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:
“Philosophy, certainly, is some account of truths the fragments and very insignificant parts of which man will practice in this workshop; truths infinite and in harmony with infinity, in respect to which the very objects and ends of the so-called practical philosopher will be mere propositions, like the rest.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“I have known a number of Don Juans who were good studs and who cavorted between the sheets without a psychiatrist to guide them. But most of the busy love-makers I knew were looking for masculinity rather than practicing it. They were fellows of dubious lust.”
—Ben Hecht (1893–1964)