Timeline for Can a multi-perfect number be a perfect square?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Sep 25, 2016 at 0:51 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S Sep 25, 2016 at 0:51 | history | notice removed | user141854 | ||
| Sep 25, 2016 at 0:51 | answer | added | Jose Arnaldo Bebita Dris | timeline score: 1 | |
| Sep 24, 2016 at 3:07 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Sep 24, 2016 at 1:02 | answer | added | Alexis Olson | timeline score: 1 | |
| Sep 24, 2016 at 0:37 | comment | added | user141854 | Indeed it is more intuitive to think of squares that way. This is why the number of divisors function above returns an odd value for perfect squares. | |
| Sep 23, 2016 at 23:51 | comment | added | Alexis Olson | Your statement about the number of divisors of $Q$ is equivalent to saying all the primes $p_i$ in $Q$'s decomposition are have even powers (which is a more intuitive way of thinking about square numbers, IMO). | |
| Sep 23, 2016 at 20:54 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackMath/status/779423686940094464 | ||
| S Sep 23, 2016 at 20:26 | history | bounty started | CommunityBot | ||
| S Sep 23, 2016 at 20:26 | history | notice added | user141854 | Draw attention | |
| Sep 23, 2016 at 20:24 | history | edited | user141854 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 244 characters in body |
| Sep 23, 2016 at 3:10 | history | edited | user141854 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | clarified question even more and added new result |
| Sep 22, 2016 at 20:31 | history | edited | user141854 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Clarified my new question |
| Sep 22, 2016 at 4:58 | history | edited | user141854 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 341 characters in body |
| Sep 22, 2016 at 2:14 | history | edited | user141854 | Appended tag | |
| Sep 21, 2016 at 20:21 | history | asked | user141854 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |