Perfect number
positive integer which equals the sum of all its divisors

In number theory, a perfect number is a positive integer that is equal to the sum of its positive proper divisors, that is, divisors excluding the number itself. For instance, 6 has proper divisors 1, 2, and 3, and 1 + 2 + 3 = 6, so 6 is a perfect number. The next perfect number is 28, because 28 has proper divisors 1, 2, 4, 7, 14, and 1 + 2 + 4 + 7 + 14 = 28.
The first seven perfect numbers are 6, 28, 496, 8128, 33550336, 8589869056, and 137438691328 (sequence A000396 in the OEIS).
The sum of proper divisors of a number is called its aliquot sum, so a perfect number is one that is equal to its aliquot sum. Equivalently, a perfect number is a number that is half the sum of all of its positive divisors; in symbols,
σ
1
(
n
)
=
2
n
{\displaystyle \sigma _{1}(n)=2n}
where
σ
1
{\displaystyle \sigma _{1}}
is the sum-of-divisors function.
This definition is ancient, appearing as early as Euclid's Elements (Book VII, Definition 22) where it is called τέλειος ἀριθμός (téleios arithmós; 'perfect', 'ideal', or 'complete number'). Euclid also proved a formation rule (Book IX, Proposition 36) whereby
q
(
q
+
1
)
2
{\textstyle {\frac {q(q+1)}{2}}}
is an even perfect number whenever
q
{\displaystyle q}
is a prime of the form
2
p
−
1
{\displaystyle 2^{p}-1}
for positive integer
p
{\displaystyle p}
—what is now called a Mersenne prime. Two millennia later, Leonhard Euler proved that all even perfect numbers are of this form. This is known as the Euclid–Euler theorem.
The public source identifies “Perfect number” as positive integer which equals the sum of all its divisors. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Perfect, number and positive.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Perfect number”, the useful work is to connect “positive integer which equals the sum of all its divisors” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 12, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q170043.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Perfect number”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Perfect number primary sources, Perfect number archive and Perfect research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Perfect number”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Perfect number” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.