How to turn this sequence into a formula?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pondzo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Sequence
pondzo
Messages
168
Reaction score
0
the sequence:
1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,3,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,3,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,4,
"............" 4,
"............" 5,
"............" 4,
"............" 4,
"............" 5,
"............" 4,
"............" 4,
"............" 6, and so on, is the sequence of exponents of 3 in the prime factorization of every third element of \mathbb Z starting from 3.
eg 3= 31 → 1
6= 31*2 → 1
9= 32 → 2
and these are the first three elements of the sequence
How would i go about turning this sequence into an equation, so i could say, for example, the number 666 is the 222th number in this sequence and plug 222 (or 666 for that matter, whichever) into some equation that would output the exponent for 3 in the prime factorization of the number 666 (which in the case of 666, would be 2 since 666= 37*2*32 )
Thank you!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I'm sorry, i don't quite get it. Could you please give an example of how this function outputs numbers in the sequence?
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top