User talk:Tean Butcher

Hello, Tean Butcher, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Lra drama 20:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

51

Hello. I reverted your recent addition to 51 (number) as it is not helpful. Either it is original research, or quite obscure, and it would not be understandable to the general reader. Perhaps you could rewrite it in such a way that a general reader would know what you are talking about. For instance, rather than use the phrase discrete semiprime, which is redlinked, maybe you could use semiprime and modify it with a phrase that makes it clear what a "discrete semiprime" is. Or, perhaps you could create a proper article for discrete semiprime, and then use the phrase in 51 (number). Let me know if you would like any assistance. Cheers, Doctormatt 02:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been editing a number of your other additions along the same lines as above. A couple things you should know:

In common usage, $\sigma (n)$ is not the aliquot sum, which is $\sigma (n)-n$ ; $\sigma (n)$ is the sum of all divisors of n
When linking to a number article, be sure to use, for example 51 (number) and not 51 which is about the year. Use [[51 (number)|51]] and the link will appear like this: 51.

Cheers, Doctormatt 03:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

27

Hello. I removed you recent addition to 27 which was this:

, and therefore the second non-unitary primal cubic number.

I removed it because the term "primal cubic" is not standard terminology. I can guess what you mean by it, but others may be confused. Also, non-unitary would seem to be implied by your term "primal" since 1 is not prime. So, it's not entirely clear what you are trying to say, or why it is helpful. Perhaps you could reword it using clearer terminology? If you just want to say that 27 is the second smallest cube of a prime number, I think that's pretty obvious, don't you? Anyway, if you really want to say that, that might be a clearer way of doing so. Cheers, Doctormatt 00:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for edit summary

Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. – Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:00, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question about aliquot sums of sphenic numbers

It's quite an interesting fact that sphenic numbers have aliquot sums 12 greater than themselves. This seems to check out for the first few sphenic numbers. Do you know if a formal proof of this has been published? PrimeFan 00:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the proof: if n=(2)(3)p, then the aliquot sum of n is 1+2+3+p+2p+3p+6 = 12+6p=12+n. Cheers, Doctormatt 01:00, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]