Editing Talk:710: Collatz Conjecture
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:And (again without checking the Wiki link), I suppose the conjecture could fail in one of two cases. Firstly if multiplying by three and adding one would take us to another odd number. Which cannot happen, because (odd*3) will be odd, so (odd*3)+1 is even. Which leads us to the possibility that the even number leads back to a prior odd number, to circle around again. There's no trivial case of (n*3)+1 => m, (m/2) => n, although there is the case of (n*3)+1 => m, (m/2) => o, (o/2) => n, for n=1. How, though, could we evaluate f<sub>1|2</sub>(x<sub>i</sub>) => x<sub>i+1</sub> for all countably finite limits to i, given the rules of which f() function to use, to ensure that x<sub>i</sub> never equals x<sub>0</sub>. Now, ''that's'' a question and a half. Which I suspect has already been asked. And a half. [[Special:Contributions/31.111.50.225|31.111.50.225]] 21:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC) | :And (again without checking the Wiki link), I suppose the conjecture could fail in one of two cases. Firstly if multiplying by three and adding one would take us to another odd number. Which cannot happen, because (odd*3) will be odd, so (odd*3)+1 is even. Which leads us to the possibility that the even number leads back to a prior odd number, to circle around again. There's no trivial case of (n*3)+1 => m, (m/2) => n, although there is the case of (n*3)+1 => m, (m/2) => o, (o/2) => n, for n=1. How, though, could we evaluate f<sub>1|2</sub>(x<sub>i</sub>) => x<sub>i+1</sub> for all countably finite limits to i, given the rules of which f() function to use, to ensure that x<sub>i</sub> never equals x<sub>0</sub>. Now, ''that's'' a question and a half. Which I suspect has already been asked. And a half. [[Special:Contributions/31.111.50.225|31.111.50.225]] 21:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC) | ||
:: Wonderful! "Without checking the wiki link"... The guy from [[675: Revolutionary]] in real life![[User:Mumiemonstret|Mumiemonstret]] ([[User talk:Mumiemonstret|talk]]) 15:14, 17 October 2014 (UTC) | :: Wonderful! "Without checking the wiki link"... The guy from [[675: Revolutionary]] in real life![[User:Mumiemonstret|Mumiemonstret]] ([[User talk:Mumiemonstret|talk]]) 15:14, 17 October 2014 (UTC) | ||
− | + | ||
:: It seems way too general to be much more than "asked," and I am sure that it has been addressed in its simpler forms. In any case, there is enough amateur, recreational, and serious mathematical literature on it to find out that there are indeed two failure cases: a starting Collatz number results in an infinitely increasing sequence, or a loop exists apart from the 4-2-1 loop. (Curiously enough, some loops exist when negative numbers are allowed.) Stuff like this and Goldbach made me realize just how hard simple things can get. --[[User:Quicksilver|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver|talk]]) 03:04, 20 August 2013 (UTC) | :: It seems way too general to be much more than "asked," and I am sure that it has been addressed in its simpler forms. In any case, there is enough amateur, recreational, and serious mathematical literature on it to find out that there are indeed two failure cases: a starting Collatz number results in an infinitely increasing sequence, or a loop exists apart from the 4-2-1 loop. (Curiously enough, some loops exist when negative numbers are allowed.) Stuff like this and Goldbach made me realize just how hard simple things can get. --[[User:Quicksilver|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver|talk]]) 03:04, 20 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |