Further, but for summing the factors for check of perfect numbers, amicable numbers, abundant numbers and deficient numbers, 1 is never considered to be a prime factor at any point of time.
The case is different with 2. 2 is divisible by both itself and 1, the pre-requisite of a prime number. Hence 2 is treated as a prime number and rightly so.
]]>The prime factors of, say, 10 would become 1, 2 and 5 (seems a little unnecessary here).
And the prime number list would be 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, etc ... (looks neater)
And the definition could be simplified to "divisible only by 1 or itself" (1 would qualify on both accounts!)
But would we actually *break* anything? Or could it simply be fixed by rewriting?
]]>Go.
]]>