Why multiplying powers of prime factors of a number yields number of total divisors?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
11
down vote

favorite
5












Suppose we have the number $36$, which can be broken down into ($2^2$)($3^2$). I understand that adding one to each exponent and then multiplying the results, i.e. $(2+1)(2+1) = 9$, yields how many divisors the number $36$ has. I can make sense of a number which can be expressed as the product of two powers of the same prime, i.e. $343$, because $7^3$ allows us to see that: $7$ is a divisor, $7^2$ is a divisor, and the always present $1$ and $343$ are divisors, leaving us with a total number of $4$ divisors for $343$. What is the best way to gain intuition behind using this method for a number like $36$?







share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    11
    down vote

    favorite
    5












    Suppose we have the number $36$, which can be broken down into ($2^2$)($3^2$). I understand that adding one to each exponent and then multiplying the results, i.e. $(2+1)(2+1) = 9$, yields how many divisors the number $36$ has. I can make sense of a number which can be expressed as the product of two powers of the same prime, i.e. $343$, because $7^3$ allows us to see that: $7$ is a divisor, $7^2$ is a divisor, and the always present $1$ and $343$ are divisors, leaving us with a total number of $4$ divisors for $343$. What is the best way to gain intuition behind using this method for a number like $36$?







    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      11
      down vote

      favorite
      5









      up vote
      11
      down vote

      favorite
      5






      5





      Suppose we have the number $36$, which can be broken down into ($2^2$)($3^2$). I understand that adding one to each exponent and then multiplying the results, i.e. $(2+1)(2+1) = 9$, yields how many divisors the number $36$ has. I can make sense of a number which can be expressed as the product of two powers of the same prime, i.e. $343$, because $7^3$ allows us to see that: $7$ is a divisor, $7^2$ is a divisor, and the always present $1$ and $343$ are divisors, leaving us with a total number of $4$ divisors for $343$. What is the best way to gain intuition behind using this method for a number like $36$?







      share|cite|improve this question














      Suppose we have the number $36$, which can be broken down into ($2^2$)($3^2$). I understand that adding one to each exponent and then multiplying the results, i.e. $(2+1)(2+1) = 9$, yields how many divisors the number $36$ has. I can make sense of a number which can be expressed as the product of two powers of the same prime, i.e. $343$, because $7^3$ allows us to see that: $7$ is a divisor, $7^2$ is a divisor, and the always present $1$ and $343$ are divisors, leaving us with a total number of $4$ divisors for $343$. What is the best way to gain intuition behind using this method for a number like $36$?









      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Aug 10 at 9:55









      TheSimpliFire

      9,70261952




      9,70261952










      asked Aug 9 at 21:59









      King Squirrel

      1,24011330




      1,24011330




















          5 Answers
          5






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          18
          down vote



          accepted










          If $d$ divides $36$, then no prime numbers other than $2$ and $3$ can divide $d$. On the other hand, $36=2^23^2$ and so $d=2^alpha3^beta$, with $alpha,betain0,1,2$. Since there are three possibilities for $alpha$ and another $3$ for $beta$, there are $9(=3times3)$ possibilities for $d$.






          share|cite|improve this answer




















          • Perfection. Thanks, José.
            – King Squirrel
            Aug 9 at 22:10

















          up vote
          7
          down vote













          For 36 all the divisors are of the form $2^s3^k$, where $0 le s,k le 2$. Thus as you have 3 choices for each exponent the number of divisors is $3 cdot 3 = 9$.






          share|cite|improve this answer



























            up vote
            4
            down vote













            You're looking for the amount of distinct, positive divisors of 36. To generate all combinations of possible divisors, you do the following:



            You take each of 2^0, 2^1, and 2^2 and multiply it by each of 3^0, 3^1, and 3^2. That will give you every divisor, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 36. There are 9 of these numbers. If you have a collection of m distinct objects M (e.g. the numbers 1, 2, and 4), and another set of n distinct objects N (e.g. 1, 3, and 9), then the total number of ways that you can combine one object from the M collection with one object from the N collection is M * N.



            It must be certain that there is no repetition of pairs of factors; for instance if collection M contained both the numbers 2 and 3, and collection N contains the numbers 2 and 3, then there would be 2 different ways of producing 2 * 3 = 6, and then the number 6 would be double-counted. But this problem is avoided, because each collection contains only a particular kind of prime divisor, i.e. all powers of 2 in one collection, all powers of 3 in another collection, all powers of 5 in a different collection, and so on.



            To generalize, if you have any number of collections, given that each collection contains no duplicate objects, and given that each collection is partitioned to contain powers of a different prime number, then the total number of combinations you can form by selecting one object from each collection (and multiplying them) is just the product of number of objects in each collection.



            If a prime factorization contains some prime p to the N power, the reason why you add 1 to the power of that prime number is that is cardinality (size) of the set of all powers from 0 to N. I.e. that is the number of things in the set (p^0, p^1, p^2, ..., p^N).



            So for the number 180, with prime factorization (2^2)(3^2)(5), you can partition the powers of its divisors by primes as 2^0, 2^1, 2^2, 3^0, 3^1, 3^2, 5^0, 5^1. Then the number of combinations of products you can form from these three partitions is 3 * 3 * 2 = 18; which is also (2+1)(2+1)(1+1).






            share|cite|improve this answer





























              up vote
              3
              down vote













              Let's say $$n = p_1^alpha_1 p_2^alpha_2 p_3^alpha_3 ldots$$ where the $p$ are distinct primes, and the $alpha$ are not necessarily distinct and may be $0$ as needed. In your case of $n = 36$, we can have $p_1 = 2, p_2 = 3$, $alpha_1 = alpha_2 = 2$ and all other $alpha_i = 0$. When $alpha_i = 0$, the corresponding $p_i$ does not contribute anything new to the divisors of $n$.



              If $alpha_i > 0$ then $p_i$ contributes the following divisors: $1, p_i, p_i^2, ldots, p_i^alpha_i$. Of course with a number like $36$ you also have to account for divisors like $p_1 p_2^2$.






              share|cite|improve this answer
















              • 1




                Ummm.... what does this contribute beyond what had been posted an hour earlier in the below answer?
                – David G. Stork
                Aug 10 at 17:47






              • 1




                @DavidG.Stork Coming from the asker, I would consider your comment with great seriousness.
                – Mr. Brooks
                Aug 13 at 19:37

















              up vote
              1
              down vote













              The more general case is for a composite of the form $$n = prodlimits_k = 1^k_max p_1^a_1 p_2^a_2 ldots p_k_max^a_k_max,$$ where the $p_k$ are unique primes and the corresponding $a_k$ the exponents. In this case the number of factors is $$(a_1+1)(a_2 + 1) ldots (a_k_max+1) = prodlimits_k=1^k_max (a_k + 1)$$






              share|cite|improve this answer






















                Your Answer




                StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
                return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
                StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
                StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
                );
                );
                , "mathjax-editing");

                StackExchange.ready(function()
                var channelOptions =
                tags: "".split(" "),
                id: "69"
                ;
                initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

                StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
                // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
                if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
                StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
                createEditor();
                );

                else
                createEditor();

                );

                function createEditor()
                StackExchange.prepareEditor(
                heartbeatType: 'answer',
                convertImagesToLinks: true,
                noModals: false,
                showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
                reputationToPostImages: 10,
                bindNavPrevention: true,
                postfix: "",
                noCode: true, onDemand: true,
                discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
                ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
                );



                );








                 

                draft saved


                draft discarded


















                StackExchange.ready(
                function ()
                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2877738%2fwhy-multiplying-powers-of-prime-factors-of-a-number-yields-number-of-total-divis%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                );

                Post as a guest






























                5 Answers
                5






                active

                oldest

                votes








                5 Answers
                5






                active

                oldest

                votes









                active

                oldest

                votes






                active

                oldest

                votes








                up vote
                18
                down vote



                accepted










                If $d$ divides $36$, then no prime numbers other than $2$ and $3$ can divide $d$. On the other hand, $36=2^23^2$ and so $d=2^alpha3^beta$, with $alpha,betain0,1,2$. Since there are three possibilities for $alpha$ and another $3$ for $beta$, there are $9(=3times3)$ possibilities for $d$.






                share|cite|improve this answer




















                • Perfection. Thanks, José.
                  – King Squirrel
                  Aug 9 at 22:10














                up vote
                18
                down vote



                accepted










                If $d$ divides $36$, then no prime numbers other than $2$ and $3$ can divide $d$. On the other hand, $36=2^23^2$ and so $d=2^alpha3^beta$, with $alpha,betain0,1,2$. Since there are three possibilities for $alpha$ and another $3$ for $beta$, there are $9(=3times3)$ possibilities for $d$.






                share|cite|improve this answer




















                • Perfection. Thanks, José.
                  – King Squirrel
                  Aug 9 at 22:10












                up vote
                18
                down vote



                accepted







                up vote
                18
                down vote



                accepted






                If $d$ divides $36$, then no prime numbers other than $2$ and $3$ can divide $d$. On the other hand, $36=2^23^2$ and so $d=2^alpha3^beta$, with $alpha,betain0,1,2$. Since there are three possibilities for $alpha$ and another $3$ for $beta$, there are $9(=3times3)$ possibilities for $d$.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                If $d$ divides $36$, then no prime numbers other than $2$ and $3$ can divide $d$. On the other hand, $36=2^23^2$ and so $d=2^alpha3^beta$, with $alpha,betain0,1,2$. Since there are three possibilities for $alpha$ and another $3$ for $beta$, there are $9(=3times3)$ possibilities for $d$.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Aug 9 at 22:04









                José Carlos Santos

                115k1699177




                115k1699177











                • Perfection. Thanks, José.
                  – King Squirrel
                  Aug 9 at 22:10
















                • Perfection. Thanks, José.
                  – King Squirrel
                  Aug 9 at 22:10















                Perfection. Thanks, José.
                – King Squirrel
                Aug 9 at 22:10




                Perfection. Thanks, José.
                – King Squirrel
                Aug 9 at 22:10










                up vote
                7
                down vote













                For 36 all the divisors are of the form $2^s3^k$, where $0 le s,k le 2$. Thus as you have 3 choices for each exponent the number of divisors is $3 cdot 3 = 9$.






                share|cite|improve this answer
























                  up vote
                  7
                  down vote













                  For 36 all the divisors are of the form $2^s3^k$, where $0 le s,k le 2$. Thus as you have 3 choices for each exponent the number of divisors is $3 cdot 3 = 9$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer






















                    up vote
                    7
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    7
                    down vote









                    For 36 all the divisors are of the form $2^s3^k$, where $0 le s,k le 2$. Thus as you have 3 choices for each exponent the number of divisors is $3 cdot 3 = 9$.






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    For 36 all the divisors are of the form $2^s3^k$, where $0 le s,k le 2$. Thus as you have 3 choices for each exponent the number of divisors is $3 cdot 3 = 9$.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered Aug 9 at 22:02









                    Stefan4024

                    28.6k53175




                    28.6k53175




















                        up vote
                        4
                        down vote













                        You're looking for the amount of distinct, positive divisors of 36. To generate all combinations of possible divisors, you do the following:



                        You take each of 2^0, 2^1, and 2^2 and multiply it by each of 3^0, 3^1, and 3^2. That will give you every divisor, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 36. There are 9 of these numbers. If you have a collection of m distinct objects M (e.g. the numbers 1, 2, and 4), and another set of n distinct objects N (e.g. 1, 3, and 9), then the total number of ways that you can combine one object from the M collection with one object from the N collection is M * N.



                        It must be certain that there is no repetition of pairs of factors; for instance if collection M contained both the numbers 2 and 3, and collection N contains the numbers 2 and 3, then there would be 2 different ways of producing 2 * 3 = 6, and then the number 6 would be double-counted. But this problem is avoided, because each collection contains only a particular kind of prime divisor, i.e. all powers of 2 in one collection, all powers of 3 in another collection, all powers of 5 in a different collection, and so on.



                        To generalize, if you have any number of collections, given that each collection contains no duplicate objects, and given that each collection is partitioned to contain powers of a different prime number, then the total number of combinations you can form by selecting one object from each collection (and multiplying them) is just the product of number of objects in each collection.



                        If a prime factorization contains some prime p to the N power, the reason why you add 1 to the power of that prime number is that is cardinality (size) of the set of all powers from 0 to N. I.e. that is the number of things in the set (p^0, p^1, p^2, ..., p^N).



                        So for the number 180, with prime factorization (2^2)(3^2)(5), you can partition the powers of its divisors by primes as 2^0, 2^1, 2^2, 3^0, 3^1, 3^2, 5^0, 5^1. Then the number of combinations of products you can form from these three partitions is 3 * 3 * 2 = 18; which is also (2+1)(2+1)(1+1).






                        share|cite|improve this answer


























                          up vote
                          4
                          down vote













                          You're looking for the amount of distinct, positive divisors of 36. To generate all combinations of possible divisors, you do the following:



                          You take each of 2^0, 2^1, and 2^2 and multiply it by each of 3^0, 3^1, and 3^2. That will give you every divisor, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 36. There are 9 of these numbers. If you have a collection of m distinct objects M (e.g. the numbers 1, 2, and 4), and another set of n distinct objects N (e.g. 1, 3, and 9), then the total number of ways that you can combine one object from the M collection with one object from the N collection is M * N.



                          It must be certain that there is no repetition of pairs of factors; for instance if collection M contained both the numbers 2 and 3, and collection N contains the numbers 2 and 3, then there would be 2 different ways of producing 2 * 3 = 6, and then the number 6 would be double-counted. But this problem is avoided, because each collection contains only a particular kind of prime divisor, i.e. all powers of 2 in one collection, all powers of 3 in another collection, all powers of 5 in a different collection, and so on.



                          To generalize, if you have any number of collections, given that each collection contains no duplicate objects, and given that each collection is partitioned to contain powers of a different prime number, then the total number of combinations you can form by selecting one object from each collection (and multiplying them) is just the product of number of objects in each collection.



                          If a prime factorization contains some prime p to the N power, the reason why you add 1 to the power of that prime number is that is cardinality (size) of the set of all powers from 0 to N. I.e. that is the number of things in the set (p^0, p^1, p^2, ..., p^N).



                          So for the number 180, with prime factorization (2^2)(3^2)(5), you can partition the powers of its divisors by primes as 2^0, 2^1, 2^2, 3^0, 3^1, 3^2, 5^0, 5^1. Then the number of combinations of products you can form from these three partitions is 3 * 3 * 2 = 18; which is also (2+1)(2+1)(1+1).






                          share|cite|improve this answer
























                            up vote
                            4
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            4
                            down vote









                            You're looking for the amount of distinct, positive divisors of 36. To generate all combinations of possible divisors, you do the following:



                            You take each of 2^0, 2^1, and 2^2 and multiply it by each of 3^0, 3^1, and 3^2. That will give you every divisor, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 36. There are 9 of these numbers. If you have a collection of m distinct objects M (e.g. the numbers 1, 2, and 4), and another set of n distinct objects N (e.g. 1, 3, and 9), then the total number of ways that you can combine one object from the M collection with one object from the N collection is M * N.



                            It must be certain that there is no repetition of pairs of factors; for instance if collection M contained both the numbers 2 and 3, and collection N contains the numbers 2 and 3, then there would be 2 different ways of producing 2 * 3 = 6, and then the number 6 would be double-counted. But this problem is avoided, because each collection contains only a particular kind of prime divisor, i.e. all powers of 2 in one collection, all powers of 3 in another collection, all powers of 5 in a different collection, and so on.



                            To generalize, if you have any number of collections, given that each collection contains no duplicate objects, and given that each collection is partitioned to contain powers of a different prime number, then the total number of combinations you can form by selecting one object from each collection (and multiplying them) is just the product of number of objects in each collection.



                            If a prime factorization contains some prime p to the N power, the reason why you add 1 to the power of that prime number is that is cardinality (size) of the set of all powers from 0 to N. I.e. that is the number of things in the set (p^0, p^1, p^2, ..., p^N).



                            So for the number 180, with prime factorization (2^2)(3^2)(5), you can partition the powers of its divisors by primes as 2^0, 2^1, 2^2, 3^0, 3^1, 3^2, 5^0, 5^1. Then the number of combinations of products you can form from these three partitions is 3 * 3 * 2 = 18; which is also (2+1)(2+1)(1+1).






                            share|cite|improve this answer














                            You're looking for the amount of distinct, positive divisors of 36. To generate all combinations of possible divisors, you do the following:



                            You take each of 2^0, 2^1, and 2^2 and multiply it by each of 3^0, 3^1, and 3^2. That will give you every divisor, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 36. There are 9 of these numbers. If you have a collection of m distinct objects M (e.g. the numbers 1, 2, and 4), and another set of n distinct objects N (e.g. 1, 3, and 9), then the total number of ways that you can combine one object from the M collection with one object from the N collection is M * N.



                            It must be certain that there is no repetition of pairs of factors; for instance if collection M contained both the numbers 2 and 3, and collection N contains the numbers 2 and 3, then there would be 2 different ways of producing 2 * 3 = 6, and then the number 6 would be double-counted. But this problem is avoided, because each collection contains only a particular kind of prime divisor, i.e. all powers of 2 in one collection, all powers of 3 in another collection, all powers of 5 in a different collection, and so on.



                            To generalize, if you have any number of collections, given that each collection contains no duplicate objects, and given that each collection is partitioned to contain powers of a different prime number, then the total number of combinations you can form by selecting one object from each collection (and multiplying them) is just the product of number of objects in each collection.



                            If a prime factorization contains some prime p to the N power, the reason why you add 1 to the power of that prime number is that is cardinality (size) of the set of all powers from 0 to N. I.e. that is the number of things in the set (p^0, p^1, p^2, ..., p^N).



                            So for the number 180, with prime factorization (2^2)(3^2)(5), you can partition the powers of its divisors by primes as 2^0, 2^1, 2^2, 3^0, 3^1, 3^2, 5^0, 5^1. Then the number of combinations of products you can form from these three partitions is 3 * 3 * 2 = 18; which is also (2+1)(2+1)(1+1).







                            share|cite|improve this answer














                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer








                            edited Aug 14 at 13:02

























                            answered Aug 10 at 14:32









                            John

                            1412




                            1412




















                                up vote
                                3
                                down vote













                                Let's say $$n = p_1^alpha_1 p_2^alpha_2 p_3^alpha_3 ldots$$ where the $p$ are distinct primes, and the $alpha$ are not necessarily distinct and may be $0$ as needed. In your case of $n = 36$, we can have $p_1 = 2, p_2 = 3$, $alpha_1 = alpha_2 = 2$ and all other $alpha_i = 0$. When $alpha_i = 0$, the corresponding $p_i$ does not contribute anything new to the divisors of $n$.



                                If $alpha_i > 0$ then $p_i$ contributes the following divisors: $1, p_i, p_i^2, ldots, p_i^alpha_i$. Of course with a number like $36$ you also have to account for divisors like $p_1 p_2^2$.






                                share|cite|improve this answer
















                                • 1




                                  Ummm.... what does this contribute beyond what had been posted an hour earlier in the below answer?
                                  – David G. Stork
                                  Aug 10 at 17:47






                                • 1




                                  @DavidG.Stork Coming from the asker, I would consider your comment with great seriousness.
                                  – Mr. Brooks
                                  Aug 13 at 19:37














                                up vote
                                3
                                down vote













                                Let's say $$n = p_1^alpha_1 p_2^alpha_2 p_3^alpha_3 ldots$$ where the $p$ are distinct primes, and the $alpha$ are not necessarily distinct and may be $0$ as needed. In your case of $n = 36$, we can have $p_1 = 2, p_2 = 3$, $alpha_1 = alpha_2 = 2$ and all other $alpha_i = 0$. When $alpha_i = 0$, the corresponding $p_i$ does not contribute anything new to the divisors of $n$.



                                If $alpha_i > 0$ then $p_i$ contributes the following divisors: $1, p_i, p_i^2, ldots, p_i^alpha_i$. Of course with a number like $36$ you also have to account for divisors like $p_1 p_2^2$.






                                share|cite|improve this answer
















                                • 1




                                  Ummm.... what does this contribute beyond what had been posted an hour earlier in the below answer?
                                  – David G. Stork
                                  Aug 10 at 17:47






                                • 1




                                  @DavidG.Stork Coming from the asker, I would consider your comment with great seriousness.
                                  – Mr. Brooks
                                  Aug 13 at 19:37












                                up vote
                                3
                                down vote










                                up vote
                                3
                                down vote









                                Let's say $$n = p_1^alpha_1 p_2^alpha_2 p_3^alpha_3 ldots$$ where the $p$ are distinct primes, and the $alpha$ are not necessarily distinct and may be $0$ as needed. In your case of $n = 36$, we can have $p_1 = 2, p_2 = 3$, $alpha_1 = alpha_2 = 2$ and all other $alpha_i = 0$. When $alpha_i = 0$, the corresponding $p_i$ does not contribute anything new to the divisors of $n$.



                                If $alpha_i > 0$ then $p_i$ contributes the following divisors: $1, p_i, p_i^2, ldots, p_i^alpha_i$. Of course with a number like $36$ you also have to account for divisors like $p_1 p_2^2$.






                                share|cite|improve this answer












                                Let's say $$n = p_1^alpha_1 p_2^alpha_2 p_3^alpha_3 ldots$$ where the $p$ are distinct primes, and the $alpha$ are not necessarily distinct and may be $0$ as needed. In your case of $n = 36$, we can have $p_1 = 2, p_2 = 3$, $alpha_1 = alpha_2 = 2$ and all other $alpha_i = 0$. When $alpha_i = 0$, the corresponding $p_i$ does not contribute anything new to the divisors of $n$.



                                If $alpha_i > 0$ then $p_i$ contributes the following divisors: $1, p_i, p_i^2, ldots, p_i^alpha_i$. Of course with a number like $36$ you also have to account for divisors like $p_1 p_2^2$.







                                share|cite|improve this answer












                                share|cite|improve this answer



                                share|cite|improve this answer










                                answered Aug 9 at 22:57









                                Mr. Brooks

                                30111137




                                30111137







                                • 1




                                  Ummm.... what does this contribute beyond what had been posted an hour earlier in the below answer?
                                  – David G. Stork
                                  Aug 10 at 17:47






                                • 1




                                  @DavidG.Stork Coming from the asker, I would consider your comment with great seriousness.
                                  – Mr. Brooks
                                  Aug 13 at 19:37












                                • 1




                                  Ummm.... what does this contribute beyond what had been posted an hour earlier in the below answer?
                                  – David G. Stork
                                  Aug 10 at 17:47






                                • 1




                                  @DavidG.Stork Coming from the asker, I would consider your comment with great seriousness.
                                  – Mr. Brooks
                                  Aug 13 at 19:37







                                1




                                1




                                Ummm.... what does this contribute beyond what had been posted an hour earlier in the below answer?
                                – David G. Stork
                                Aug 10 at 17:47




                                Ummm.... what does this contribute beyond what had been posted an hour earlier in the below answer?
                                – David G. Stork
                                Aug 10 at 17:47




                                1




                                1




                                @DavidG.Stork Coming from the asker, I would consider your comment with great seriousness.
                                – Mr. Brooks
                                Aug 13 at 19:37




                                @DavidG.Stork Coming from the asker, I would consider your comment with great seriousness.
                                – Mr. Brooks
                                Aug 13 at 19:37










                                up vote
                                1
                                down vote













                                The more general case is for a composite of the form $$n = prodlimits_k = 1^k_max p_1^a_1 p_2^a_2 ldots p_k_max^a_k_max,$$ where the $p_k$ are unique primes and the corresponding $a_k$ the exponents. In this case the number of factors is $$(a_1+1)(a_2 + 1) ldots (a_k_max+1) = prodlimits_k=1^k_max (a_k + 1)$$






                                share|cite|improve this answer


























                                  up vote
                                  1
                                  down vote













                                  The more general case is for a composite of the form $$n = prodlimits_k = 1^k_max p_1^a_1 p_2^a_2 ldots p_k_max^a_k_max,$$ where the $p_k$ are unique primes and the corresponding $a_k$ the exponents. In this case the number of factors is $$(a_1+1)(a_2 + 1) ldots (a_k_max+1) = prodlimits_k=1^k_max (a_k + 1)$$






                                  share|cite|improve this answer
























                                    up vote
                                    1
                                    down vote










                                    up vote
                                    1
                                    down vote









                                    The more general case is for a composite of the form $$n = prodlimits_k = 1^k_max p_1^a_1 p_2^a_2 ldots p_k_max^a_k_max,$$ where the $p_k$ are unique primes and the corresponding $a_k$ the exponents. In this case the number of factors is $$(a_1+1)(a_2 + 1) ldots (a_k_max+1) = prodlimits_k=1^k_max (a_k + 1)$$






                                    share|cite|improve this answer














                                    The more general case is for a composite of the form $$n = prodlimits_k = 1^k_max p_1^a_1 p_2^a_2 ldots p_k_max^a_k_max,$$ where the $p_k$ are unique primes and the corresponding $a_k$ the exponents. In this case the number of factors is $$(a_1+1)(a_2 + 1) ldots (a_k_max+1) = prodlimits_k=1^k_max (a_k + 1)$$







                                    share|cite|improve this answer














                                    share|cite|improve this answer



                                    share|cite|improve this answer








                                    edited Aug 12 at 16:57









                                    Robert Soupe

                                    10.1k21947




                                    10.1k21947










                                    answered Aug 9 at 22:38









                                    David G. Stork

                                    7,7362929




                                    7,7362929






















                                         

                                        draft saved


                                        draft discarded


























                                         


                                        draft saved


                                        draft discarded














                                        StackExchange.ready(
                                        function ()
                                        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2877738%2fwhy-multiplying-powers-of-prime-factors-of-a-number-yields-number-of-total-divis%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                        );

                                        Post as a guest













































































                                        這個網誌中的熱門文章

                                        How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

                                        Carbon dioxide

                                        Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?