In number theory, a practical number or panarithmic number is a positive integer n such that all smaller positive integers can be represented as sums of distinct divisors of n. For example, 12 is a practical number because all the numbers from 1 to 11 can be expressed as sums of its divisors 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6: as well as these divisors themselves, we have 5=3+2, 7=6+1, 8=6+2, 9=6+3, 10=6+3+1, and 11=6+3+2.
The sequence of practical numbers (sequence A005153 in OEIS) begins
- 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 30, 32, 36, 40, 42, 48, 54, ....
Practical numbers were used by Fibonacci in his Liber Abaci (1202) in connection with the problem of representing rational numbers as Egyptian fractions. Fibonacci does not formally define practical numbers, but he gives a table of Egyptian fraction expansions for fractions with practical denominators.
The name "practical number" is due to Srinivasan (1948), who first attempted a classification of these numbers that was completed by Stewart (1954) and Sierpiński (1955). This characterization makes it possible to determine whether a number is practical by examining its prime factorization. Any even perfect number and any power of two is also a practical number.
Practical numbers have also been shown to be analogous with prime numbers in many of their properties.
Read more about Practical Number: Characterization of Practical Numbers, Relation To Other Classes of Numbers, Practical Numbers and Egyptian Fractions, Analogies With Prime Numbers
Famous quotes containing the words practical and/or number:
“No delusion is greater than the notion that method and industry can make up for lack of mother-wit, either in science or in practical life.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley (1825–95)
“In the U.S. for instance, the value of a homemaker’s productive work has been imputed mostly when she was maimed or killed and insurance companies and/or the courts had to calculate the amount to pay her family in damages. Even at that, the rates were mostly pink collar and the big number was attributed to the husband’s pain and suffering.”
—Gloria Steinem (20th century)