Skip to main content
Bumped by Community user
edited body
Source Link

The title says it all.

Question

If $N = qn^2$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$ and $\gcd(q,n)=1$, is it possible to have $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$?

Heuristic

From the Descartes spoof, with quasi-Euler prime $q_1$:

$$n_1 = 3003 < \sigma(n_1) = 5376 < q_1 = 22021$$

So it appears that it might be possible to prove that $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$.

Some Essential Estimates

Acquaah and Konyagin recently obtained the estimate $q < n\sqrt{3}$. We will use this estimate to obtain an upper bound for $\sigma(q)/n$.

Ochem and Rao recently obtained the lower bound $N > {10}^{1500}$ for the magnitude of an odd perfect number. Using this bound, together with the inequality $n < q$, gives $$I(q) < 1 + {10}^{-500}.$$

Motivation

We wish to prove the following proposition:

If $N = {q^k}{n^2}$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$, then $3 \nmid N$ implies that $q < n$.

If $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$, then it follows that $$I(q) + I(n) \neq \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ from which we obtain $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q},$$ since the reverse inequality $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ will violate the inequality $I(q) < \sqrt[3]{2} < I(n)$ (see this paper). (Edit February 8 2016: Assuming $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ is true, then $$\left(q < n\right) \land \left(\sigma(n) < \sigma(q)\right)$$ is false. However, I am currently unable to rule out $$\left(n < q\right) \land \left(\sigma(q) < \sigma(n)\right).$$ This particular case remains open.)

But the inequality $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ implies that the biconditional $$q < n \Longleftrightarrow \sigma(q) < \sigma(n)$$ holds.

This biconditional is then a key ingredient in the proof of the proposition mentioned earlier.

My method is able to rule out $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ if $3 \nmid n$, since we obtain $$2.799 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(6/5)}{\log(31/25)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(5))}{\log(I(5^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$$$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ (where the smallest prime factor $u$ of $N$ satisfies $u \geq 5$), whence we arrive at a contradiction.

Further Considerations

If $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ and $3 \mid n$, then the same method does not force a contradiction, because we then have $$2.7199 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(4/3)}{\log(13/9)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(3))}{\log(I(3^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$$$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ where $u$ is the smallest prime factor of $N$.

Added February 7 2016

If $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$, then $\sigma(n) \equiv 2 \pmod 4$, so that $n$ takes the form $$n = {p^r}{m^2}$$ where $p$ is a prime with $p \equiv r \equiv 1 \pmod 4$ and $\gcd(p, m) = 1$. If $3 \mid n$, then $p \neq 3$, so that $3 \mid m$.

So I have $$\sigma(n) = \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)$$ where $\sigma(p^r) \equiv r + 1 \equiv 2 \pmod 4$.

Since $\gcd(q, q+1) = 1$, then $\gcd(q, \sigma(n)) = 1$, so that $$\gcd(q, \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)) = 1.$$ Thus, $q \nmid \sigma(p^r)$ and $q \nmid \sigma(m^2)$.

However, note that $$q \mid \sigma(n^2) = \sigma(p^{2r})\sigma(m^4).$$

Alas here is where I get stuck.

The title says it all.

Question

If $N = qn^2$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$ and $\gcd(q,n)=1$, is it possible to have $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$?

Heuristic

From the Descartes spoof, with quasi-Euler prime $q_1$:

$$n_1 = 3003 < \sigma(n_1) = 5376 < q_1 = 22021$$

So it appears that it might be possible to prove that $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$.

Some Essential Estimates

Acquaah and Konyagin recently obtained the estimate $q < n\sqrt{3}$. We will use this estimate to obtain an upper bound for $\sigma(q)/n$.

Ochem and Rao recently obtained the lower bound $N > {10}^{1500}$ for the magnitude of an odd perfect number. Using this bound, together with the inequality $n < q$, gives $$I(q) < 1 + {10}^{-500}.$$

Motivation

We wish to prove the following proposition:

If $N = {q^k}{n^2}$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$, then $3 \nmid N$ implies that $q < n$.

If $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$, then it follows that $$I(q) + I(n) \neq \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ from which we obtain $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q},$$ since the reverse inequality $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ will violate the inequality $I(q) < \sqrt[3]{2} < I(n)$ (see this paper). (Edit February 8 2016: Assuming $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ is true, then $$\left(q < n\right) \land \left(\sigma(n) < \sigma(q)\right)$$ is false. However, I am currently unable to rule out $$\left(n < q\right) \land \left(\sigma(q) < \sigma(n)\right).$$ This particular case remains open.)

But the inequality $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ implies that the biconditional $$q < n \Longleftrightarrow \sigma(q) < \sigma(n)$$ holds.

This biconditional is then a key ingredient in the proof of the proposition mentioned earlier.

My method is able to rule out $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ if $3 \nmid n$, since we obtain $$2.799 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(6/5)}{\log(31/25)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(5))}{\log(I(5^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ (where the smallest prime factor $u$ of $N$ satisfies $u \geq 5$), whence we arrive at a contradiction.

Further Considerations

If $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ and $3 \mid n$, then the same method does not force a contradiction, because we then have $$2.7199 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(4/3)}{\log(13/9)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(3))}{\log(I(3^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ where $u$ is the smallest prime factor of $N$.

Added February 7 2016

If $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$, then $\sigma(n) \equiv 2 \pmod 4$, so that $n$ takes the form $$n = {p^r}{m^2}$$ where $p$ is a prime with $p \equiv r \equiv 1 \pmod 4$ and $\gcd(p, m) = 1$. If $3 \mid n$, then $p \neq 3$, so that $3 \mid m$.

So I have $$\sigma(n) = \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)$$ where $\sigma(p^r) \equiv r + 1 \equiv 2 \pmod 4$.

Since $\gcd(q, q+1) = 1$, then $\gcd(q, \sigma(n)) = 1$, so that $$\gcd(q, \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)) = 1.$$ Thus, $q \nmid \sigma(p^r)$ and $q \nmid \sigma(m^2)$.

However, note that $$q \mid \sigma(n^2) = \sigma(p^{2r})\sigma(m^4).$$

Alas here is where I get stuck.

The title says it all.

Question

If $N = qn^2$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$ and $\gcd(q,n)=1$, is it possible to have $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$?

Heuristic

From the Descartes spoof, with quasi-Euler prime $q_1$:

$$n_1 = 3003 < \sigma(n_1) = 5376 < q_1 = 22021$$

So it appears that it might be possible to prove that $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$.

Some Essential Estimates

Acquaah and Konyagin recently obtained the estimate $q < n\sqrt{3}$. We will use this estimate to obtain an upper bound for $\sigma(q)/n$.

Ochem and Rao recently obtained the lower bound $N > {10}^{1500}$ for the magnitude of an odd perfect number. Using this bound, together with the inequality $n < q$, gives $$I(q) < 1 + {10}^{-500}.$$

Motivation

We wish to prove the following proposition:

If $N = {q^k}{n^2}$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$, then $3 \nmid N$ implies that $q < n$.

If $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$, then it follows that $$I(q) + I(n) \neq \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ from which we obtain $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q},$$ since the reverse inequality $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ will violate the inequality $I(q) < \sqrt[3]{2} < I(n)$ (see this paper). (Edit February 8 2016: Assuming $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ is true, then $$\left(q < n\right) \land \left(\sigma(n) < \sigma(q)\right)$$ is false. However, I am currently unable to rule out $$\left(n < q\right) \land \left(\sigma(q) < \sigma(n)\right).$$ This particular case remains open.)

But the inequality $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ implies that the biconditional $$q < n \Longleftrightarrow \sigma(q) < \sigma(n)$$ holds.

This biconditional is then a key ingredient in the proof of the proposition mentioned earlier.

My method is able to rule out $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ if $3 \nmid n$, since we obtain $$2.799 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(6/5)}{\log(31/25)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(5))}{\log(I(5^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ (where the smallest prime factor $u$ of $N$ satisfies $u \geq 5$), whence we arrive at a contradiction.

Further Considerations

If $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ and $3 \mid n$, then the same method does not force a contradiction, because we then have $$2.7199 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(4/3)}{\log(13/9)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(3))}{\log(I(3^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ where $u$ is the smallest prime factor of $N$.

Added February 7 2016

If $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$, then $\sigma(n) \equiv 2 \pmod 4$, so that $n$ takes the form $$n = {p^r}{m^2}$$ where $p$ is a prime with $p \equiv r \equiv 1 \pmod 4$ and $\gcd(p, m) = 1$. If $3 \mid n$, then $p \neq 3$, so that $3 \mid m$.

So I have $$\sigma(n) = \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)$$ where $\sigma(p^r) \equiv r + 1 \equiv 2 \pmod 4$.

Since $\gcd(q, q+1) = 1$, then $\gcd(q, \sigma(n)) = 1$, so that $$\gcd(q, \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)) = 1.$$ Thus, $q \nmid \sigma(p^r)$ and $q \nmid \sigma(m^2)$.

However, note that $$q \mid \sigma(n^2) = \sigma(p^{2r})\sigma(m^4).$$

Alas here is where I get stuck.

Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
http -> https (the question was bumped anyway)
Source Link
Martin Sleziak
  • 4.7k
  • 4
  • 35
  • 40

The title says it all.

Question

If $N = qn^2$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$ and $\gcd(q,n)=1$, is it possible to have $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$?

Heuristic

From the Descartes spoof, with quasi-Euler prime $q_1$:

$$n_1 = 3003 < \sigma(n_1) = 5376 < q_1 = 22021$$

So it appears that it might be possible to prove that $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$.

Some Essential Estimates

Acquaah and KonyaginAcquaah and Konyagin recently obtained the estimate $q < n\sqrt{3}$. We will use this estimate to obtain an upper bound for $\sigma(q)/n$.

Ochem and RaoOchem and Rao recently obtained the lower bound $N > {10}^{1500}$ for the magnitude of an odd perfect number. Using this bound, together with the inequality $n < q$, gives $$I(q) < 1 + {10}^{-500}.$$

Motivation

We wish to prove the following proposition:

If $N = {q^k}{n^2}$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$, then $3 \nmid N$ implies that $q < n$.

If $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$, then it follows that $$I(q) + I(n) \neq \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ from which we obtain $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q},$$ since the reverse inequality $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ will violate the inequality $I(q) < \sqrt[3]{2} < I(n)$ (see this paper). (Edit February 8 2016: Assuming $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ is true, then $$\left(q < n\right) \land \left(\sigma(n) < \sigma(q)\right)$$ is false. However, I am currently unable to rule out $$\left(n < q\right) \land \left(\sigma(q) < \sigma(n)\right).$$ This particular case remains open.)

But the inequality $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ implies that the biconditional $$q < n \Longleftrightarrow \sigma(q) < \sigma(n)$$ holds.

This biconditional is then a key ingredient in the proof of the proposition mentioned earlier.

My method is able to rule out $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ if $3 \nmid n$, since we obtain $$2.799 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(6/5)}{\log(31/25)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(5))}{\log(I(5^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ (where the smallest prime factor $u$ of $N$ satisfies $u \geq 5$), whence we arrive at a contradiction.

Further Considerations

If $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ and $3 \mid n$, then the same method does not force a contradiction, because we then have $$2.7199 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(4/3)}{\log(13/9)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(3))}{\log(I(3^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ where $u$ is the smallest prime factor of $N$.

Added February 7 2016

If $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$, then $\sigma(n) \equiv 2 \pmod 4$, so that $n$ takes the form $$n = {p^r}{m^2}$$ where $p$ is a prime with $p \equiv r \equiv 1 \pmod 4$ and $\gcd(p, m) = 1$. If $3 \mid n$, then $p \neq 3$, so that $3 \mid m$.

So I have $$\sigma(n) = \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)$$ where $\sigma(p^r) \equiv r + 1 \equiv 2 \pmod 4$.

Since $\gcd(q, q+1) = 1$, then $\gcd(q, \sigma(n)) = 1$, so that $$\gcd(q, \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)) = 1.$$ Thus, $q \nmid \sigma(p^r)$ and $q \nmid \sigma(m^2)$.

However, note that $$q \mid \sigma(n^2) = \sigma(p^{2r})\sigma(m^4).$$

Alas here is where I get stuck.

The title says it all.

Question

If $N = qn^2$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$ and $\gcd(q,n)=1$, is it possible to have $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$?

Heuristic

From the Descartes spoof, with quasi-Euler prime $q_1$:

$$n_1 = 3003 < \sigma(n_1) = 5376 < q_1 = 22021$$

So it appears that it might be possible to prove that $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$.

Some Essential Estimates

Acquaah and Konyagin recently obtained the estimate $q < n\sqrt{3}$. We will use this estimate to obtain an upper bound for $\sigma(q)/n$.

Ochem and Rao recently obtained the lower bound $N > {10}^{1500}$ for the magnitude of an odd perfect number. Using this bound, together with the inequality $n < q$, gives $$I(q) < 1 + {10}^{-500}.$$

Motivation

We wish to prove the following proposition:

If $N = {q^k}{n^2}$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$, then $3 \nmid N$ implies that $q < n$.

If $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$, then it follows that $$I(q) + I(n) \neq \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ from which we obtain $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q},$$ since the reverse inequality $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ will violate the inequality $I(q) < \sqrt[3]{2} < I(n)$ (see this paper). (Edit February 8 2016: Assuming $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ is true, then $$\left(q < n\right) \land \left(\sigma(n) < \sigma(q)\right)$$ is false. However, I am currently unable to rule out $$\left(n < q\right) \land \left(\sigma(q) < \sigma(n)\right).$$ This particular case remains open.)

But the inequality $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ implies that the biconditional $$q < n \Longleftrightarrow \sigma(q) < \sigma(n)$$ holds.

This biconditional is then a key ingredient in the proof of the proposition mentioned earlier.

My method is able to rule out $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ if $3 \nmid n$, since we obtain $$2.799 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(6/5)}{\log(31/25)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(5))}{\log(I(5^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ (where the smallest prime factor $u$ of $N$ satisfies $u \geq 5$), whence we arrive at a contradiction.

Further Considerations

If $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ and $3 \mid n$, then the same method does not force a contradiction, because we then have $$2.7199 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(4/3)}{\log(13/9)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(3))}{\log(I(3^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ where $u$ is the smallest prime factor of $N$.

Added February 7 2016

If $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$, then $\sigma(n) \equiv 2 \pmod 4$, so that $n$ takes the form $$n = {p^r}{m^2}$$ where $p$ is a prime with $p \equiv r \equiv 1 \pmod 4$ and $\gcd(p, m) = 1$. If $3 \mid n$, then $p \neq 3$, so that $3 \mid m$.

So I have $$\sigma(n) = \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)$$ where $\sigma(p^r) \equiv r + 1 \equiv 2 \pmod 4$.

Since $\gcd(q, q+1) = 1$, then $\gcd(q, \sigma(n)) = 1$, so that $$\gcd(q, \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)) = 1.$$ Thus, $q \nmid \sigma(p^r)$ and $q \nmid \sigma(m^2)$.

However, note that $$q \mid \sigma(n^2) = \sigma(p^{2r})\sigma(m^4).$$

Alas here is where I get stuck.

The title says it all.

Question

If $N = qn^2$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$ and $\gcd(q,n)=1$, is it possible to have $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$?

Heuristic

From the Descartes spoof, with quasi-Euler prime $q_1$:

$$n_1 = 3003 < \sigma(n_1) = 5376 < q_1 = 22021$$

So it appears that it might be possible to prove that $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$.

Some Essential Estimates

Acquaah and Konyagin recently obtained the estimate $q < n\sqrt{3}$. We will use this estimate to obtain an upper bound for $\sigma(q)/n$.

Ochem and Rao recently obtained the lower bound $N > {10}^{1500}$ for the magnitude of an odd perfect number. Using this bound, together with the inequality $n < q$, gives $$I(q) < 1 + {10}^{-500}.$$

Motivation

We wish to prove the following proposition:

If $N = {q^k}{n^2}$ is an odd perfect number with Euler prime $q$, then $3 \nmid N$ implies that $q < n$.

If $q + 1 \neq \sigma(n)$, then it follows that $$I(q) + I(n) \neq \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ from which we obtain $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q},$$ since the reverse inequality $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ will violate the inequality $I(q) < \sqrt[3]{2} < I(n)$ (see this paper). (Edit February 8 2016: Assuming $$\frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < I(q) + I(n)$$ is true, then $$\left(q < n\right) \land \left(\sigma(n) < \sigma(q)\right)$$ is false. However, I am currently unable to rule out $$\left(n < q\right) \land \left(\sigma(q) < \sigma(n)\right).$$ This particular case remains open.)

But the inequality $$I(q) + I(n) < \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q}$$ implies that the biconditional $$q < n \Longleftrightarrow \sigma(q) < \sigma(n)$$ holds.

This biconditional is then a key ingredient in the proof of the proposition mentioned earlier.

My method is able to rule out $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ if $3 \nmid n$, since we obtain $$2.799 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(6/5)}{\log(31/25)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(5))}{\log(I(5^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ (where the smallest prime factor $u$ of $N$ satisfies $u \geq 5$), whence we arrive at a contradiction.

Further Considerations

If $\sigma(q) = q + 1 = \sigma(n)$ and $3 \mid n$, then the same method does not force a contradiction, because we then have $$2.7199 \approx 1 + 2^{\frac{\log(4/3)}{\log(13/9)}} \leftarrow \frac{q + 1}{q} + \left(\frac{2q}{q + 1}\right)^{\frac{\log(I(3))}{\log(I(3^2))}} \leq I(q) + \left(I(n^2)\right)^{\frac{\log(I(u))}{\log(I(u^2))}}$$ $$< \frac{\sigma(q)}{q} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{n} = \frac{\sigma(q)}{n} + \frac{\sigma(n)}{q} < \sqrt{3}\left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) + \left(1 + {10}^{-500}\right) \approx 2.732,$$ where $u$ is the smallest prime factor of $N$.

Added February 7 2016

If $q + 1 = \sigma(n)$, then $\sigma(n) \equiv 2 \pmod 4$, so that $n$ takes the form $$n = {p^r}{m^2}$$ where $p$ is a prime with $p \equiv r \equiv 1 \pmod 4$ and $\gcd(p, m) = 1$. If $3 \mid n$, then $p \neq 3$, so that $3 \mid m$.

So I have $$\sigma(n) = \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)$$ where $\sigma(p^r) \equiv r + 1 \equiv 2 \pmod 4$.

Since $\gcd(q, q+1) = 1$, then $\gcd(q, \sigma(n)) = 1$, so that $$\gcd(q, \sigma(p^r)\sigma(m^2)) = 1.$$ Thus, $q \nmid \sigma(p^r)$ and $q \nmid \sigma(m^2)$.

However, note that $$q \mid \sigma(n^2) = \sigma(p^{2r})\sigma(m^4).$$

Alas here is where I get stuck.

Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
added GCD constraint
Source Link
Loading
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user