Thread Closed

The dumb conjecture of the day

 
Share Thread Thread Tools
May23-08, 11:41 AM   #1
 

The dumb conjecture of the day


Let [tex]Q(\sqrt{k})[/tex], for some positive integer k, be the extension of the field of rationals with basis [tex](1, \sqrt{k})[/tex]. For example, in [tex]Q(\sqrt{5})[/tex] the element [tex]({1 \over 2}, {1 \over 2})[/tex] is the golden ratio = [tex]{1 \over 2} + {1 \over 2}\sqrt{5}[/tex].

Given an extension [tex]Q(\sqrt{k})[/tex], let [tex]B(n)[/tex] denote the 'Binet formula',
[tex]B(n) = {{p^n - (1-p)^n} \over \sqrt k}[/tex], n = 0, 1, 2, ...
where [tex]p = ({1 \over 2}, {1 \over 2})[/tex].

Conj. 1: [tex]B(n)[/tex] produces only integers, iif [tex]k \equiv 1 \ ("mod" \ 4)[/tex].

Conj. 2: When [tex]k \equiv 1 \ ("mod" \ 4)[/tex], [tex]B(n)[/tex] is the closed-form formula for the recurrence sequence
[tex]x_n = x_{n-1} + A \; x_{n-2}[/tex], n = 2, 3, 4, ...
[tex]x_0 = 0, \ \ x_1 = 1[/tex]
with [tex]A = {{k - 1} \over 4}[/tex].
PhysOrg.com
PhysOrg
science news on PhysOrg.com

>> Bird's playlist could signal mental strengths and weaknesses
>> Minus environment, patterns still emerge: Computational study tracks E. coli cells' regulatory mechanisms
>> Bacterium uses natural 'thermometer' to trigger diarrheal disease, scientists find
May23-08, 12:19 PM   #2
 
Recognitions:
Gold Membership Gold Member
Science Advisor Science Advisor
Retired Staff Staff Emeritus
Isn't the second conjecture a straightforward exercise? And you don't even have to bother solving the ordinary linear difference equation: you already know the (putative) solution! (Why do you have the congruence condition on k for conjecture 2?)

And isn't conjecture 1 a trivial consequence of conjecture 2?


I suppose one thing might help to see conjecture 2: if it's right, then [itex]p^n[/itex] and [itex](1-p)^n[/itex] would be a basis for the solution space to the unconstrained version of your difference equation.
May23-08, 12:29 PM   #3
 
I'm not sure I follow. (And in any case it's not trivial to me.) :D

As I see it, the first conjecture is a necessary previous step, for the second to be applicable. Possibly because I was interested in recurrence sequences returning only integers and with A = 1, 2, 3, ..., and frankly did not pay attention to the fact that B(n) could in fact be also the closed form for rational values of A and rational-producing sequences.

I'll try to digest what you're saying.
May23-08, 12:42 PM   #4
 

The dumb conjecture of the day


There is a generalised Binet formula for the recurrence relation G(n) = aG(n-1) + bG(n-2), which explains much more than the problem raised.
The system does not allow me to post URLs to other sites as I have made less than 15 posts(why ???), but googling "generalised fibonacci" helps, and I also give a "traditional" reference:
Vella, A. and Vella, D. (2006) Calculating exact cycle lengths in the generalised Fibonacci sequence modulo p. Math. Gaz. 90 (available on the internet).
Thread Closed
Thread Tools


Similar Threads for: The dumb conjecture of the day
Thread Forum Replies
BKL Conjecture Special & General Relativity 0
New Conjecture Linear & Abstract Algebra 8
Proof of Golbach's conjecture and the twin prime conjecture Linear & Abstract Algebra 9
My Conjecture General Discussion 0