss of critical un-backed-up data [cite: 10, 33]. Consequently, PrimeGrid assumed full administration of the project and absorbed its mission [cite: 16, 29, 33].

Shortly after this transition, PrimeGrid facilitated the discovery of a 12th prime, eliminating $k = 10223$. Discovered by Szabolcs Péter of Hungary on October 31, 2016, the prime $10223 \cdot 2^{31172165} + 1$ contains a staggering 9,383,761 decimal digits [cite: 1, 16, 33]. The calculation required nearly 9 days of continuous processing on an Intel i7 CPU [cite: 16, 33]. At the time of its discovery, it was the 7th largest known prime overall, the largest known Proth prime, and the largest known Colbert number [cite: 16, 33, 34].

k Value | Exponent (n) | Decimal Digits | Date Discovered | Discoverer
46157 | 698207 | 210186 | Nov 27, 2002 | Stephen Gibson
65567 | 1013803 | 305190 | Dec 2, 2002 | James Burt
44131 | 995972 | 299823 | Dec 5, 2002 | Anonymous
69109 | 1157446 | 348431 | Dec 6, 2002 | Sean DiMichele
54767 | 1337287 | 402569 | Dec 23, 2002 | Peter Coels
5359 | 5054502 | 1521561 | Dec 6, 2003 | Randy Sundquist
28433 | 7830457 | 2357207 | Dec 30, 2004 | Team Prime Rib
27653 | 9167433 | 2759677 | Jun 8, 2005 | Derek Gordon
4847 | 3321063 | 999744 | Oct 15, 2005 | Richard Hassler
19249 | 13018586 | 3918990 | Mar 26, 2007 | Konstantin Agafonov
33661 | 7031232 | 2116617 | Oct 17, 2007 | Sturle Sunde
10223 | 31172165 | 9383761 | Oct 31, 2016 | Szabolcs Péter

Table 2: The 12 mega-primes discovered by the Seventeen or Bust and PrimeGrid collaborations, successfully eliminating their respective $k$ values from the Sierpiński problem [cite: 31, 32].

Current Status: "Five or Bust"

As of the mid-2020s, decades of concerted computational effort have distilled the original Sierpiński problem down to exactly five remaining unproven multipliers [cite: 8, 35]. While the project name could accurately be updated to "Five or Bust," PrimeGrid retains the original moniker for historical continuity [cite: 29, 35].

To definitively prove that 78,557 is the smallest Sierpiński number, a prime must be found for each of the following $k$ values:

Remaining Candidates for the Sierpinski Problem
k = 21181
k = 22699
k = 24737
k = 55459
k = 67607

Table 3: The five remaining odd multipliers below 78,557 [cite: 8, 10, 35].

Computational Infrastructure and Hardware Dynamics

The search continues under PrimeGrid utilizing a global network of hundreds of thousands of volunteers, supplying thousands of TeraFLOPS of processing power to test exceedingly large exponents [cite: 31]. The search space has long surpassed $n = 36420000$, venturing into algorithmic territory where any prime discovered will be well over 10 million decimal digits long [cite: 10, 30].

The underlying mathematics of the search relies on Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithms to multiply ultra-large integers efficiently. Applications like LLR (Lucas-Lehmer-Riesel), PRST, and Genefer are heavily optimized for both CPU and GPU execution [cite: 16, 35, 36]. The workflow is strictly bifurcated into two phases: sieving and primality testing. Sieving acts as a highly efficient filter, removing candidate exponents that have small algebraic factors. However, the deeper the sieve goes, the slower the rate of candidate removal becomes, eventually hitting an "optimal depth" where sieving takes just as much computational time as running a full primality test [cite: 28, 37].

Because computing large $n$ values requires intense, uninterrupted CPU time, multithreading is frequently employed. A single task running on one CPU core can take upwards of two to four weeks on older machines, making the tuning of parameters like max cpus critical for participants [cite: 35]. Interestingly, deep hardware analysis indicates that hyperthreading (or SMT) frequently decreases overall throughput for LLR primality testing. This negative performance scaling occurs because FFT calculations rely heavily on cache continuity and memory bandwidth rather than instruction pipeline multiplexing, prompting project organizers to advise volunteers to disable hyperthreading for LLR tasks [cite: 35, 38].

PrimeGrid also conducts rigorous "double checking" of legacy data. Because Seventeen or Bust suffered data loss, PrimeGrid systematically retests specific ranges of $n$ (comparing mathematical residues) to ensure no primes were missed due to hardware calculation errors or incomplete validation [cite: 30, 39, 40]. Two of the original twelve primes (for $k = 4847$ and $k = 33661$) were discovered exclusively because volunteers were double-checking previously computed ranges, highlighting the necessity of cryptographic-level verification in these searches [cite: 29, 39].

Generalizations and Extended Number Theory Problems

The theoretical proofs and computational methodologies developed for the Sierpiński problem have laid the groundwork for an entire taxonomy of associated mathematical conjectures. By altering the parameters, constraints, or signs of the $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ sequence, number theorists have generated a suite of derivative problems.

The Prime Sierpiński Problem

In 1976, Nathan Mendelsohn proved that $k = 271129$ is a Sierpiński number, utilizing the covering set $\{3, 5, 7, 13, 17, 241\}$ [cite: 1, 2]. Because 271,129 is itself a prime number, this discovery initiated the Prime Sierpiński Problem: determining the smallest Sierpiński number that is also a prime [cite: 8, 22].

To establish 271,129 as the smallest prime Sierpiński number, all prime integers less than 271,129 must be tested. Currently, there are nine prime multipliers for which no prime of the form $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ has been found: 22699, 67607, 79309, 79817, 152267, 156511, 222113, 225931, and 237019 [cite: 8, 22]. Notably, the first two values (22,699 and 67,607) are less than 78,557, meaning they are shared candidates with the original Seventeen or Bust project [cite: 10, 28]. PrimeGrid operates the "Prime Sierpinski Problem" (PSP) subproject specifically to eliminate these remaining values [cite: 3, 8, 28].

The Extended Sierpiński Problem

Assuming Selfridge's conjecture holds and 78,557 is the absolute smallest Sierpiński number, and assuming Mendelsohn's 271,129 is the smallest prime Sierpiński number, a structural gap exists. The Extended Sierpiński Problem asks: Is 271,129 the second smallest Sierpiński number overall? [cite: 8, 22].

Answering this requires searching the interval $78557 < k < 271129$ for any composite Sierpiński numbers [cite: 8, 22]. Eliminating the candidates in this range requires finding a prime for each composite $k$. As of the most recent computational updates, 11 composite multipliers remain in this interval: 21181, 24737, 55459, 91549, 131179, 163187, 200749, 209611, 227723, 229673, and 238411 [cite: 22]. (Again, 21181, 24737, and 55459 are shared with the original Five or Bust list, demonstrating the interwoven nature of these conjectures [cite: 22].)

Riesel Numbers and Dual Compositeness

The algebraic inverse of the Sierpiński function is the sequence $k \cdot 2^n - 1$. An odd natural number $k$ for which this expression is composite for all positive integers $n$ is known as a Riesel number [cite: 13, 15]. In 1956—four years prior to Sierpiński's proof—the Swedish mathematician Hans Riesel proved the existence of such numbers and demonstrated that $k = 509203$ is a Riesel number [cite: 15, 41].

Like Sierpiński numbers, Riesel numbers rely heavily on covering systems. However, the required primes often differ significantly due to the $-1$ altering the cyclotomic properties and algebraic factorization geometry [cite: 13, 19]. Unlike the $+1$ form, which allows flexible use of small primes like 5 and 7, Riesel coverings often require more complex congruences to avoid overlapping failures [cite: 8]. The quest to prove 509,203 is the absolute smallest Riesel number continues through PrimeGrid's "The Riesel Problem" subproject [cite: 6, 11].

Brier Numbers: Simultaneously Sierpiński and Riesel

A profound synthesis of these two sequences was theorized by Eric Brier, who asked whether an integer could be simultaneously a Sierpiński number and a Riesel number [cite: 8, 23, 42]. Such an integer, now known as a Brier number, must satisfy the condition that both $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ and $k \cdot 2^n - 1$ are composite for all positive integers $n$ [cite: 8, 17, 43].

Because a Brier number must satisfy the congruences of two independent covering sets simultaneously, the values of $k$ escalate dramatically. The smallest known Brier number, discovered by Christophe Clavier in 2013, is a 41-digit behemoth: 3,316,923,598,096,294,713,661 [cite: 1, 19, 24]. By leveraging a theorem of D. Shiu on the distribution of primes in arithmetic progressions, it has been mathematically proven that for every positive integer $r$, there exist $r$ consecutive primes that are also Brier numbers, hinting at the deeply patterned, yet elusive, nature of prime distributions [cite: 23, 42]. A 2021 Dartmouth College study by Pomerance et al. further proved that infinitely many numbers are simultaneously Sierpiński, Riesel, and Carmichael numbers, creating an intersection of pseudo-primality and forced compositeness [cite: 1].

Base Extensions, Repdigits, and the First Kind

While the standard definition operates in Base 2, the mathematics generalizes readily to any integer Base $b \ge 2$, where one searches for $k$ such that $k \cdot b^n + 1$ is composite for all $n$ [cite: 25, 44]. PrimeGrid operates projects like the Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5 problem to eliminate candidates where $b=5$ [cite: 6, 44]. In 2025, PrimeGrid successfully eliminated $k = 67612$ in Base 5 by discovering a 3.8-million-digit prime (which took only 1 hour and 24 minutes of PRP testing on an AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX), bringing the remaining Base 5 candidates down to 27 [cite: 6, 36].

Furthermore, Sierpiński numbers of the first kind refer to primes of the form $k^k + 1$. Sierpiński himself proved that for $k^k + 1$ to be prime for any $k>1$, $k$ must take the highly restrictive form $2^{2^j}$, tying the sequence directly back to Fermat numbers [cite: 45, 46]. Mathematical investigations have also extended to detecting Sierpiński and Riesel numbers among restrictive integer subsets, such as Fibonacci sequences, Lucas numbers, and repdigits (numbers consisting solely of a single repeated digit in a given base) [cite: 15, 47].

Broader Implications and Conjecture Outlook

The quest to resolve the Sierpiński problem acts as a crucible for both pure mathematical theory and applied computer science. At the theoretical level, the existence of Sierpiński numbers directly links to Paul Erdős's combinatorial number theory. Erdős conjectured that for any Sierpiński number $k$, the smallest prime divisor of $k \cdot 2^n + 1$ must be bounded as $n$ approaches infinity [cite: 15, 27]. If this is proven true, it solidifies the hypothesis that all Sierpiński numbers are strictly the product of covering systems, ruling out any undiscovered algebraic anomalies that might cause infinite compositeness without a finite, periodic covering set [cite: 13, 27].

At the applied level, the search drives massive innovations in high-performance computing (HPC). The algorithms used by PrimeGrid to multiply integers spanning millions of digits—relying on discrete Fourier transforms and advanced memory bandwidth management—routinely push the physical boundaries of hardware stability [cite: 31, 35]. The massive prime numbers discovered in these searches are frequently utilized to stress-test modern CPU and GPU architectures, successfully identifying microscopic, silicon-level calculation errors before those processors are deployed in commercial, scientific, or cryptographic environments.

Conclusion

The Sierpiński problem stands as a towering testament to the enduring complexity of prime number distribution. What began in 1960 as a brilliant theoretical proof utilizing interlocking covering sets of prime congruences has evolved into one of the largest, most sustained distributed computing efforts in human history.

John Selfridge’s 1962 discovery of $k = 78557$ established the absolute baseline, and despite decades of aggressive computational searching by thousands of global volunteers, his conjecture that it is the smallest Sierpiński number remains flawlessly intact. The field has systematically stripped away candidates, transforming the original "Seventeen or Bust" initiative into the current "Five or Bust" reality.

As algorithmic efficiency improves and global computational power scales, the mathematical community steadily marches toward a definitive resolution of the five remaining candidates: 21181, 22699, 24737, 55459, and 67607. Whether a prime is eventually found for each, finally proving Selfridge right, or whether one of these five numbers stubbornly remains composite for all $n$, thereby rewriting number theory textbooks, the journey itself has fundamentally advanced our understanding of prime dynamics, modular coverings, and the very limits of computational mathematics.

References

  • [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpi%C5%84ski_number
  • [2] http://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=13544
  • [3] https://primegrid.fandom.com/wiki/Extended_Sierpinski_Problem
  • [4] https://www.primegrid.com/
  • [5] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=972
  • [6] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=1647
  • [7] http://www.prothsearch.com/sierp.html
  • [8] https://primegrid.fandom.com/wiki/Prime_Sierpinski_Problem
  • [10] https://t5k.org/glossary/page.php?sort=SierpinskiNumber
  • [11] https://primegrid.fandom.com/wiki/Seventeen_or_Bust
  • [12] https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.07376
  • [13] https://math.colgate.edu/~integers/aa12/aa12.pdf
  • [14] https://math.dartmouth.edu/~carlp/BFLPST_AMS121001.pdf
  • [15] https://www.fq.math.ca/Papers1/49-4/BaczkowskiFasorantiFinch.pdf
  • [16] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=1647
  • [18] http://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=13544
  • [19] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=1750
  • [20] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=972
  • [21] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=1538
  • [22] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=9614
  • [23] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=8360
  • [24] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=13913
  • [27] https://grokipedia.com/page/primegrid
  • [28] https://grokipedia.com/page/Safe_and_Sophie_Germain_primes
  • [30] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=13913
  • [33] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=9614
  • [35] https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/journals/JIS/VOL10/Jones/jones67.pdf
  • [37] https://math.dartmouth.edu/~carlp/BFLPST_AMS121001.pdf
  • [38] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpi%C5%84ski_number
  • [39] https://grokipedia.com/page/covering_set
  • [40] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Selfridge
  • [41] https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/37744
  • [46] https://boincsynergy.ca/wiki/PrimeGrid
  • [47] https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/journals/JIS/VOL10/Jones/jones67.pdf
  • [48] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpi%C5%84ski_number
  • [49] https://primegrid.fandom.com/wiki/Seventeen_or_Bust
  • [50] http://www.prothsearch.com/sierp.html
  • [51] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=1647
  • [53] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=972
  • [54] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=8360
  • [55] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=7767
  • [61] https://grokipedia.com/page/primegrid
  • [62] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=13913
  • [63] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=9614
  • [64] http://www.primegrid.com/old_news.php
  • [66] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=1538
  • [67] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=9614
  • [71] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=1538
  • [72] http://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=1304&nowrap=true
  • [78] https://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/whats-happening/articles/how-do-you-solve-problem-sierpinski
  • [79] http://www.primegrid.com/old_news.php
  • [81] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=7116
  • [82] Unknown Source / Custom Execution
  • [84] https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Sierpinski/
  • [86] https://ns1.almerja.com/more.php?idm=80076
  • [89] https://www.primepuzzles.net/problems/prob_049.htm
  • [92] https://poetcommons.whittier.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=math
  • [94] http://www.prothsearch.com/sierp.html
  • [96] https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/37744
  • [98] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=9614
  • [103] http://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=7356
  • [104] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=8513&nowrap=true&menu=top
  • [108] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=9614
  • [109] https://boincsynergy.ca/wiki/PrimeGrid
  • [111] https://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=1647
  • [113] https://math.colgate.edu/~integers/aa12/aa12.pdf
  • [116] https://poetcommons.whittier.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=math
  • [117] https://people.math.sc.edu/filaseta/papers/SierpinskiEtCoPap5.pdf
  • [118] https://oeis.org/A121270
  • [119] https://oeis.org/A121270/internal
  • [125] https://scispace.com/pdf/the-mathematics-of-paul-erdos-i-25xah963v8.pdf
  • [126] https://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~kyodo/kokyuroku/contents/pdf/1639-08.pdf
  • [128] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riesel_number
  • [129] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256775044_On_Cullen_numbers_which_are_both_Riesel_and_Sierpinski_numbers
  • [131] https://people.math.sc.edu/filaseta/ConsecutiveWDDBrierNumbers.pdf
  • [132] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.08898

Tuesday, 16 June 2026

P-Composite Numbers

Let's create a class of positive integers called \(p\)-composite integers where \(p\) stands for any prime number. For a number to be so-called, it must satisfy the following criteria:

  • it must be composite
  • it's sum of digits must equal \(p\)
  • \(p\) must be a divisor of the number
Let's take 1679 as an example. It's sum of digits is 23 and 23 divides it to give 73. Thus 1679 can be termed a 23-composite number. The number of 23-composite numbers in the range up to 40000 is 94. The numbers are:

23-composite


1679, 1886, 3749, 3956, 4577, 4784, 4991, 5198, 5819, 6647, 6854, 7268, 7475, 7682, 8096, 8717, 8924, 9338, 9545, 9752, 10787, 10994, 12857, 13478, 13685, 13892, 14099, 14927, 15548, 15755, 15962, 16169, 16376, 16583, 16790, 17618, 17825, 18239, 18446, 18653, 18860, 19067, 19274, 19481, 21758, 21965, 22379, 22586, 22793, 23828, 24449, 24656, 24863, 25277, 25484, 25691, 26519, 26726, 26933, 27347, 27554, 27761, 28175, 28382, 29417, 29624, 29831, 30659, 30866, 31487, 31694, 32729, 32936, 33557, 33764, 33971, 34178, 34385, 34592, 35627, 35834, 36248, 36455, 36662, 37076, 37283, 37490, 37904, 38318, 38525, 38732, 39146, 39353, 39560

Let's work our way up the primes from 2.

2-composite


20, 110, 200, 1010, 1100, 2000, 10010, 10100, 11000, 20000

3-composite


12, 21, 30, 102, 111, 120, 201, 210, 300, 1002, 1011, 1020, 1101, 1110, 1200, 2001, 2010, 2100, 3000, 10002, 10011, 10020, 10101, 10110, 10200, 11001, 11010, 11100, 12000, 20001, 20010, 20100, 21000, 30000

5-composite


50, 140, 230, 320, 410, 500, 1040, 1130, 1220, 1310, 1400, 2030, 2120, 2210, 2300, 3020, 3110, 3200, 4010, 4100, 5000, 10040, 10130, 10220, 10310, 10400, 11030, 11120, 11210, 11300, 12020, 12110, 12200, 13010, 13100, 14000, 20030, 20120, 20210, 20300, 21020, 21110, 21200, 22010, 22100, 23000, 30020, 30110, 30200, 31010, 31100, 32000

7-composite


70, 133, 322, 511, 700, 1015, 1141, 1204, 1330, 2023, 2212, 2401, 3031, 3220, 4102, 5110, 7000, 10024, 10150, 10213, 10402, 11032, 11221, 11410, 12040, 12103, 13111, 13300, 15001, 20041, 20104, 20230, 21112, 21301, 22120, 23002, 24010, 30121, 30310, 31003, 32011, 32200

11-composite


209, 308, 407, 506, 605, 704, 803, 902, 2090, 3080, 4070, 5060, 6050, 7040, 8030, 9020, 10109, 10208, 10307, 10406, 10505, 10604, 10703, 10802, 10901, 20009, 20108, 20207, 20306, 20405, 20504, 20603, 20702, 20801, 20900, 30008, 30107, 30206, 30305, 30404, 30503, 30602, 30701, 30800

13-composite


247, 364, 481, 715, 832, 1066, 1183, 1417, 1534, 1651, 2119, 2236, 2353, 2470, 2704, 2821, 3055, 3172, 3406, 3523, 3640, 4108, 4225, 4342, 4810, 5044, 5161, 5512, 6214, 6331, 7033, 7150, 7501, 8203, 8320, 9022, 10075, 10192, 10309, 10426, 10543, 10660, 11128, 11245, 11362, 11713, 11830, 12064, 12181, 12415, 12532, 13117, 13234, 13351, 13702, 14053, 14170, 14404, 14521, 15106, 15223, 15340, 16042, 16510, 17212, 18031, 19201, 20137, 20254, 20371, 20605, 20722, 21073, 21190, 21307, 21424, 21541, 22009, 22126, 22243, 22360, 22711, 23062, 23413, 23530, 24115, 24232, 24700, 25051, 25402, 26104, 26221, 27040, 28210, 30082, 30316, 30433, 30550, 30901, 31018, 31135, 31252, 31603, 31720, 32071, 32305, 32422, 33007, 33124, 33241, 34060, 34411, 35113, 35230, 36400, 37102

17-composite


476, 629, 782, 935, 1088, 1394, 1547, 1853, 2159, 2465, 2618, 2771, 2924, 3077, 3383, 3536, 3842, 4148, 4454, 4607, 4760, 4913, 5066, 5219, 5372, 5525, 5831, 6137, 6290, 6443, 6902, 7055, 7208, 7361, 7514, 7820, 8126, 8432, 9044, 9350, 9503, 10268, 10574, 10727, 10880, 11186, 11339, 11492, 11645, 11951, 12257, 12563, 12716, 13175, 13328, 13481, 13634, 13940, 14093, 14246, 14552, 14705, 15164, 15317, 15470, 15623, 16082, 16235, 16541, 17153, 17306, 17612, 18071, 18224, 18530, 19142, 19601, 20366, 20519, 20672, 20825, 21284, 21437, 21590, 21743, 22049, 22355, 22508, 22661, 22814, 23273, 23426, 23732, 24038, 24191, 24344, 24650, 24803, 25109, 25262, 25415, 25721, 26027, 26180, 26333, 27251, 27404, 27710, 28016, 28322, 29240, 30158, 30464, 30617, 30770, 30923, 31076, 31229, 31382, 31535, 31841, 32147, 32453, 32606, 32912, 33065, 33218, 33371, 33524, 33830, 34136, 34442, 34901, 35054, 35207, 35360, 35513, 36125, 36431, 37043, 37502, 38114, 38420, 39032

19-composite


874, 1387, 1558, 1729, 2584, 2755, 2926, 3097, 3268, 3439, 3781, 3952, 4294, 4465, 4636, 4807, 5149, 5491, 5662, 5833, 6175, 6346, 6517, 7372, 7543, 7714, 8056, 8227, 8740, 8911, 9082, 9253, 9424, 10279, 10792, 10963, 11476, 11647, 11818, 12673, 12844, 13186, 13357, 13528, 13870, 14383, 14554, 14725, 15067, 15238, 15409, 15580, 15751, 15922, 16093, 16264, 16435, 16606, 17119, 17290, 17461, 17632, 17803, 18145, 18316, 19171, 19342, 19513, 20197, 20368, 20539, 20881, 21394, 21565, 21736, 21907, 22078, 22249, 22591, 22762, 22933, 23275, 23446, 23617, 24472, 24643, 24814, 25156, 25327, 25840, 26182, 26353, 26524, 27037, 27208, 27550, 27721, 28063, 28234, 28405, 29260, 29431, 29602, 30286, 30457, 30628, 30970, 31483, 31654, 31825, 32167, 32338, 32509, 32680, 32851, 33193, 33364, 33535, 33706, 34048, 34219, 34390, 34561, 34732, 34903, 35074, 35245, 35416, 36271, 36442, 36613, 37126, 37810, 38152, 38323, 39007, 39520

29-composite


4988, 7598, 7859, 9686, 9947, 15689, 16994, 17777, 18299, 19865, 22997, 25868, 27695, 27956, 28478, 28739, 29783, 33698, 33959, 35786, 36569, 37874, 38396, 38657, 38918, 39179, 39962

31-composite


8959, 9796, 17887, 25699, 25978, 28489, 28768, 29884, 36859, 37696, 37975, 39649, 39928

37-composite


37999, 38998, 39997

41-composite


37999, 38998, 39997

In the range up to 40000, there are no \(p\)-composite numbers for \(p \gt 41\). I've incorporated identification of these \(p\)-composite numbers into my daily number analysis. One of the properties of these numbers is base-independent: the prime \(p\) will divide the number regardless of the number base used. However, the sum of digits of the number being equal to \(p\) is very much base-dependent.

Friday, 12 June 2026

Forming Palindromes from Factors

 In a blog post titled Why Is 313131 An Interesting Number?, I remarked that:

$$ 313131=3 \times 7 \times 13 \times 31 \times 37$$If we rearrange the order of multiplication we get the following:$$ 313131=7 \times 3 \times 13 \times 31 \times 37$$Concatenating these digits we get the number \(73133137\) which is palindromic.

I went on to look at what other numbers in the range between 28000 and 29000 have this property and came up with the table shown below:


The numbers are thus relatively rare, there being only 27 in a range of 1000 numbers. This represents a density of 2.7%. The numbers are listed below:

28072, 28125, 28194, 28224, 28242, 28273, 28308, 28322, 28332, 28416, 28431, 28448, 28585, 28589, 28593, 28601, 28602, 28609, 28620, 28672, 28685, 28692, 28750, 28800, 28812, 28847, 28951

The factors under consideration here are all PRIME factors. What if we allow factors that are not necessarily prime. Take 28200 as an example:$$ \begin{align} 28200 &= 2 \times 5 \times 3 \times 2 \times 235 \times 2 \\ &\rightarrow 25322352 \end{align}$$The resultant number after concatenation of the factors is palindromic. Notice that the factor 235 is NOT prime.

It turns out that palindromes constructed in this way are relatively frequent. In the range between 28100 and 28300 (a range of only 200), the density is 15.4%. The numbers are:

28104, 28105, 28125, 28126, 28128, 28130, 28140, 28143, 28152, 28160, 28161, 28175, 28179, 28180, 28182, 28188, 28194, 28200, 28224, 28230, 28236, 28242, 28251, 28256, 28266, 28273, 28275, 28280, 28288, 28296, 28300

I've set up my multipurpose algorithm to identify such numbers when they pop up in my diurnal age analysis.

Wednesday, 10 June 2026

888 Revisited

In November of 2021, I posted about 888 from a mathematical and non-mathematical perspective. Mathematically, I noted that:

  • 888 is the smallest cube in which each digit occurs exactly three times. The list up to one million of such numbers is (permalink):
888, 56592, 58524, 65577, 70869, 78183, 496941, 512427, 516267, 517461, 557949, 565920, 581421, 585558, 661959, 711828, 713772, 723627, 724983, 733053, 739563, 764472, 781830, 877242, 988458

  • 888 is the only cube in which three digits occur three times. For example, the next number in the previous sequence (56592) has a cube of 181244621426688 but there are four digits that occur three times.

  • 888 the smallest multiple of 24 whose digit sum is 24 and, as well as being divisible by its digit sum, it is divisible by all of its digits.

  • 888 and 24 show up again in the former's membership of OEIS 236661 where 888 counts the number of partitions of 24 that have a standard deviation greater than 2. Permalink.

  • Other properties of 888 include its being a happy, Harshad, Moran, nude, strobogrammatic, modest, congruent, amenable, practical, abundant, pseudoperfect and Zumkeller number (see Numbers Aplenty).

  • The 8's are involved in 888 again thanks to its membership of OEIS A127335.


 A127335

 Numbers that are the sum of 8 successive primes.            
 

 The sequence runs:

77, 98, 124, 150, 180, 210, 240, 270, 304, 340, 372, 408, 442, 474, 510, 546, 582, 620, 660, 696, 732, 768, 802, 846, 888

The eight successive primes in the case of 888 are 97, 101, 103, 107, 109, 113, 127 and 131 with an average of 111. Both 111 and 888 are of course repdigits along with the infamous 666 or number of the beast.

  • 888 arises in the context of aliquot sequences via OEIS A014360:

 
 A014360



Aliquot sequence starting at 552.                                               
 

The sequence begins:

552, 888, 1392, 2328, 3552, 6024, 9096, 13704, 20616, 30984, ...

To quote from Wolfram Alpha:

It has not been proven that all aliquot sequences eventually terminate and become periodic. The smallest number whose fate is not known is 276. There are five such sequences less than 1000, namely 276, 552, 564, 660, and 966, sometimes called the "Lehmer five". 

In this post, I'll revisit 888 but I'll be doing so via 28192, the number associated with my diurnal age today. This number has the interesting property that its square and cube both contain the digit sequence 888:$$ \begin{align} 28192^2 &= 7947\textbf{888}64 \\ 28192^3 &= 22406687653\textbf{888} \end{align} $$There are only four such numbers in the range up to 40000 and they are 3192, 28192, 31920 and 33878. One of these, 31920, is simply a derivative of 3192. Of these four numbers, it is only 28192 that contains three eights when expressed in terms of its prime factors:$$2\textbf{8}192 = 2^5 \times \textbf{88}1$$It could even be written as \(2^2 \times \textbf{8} \times \textbf{88}1 \) so it is very giving in terms of its eightness!

What about other numbers in the range up to 40000 that display three digit repdigits when squared and cubed? Here are the numbers that satisfy:

For repdigit \( \textbf{111}\), there is only one number that satisfies:

  • \(10558^2= \textbf{111}471364 \text{ and } 10558^3 =117691466\textbf{111}2\)
For repdigits \( \textbf{222} \) and \( \textbf{333} \), no numbers satisfy but for repdigit \( \textbf{444}\) we have:

  • \(6962^2 = 48469\textbf{444} \text{ and } 6962^3 = 337\textbf{444}269128\)
  • \(12038^2 = 144913\textbf{444} \text{ and } 12038^3 = 17\textbf{444}68038872\)
  • \(21081^2 = \textbf{4444}08561 \text{ and } 21081^3 = 936857687\textbf{444}1\)
  • \(32538^2 = 1058721\textbf{444} \text{ and } 32538^3 = 3\textbf{444}8678344872\)
  • \(37808^2 = 1429\textbf{444}864 \text{ and } 37808^3 = 540\textbf{444}51418112\)
For repdigit \( \textbf{555} \), again only one number satisfies:
  • \(38152^2 =14\textbf{555}75104 \text{ and } 38152^3 = \textbf{555}33101367808\)
For the famous repdigit \( \textbf{666} \), we have two numbers that satisfy with some extra 6's thrown in for the case of \(30605\):
  • \(17767^2 = 315\textbf{666}289 \text{ and } 17767^3 = 560844295\textbf{666}3\)
  • \(30605^2 = 93\textbf{6666}025 \text{ and }30605^3 = 28\textbf{66666}3695125\)
For the repdigit \( \textbf{777} \), again two numbers satisfy:
  • \( 18924^2 = 35811\textbf{777}6 \text{ and }18924^3= 6\textbf{777}020793024 \)
  • \( 34753^2 =120\textbf{777}1009 \text{ and } 34753^3 = 41973665875\textbf{777} \)
For the repdigit \( \textbf{999} \) we have a bonanza so I'll just list the numbers and show one example:
\( 9997, 9998, 9999, 19998, 19999, 29999, 38729, 39999 \)
  • \(9997^2 = \textbf{999}40009 \text{ and } 9997^3 = \textbf{999}100269973\)

Sunday, 7 June 2026

Self-Fibonacci

Here is an interesting sequence generated by a hidden connection to Fibonacci based on the letter-number association shown in Table 1:


Table 1: source

The sequence is OEIS A129938:


A129938
: "Self-Fibonacci"; a(n) is the sum of the last nine terms. Sequence starts with 6, 9, 2, 15, 14, 1, 3, 3, 9 which are f, i, b, o, n, a, c, c, i if you consider a=1, b=2, c=3, ..., z=26.

The sequence begins 6, 9, 2, 15, 14, 1, 3, 3, 9, 62, 118, 227, 452, 889, 1764, 3527, 7051, 14099, 28189, ...

I only chanced upon this sequence because 28189, my diurnal age today, is a member. I've written about the various connections between numbers and letters in a post titled Days of the Year and Gematria back in August of 2021. The idea behind this sequence reminds me of my own approach described in a blog post titled Consolidating Fibonacci-like Numbers where I considered numbers whose digits following a Fibonacci pattern e.g. 21347:$$21347 \text{ where }2 + 1 =3, 1+3=4,3+4=7$$However, getting back to approach followed in OEIS A129938, an interesting "spin-off" could be that previously unnamed tribonacci sequences could be given memorable names. For example, using Table 1 we could write:$$ \text{ cat } \rightarrow \text{ c, a, t } \rightarrow \text{ 3, 1, 20 }$$and so the "cat" sequence becomes:$$3, 1, 20, 24, 45, 79, \dots$$Similarly we have:$$ \text{ dog } \rightarrow \text{ d, o, g } \rightarrow \text{ 4, 15, 7 }$$ So the "dog" sequence becomes:$$4, 15, 7, 26, 48, 81, \dots$$Silly I know but it would make for an interesting puzzle in Puzzle of the DayThe sequence doesn't have to be tribonacci, it could simply be Fibonacci-like. For example, we could ask why is the sequence 13, 5, 18, 23, 41, 65, ... egocentric? The answer is that:$$13, 5 \rightarrow \text{ m, e } \rightarrow \text{ me }$$Similarly, the sequence could be made of four or more seeds and a puzzle created. For example, we could ask what does this sequence 13, 9, 12, 11, 45, 77, ... and the Milky Way have in common? The answer is that the first four members of the sequence are the seeds to generate the future members of the sequence and we have:$$ 13, 9, 12, 11 \rightarrow \text{ m, i, l, k } \rightarrow \text{ milk}$$That's enough nonsense for the moment but let's not forget that there has always been a long-standing connection between letters of certain alphabets (Hebrew, Ancient Greek and Arabic for example) and numbers. With the English language the connection has weakened but it's still there and not just in the way shown in Table 1. There are other ways to assign values to letters in the English alphabet. Table 2 shows an alternative way that is more in keeping with the ancient languages.


Table 2: source

Saturday, 6 June 2026

Perfect Powers

Firstly a reminder. What is a perfect power?

A perfect power is a positive integer that can be expressed as an integer power of another positive integer. More formally, \(n\) is a perfect power if there exist natural numbers \(m > 1\), and \(k > 1\) such that \(m^k = n\). In this case, \(n\) may be called a perfect \(k\)-th power. If \(k = 2\) or \(k = 3\), then \(n\) is called a perfect square or perfect cube, respectively. Sometimes 1 is also considered a perfect power (\(1^k = 1\) for any \(k\)).
Today I turned 28188 days old and one of the interesting properties of this number, apart from the digit 8 appearing three times, is that its sum of digits (SOD) and product of digits (POD) are both perfect powers. This is because:$$ \begin{align} \text{SOD}(28188) &= 27 = 3^3\\ \text{POD}(28188) &= 1024 = 2^{10 }\end{align}$$This got me thinking as to how many positive integers in the range up to 40000 have this property. Well, it turns out that there are 217 and here they are (permalink):

4, 8, 9, 18, 22, 44, 81, 88, 144, 224, 242, 333, 414, 422, 441, 448, 484, 844, 999, 1124, 1133, 1142, 1177, 1214, 1224, 1241, 1242, 1313, 1331, 1339, 1393, 1412, 1421, 1422, 1555, 1717, 1771, 1888, 1933, 2114, 2124, 2141, 2142, 2214, 2222, 2241, 2248, 2284, 2411, 2412, 2421, 2428, 2482, 2824, 2842, 3113, 3131, 3139, 3193, 3311, 3319, 3391, 3913, 3931, 4112, 4121, 4122, 4211, 4212, 4221, 4228, 4282, 4444, 4822, 5155, 5515, 5551, 7117, 7171, 7711, 8188, 8224, 8242, 8422, 8818, 8881, 8888, 9133, 9313, 9331, 11114, 11124, 11133, 11141, 11142, 11214, 11222, 11241, 11248, 11284, 11313, 11331, 11411, 11412, 11421, 11428, 11482, 11824, 11842, 12114, 12122, 12141, 12148, 12184, 12212, 12221, 12222, 12411, 12418, 12481, 12814, 12841, 12888, 13113, 13131, 13311, 13399, 13939, 13993, 14111, 14112, 14121, 14128, 14182, 14211, 14218, 14281, 14488, 14812, 14821, 14848, 14884, 18124, 18142, 18214, 18241, 18288, 18412, 18421, 18448, 18484, 18828, 18844, 18882, 19339, 19393, 19933, 21114, 21122, 21141, 21148, 21184, 21212, 21221, 21222, 21411, 21418, 21481, 21814, 21841, 21888, 22112, 22121, 22122, 22211, 22212, 22221, 22228, 22282, 22444, 22822, 24111, 24118, 24181, 24244, 24424, 24442, 24811, 28114, 28141, 28188, 28222, 28411, 28818, 28881, 31113, 31131, 31311, 31399, 31939, 31993, 33111, 33199, 33399, 33919, 33939, 33991, 33993, 39139, 39193, 39319, 39339, 39391, 39393, 39913, 39931, 39933

What about numbers whose sums of divisors are perfect powers? In the range up to 40000, there are only 18 and they are (permalink):

3, 7, 21, 31, 81, 93, 127, 217, 381, 400, 651, 889, 2667, 3937, 8191, 11811, 24573, 27559

Take 21 with divisors of 1, 3, 7 and 21 as an example:$$ \sigma(21)=32=2^5$$What about numbers whose totients are perfect powers? Let's recall that:
The totient of a number, denoted by the Euler's totient function \(\phi(n)\), is the count of positive integers less than or equal to \(n\) that are coprime (relatively prime) to \(n\). Two numbers are coprime if their only common factor is 1.
Numbers of this sort are more frequent with there being 119 in the range up to 40000. They are (permalink):

5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 16, 17, 20, 24, 30, 32, 34, 40, 48, 51, 60, 64, 68, 80, 85, 96, 102, 120, 128, 136, 160, 170, 192, 204, 240, 255, 256, 257, 272, 320, 340, 384, 408, 480, 510, 512, 514, 544, 640, 680, 768, 771, 816, 960, 1020, 1024, 1028, 1088, 1280, 1285, 1360, 1536, 1542, 1632, 1920, 2040, 2048, 2056, 2176, 2560, 2570, 2720, 3072, 3084, 3264, 3840, 3855, 4080, 4096, 4112, 4352, 4369, 5120, 5140, 5440, 6144, 6168, 6528, 7680, 7710, 8160, 8192, 8224, 8704, 8738, 10240, 10280, 10880, 12288, 12336, 13056, 13107, 15360, 15420, 16320, 16384, 16448, 17408, 17476, 20480, 20560, 21760, 21845, 24576, 24672, 26112, 26214, 30720, 30840, 32640, 32768, 32896, 34816, 34952

Let's take 20 as an example. The numbers that are coprime to 20 are 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 17, 19 and so we have we have a count of 8:$$ \phi(20)=8=2^3$$Next, let's consider the sum of the anti-divisors of a number. First let's recall what an antidivisor is using Gemini to explain in very clear terms:

An anti-divisor is a number that fails to divide a target integer by the largest possible margin. While a regular divisor divides a number evenly with no remainder, an anti-divisor leaves the most unbiased, centered remainder possible. [1, 2, 3]
The concept was first formalized by mathematician Jon Perry. [1]
Mathematical Rules
An integer \(d\) (where \(1 < d < n\)) is an anti-divisor of \(n\) if it satisfies one of the following rules: [1, 2]
    • For even values of \(d\): The number \(d\) divides \(2n\) evenly. Mathematically, we have:$$n \bmod d = \dfrac{d}{2}$$
    • For odd values of \(d\): The number \(d\) divides \(2n - 1\) or \(2n + 1\) evenly. Mathematically we have  [1, 2]:$$n \bmod d = \dfrac{d-1}{2}  \text{ or } n \bmod d = \dfrac{d+1}{2}$$
Visual Example: Anti-divisors of 20
To find the anti-divisors of \(20\), you look for numbers between \(2\) and \(19\) that fail to divide \(20\), but cleanly divide \(40\) (twice \(20\)) or \(39\)/\(41\). [1]
    • 3 is an odd anti-divisor because \(3 \times 13 = 39\), leaving a gap of \(1\) (since \(\frac{3-1}{2} = 1\), and \(20 \bmod 3 = 2\)).
    • 8 is an even anti-divisor because \(8 \times 5 = 40\). It divides \(2 \times 20\) perfectly.
    • 13 is an odd anti-divisor because \(13 \times 3 = 39\). [1]
Key Facts
    • The number 1 is never an anti-divisor, as it evenly divides all integers.
    • The number 2 has no anti-divisors.
    • Prime numbers have a limited number of anti-divisors based heavily on multiples of \(2n\). [1, 2, 3]
For a complete look at integer sequences and properties, you can explore the The Anti-Divisor - OEIS catalog. [1]

There are 20 numbers in the range up to 40000 that satisfy and these are (permalink):

6, 8, 9, 14, 36, 89, 96, 221, 541, 576, 740, 778, 1854, 2114, 2571, 10277, 13631, 16160, 16389, 39428

Let's take 39428 as an example. The antidivisors of this number are:

3, 5, 7, 8, 15, 21, 35, 105, 751, 2253, 3755, 5257, 11265, 15771, 26285

The sum of these anti-divisors is \(65536 = 2^{16}\) and so it is perfect power.

Further investigation could target:

  • the sum of the proper divisors
  • the sum of the non-divisors
  • the determinant of the circulant matrix
  • the arithmetic derivative