Status
On this page
Status
Topics
Status
On this page
Status
Topics
Call weird if and is not pseudoperfect, that is, it is not the sum of any set of its divisors.
Are there any odd weird numbers? Are there infinitely many primitive weird numbers, i.e. those such that no proper divisor of is weird?
Call weird if and is not pseudoperfect, that is, it is not the sum of any set of distinct proper divisors of .
Are there any odd weird numbers? Are there infinitely many primitive weird numbers, i.e. those such that no proper divisor of is weird?
Source: erdosproblems.com/470
No claim settles this problem.
Open. Under an unproved prime-gap hypothesis, Melfi proves that there are infinitely many primitive weird numbers (claim page (Melfi, 2014), conditional); the first question, on odd weird numbers, stays open.
Read as the site words it, the gloss of pseudoperfect allows the one-element set . That would make every pseudoperfect and both questions trivially negative. The corrected Statement replaces "any set of its divisors" by "any set of distinct proper divisors of "; nothing else changes. The sources read it with proper divisors. Erdős and Graham (1980), p. 94, the site's source for the wording, call weird when and is not a sum of distinct proper divisors of . Benkoski and Erdős (1974), p. 617 (card), define pseudoperfect that way and abundant as . The formal-conjectures statement also uses proper divisors.