H(x)=p∣x∑(p∗logp(gcf(x,p⌊logpx⌋)))
The idea for this function was adding together the largest np such that pn∣x and pn+1∤x for a given x and all prime p≤x. For example, H(28)=11 since 28=7∗22.
Here's a list of the first 30 H(x), starting from x=2:
2,3,4,5,5,7,6,6,7,11,7,13,9,8,8,17,8,19,9,10,13,23,9,10,15,9,11,29,10,31,…
I'm interested in learning more about this function. To start things off, here's some identities I've already found:
H(pn)=pnH(ab)=H(a)+H(b)H(xb)=b∗H(x)H(x!)=k=0∑xH(k)=k=2∑xH(k)
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science
related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should
explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments
should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.
Markdown
Appears as
*italics* or _italics_
italics
**bold** or __bold__
bold
- bulleted - list
bulleted
list
1. numbered 2. list
numbered
list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
In number theory there is a function logp(x)= largest n such that pn∣x. Or in algebra the p-adic evaluation delivers this νp(x)=n. In any case, we can do away with the multiple layers of superfluous terms in your function and write it simply as
H(x):=p∈P∑plogp(x)
Noting that logp(0) should be defined as ∞, we have H(0)=∞, not 0(!!). I don’t know why you then say all prime ≤x that makes no sense. Then H(p) would be 0 for all p∈P.
Anyhow. Of interest would be, if you can extend H to Q. Extending to Z is easy (just set H(−n)=−H(n) or H(−n)=H(n) however you like. Ideally, due to property 2, we would like to have H(x/y)=H(x)−H(y). It’s easy to see that this is in fact well defined, provided we choose H(−n)=H(n) above … and provided you set H(0)=∞, otherwise you will run into problems.
Now set ∣x∣:=exp(−H(x)) for all x∈Q. Then ∣x∣=0 iff x=0 and ∣⋅∣ is multiplicative. The operation is however not a norm, since ∣5+−3∣=∣2∣=exp(−2)>exp(−5)+exp(−3)=∣5∣+∣−3∣.
Another note: If we define a function Pn(x) as the highest power of n that divides x, we can express this function as n=1∑π(x)pnPpn(x)
where π(x) is the prime counting function.
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
You don't mean all prime p≤x, you mean all p≤x, right?
The first two properties determine your function. If you look at h(x)=2H(x), then h is completely multiplicative.
There are some good links here. Apparently your function is sometimes called sopfr, for "sum of prime factors with repetition."
In number theory there is a function logp(x)= largest n such that pn∣x. Or in algebra the p-adic evaluation delivers this νp(x)=n. In any case, we can do away with the multiple layers of superfluous terms in your function and write it simply as
H(x):=p∈P∑plogp(x)
Noting that logp(0) should be defined as ∞, we have H(0)=∞, not 0(!!). I don’t know why you then say all prime ≤x that makes no sense. Then H(p) would be 0 for all p∈P.
Anyhow. Of interest would be, if you can extend H to Q. Extending to Z is easy (just set H(−n)=−H(n) or H(−n)=H(n) however you like. Ideally, due to property 2, we would like to have H(x/y)=H(x)−H(y). It’s easy to see that this is in fact well defined, provided we choose H(−n)=H(n) above … and provided you set H(0)=∞, otherwise you will run into problems.
Now set ∣x∣:=exp(−H(x)) for all x∈Q. Then ∣x∣=0 iff x=0 and ∣⋅∣ is multiplicative. The operation is however not a norm, since ∣5+−3∣=∣2∣=exp(−2)>exp(−5)+exp(−3)=∣5∣+∣−3∣.
@Calvin Lin please take a look at this
how do we write an interger
Another note: If we define a function Pn(x) as the highest power of n that divides x, we can express this function as n=1∑π(x)pnPpn(x) where π(x) is the prime counting function.
I found some decent upper and lower bounds for this: 2k≤H(n)≤2k−1n+2(k−1)
Where k is the number of prime factors of n.