5 ms·

so it's weakly highly composite?

• smolder 5y ago
  I think you can still say it's highly composite, but doesn't qualify as an anti-prime when it isn't the lowest number with that many factors.
  • infogulch 5y ago
    "anti-prime" is just Brady trying to rebrand an old boring name to sound cooler (as he does). "highly composite" has a perfectly well defined meaning already, trying to shift it to shoehorn in some artificial distinction between it and "anti-prime" is counterproductive. If the aim is to produce a more descriptive name for a similar sequence of numbers that includes 480, I think GP's "weakly highly composite" is much better. I might propose just "weakly composite" or "mediocrely composite". Edit: Actually, this was (also) already done by Ramanujan and has a better name than any proposed here: http://oeis.org/A067128 http://oeis.org/A067128 - "largely composite numbers" which does in fact contain 480. Perhaps every sharded system should choose a shard count from this list?
    • smolder 5y ago
      Thanks for correcting me, but I don't think drawing a distinction between "anti-prime" (clearly specific) and "highly composite" (vague) is counterproductive. On the other hand, "highly" and "largely" mean roughly the same thing, so treating "highly composite" and "largely composite" as distinct in this way is linguistically counterintuitive and counterproductive. Likewise, "weakly highly" reads like ambiguous nonsense when you don't go out of your way to specially define it.