- 4,032
- 2,080
I stopped typing my clue in as soon as I saw yours pop up.PeroK said:One last clue:
## 2 + 3 \approx 6##
##3 + 6 \approx 8##
##6 + 8 \approx 15##
Clearly, we are on the same page!
I stopped typing my clue in as soon as I saw yours pop up.PeroK said:One last clue:
## 2 + 3 \approx 6##
##3 + 6 \approx 8##
##6 + 8 \approx 15##
Thanks got it in some terms we add and aubtract 1 alternatively.Scott said:We're not suppose to just give you the solution. So here's another (hopefully final) clue:
We know (2, 3, 6, 8, 15, ...) isn't Fibonacci because:
6 <> 2+3 (just misses)
8 <> 3+6 (just misses)
15 <> 6+8 (just misses)
22 <>
And now that a solution is finally revealed, @willem2 solved it with this:willem2 said:You can however get an exact formula for the n-th element of the series, and it does involve (-1)^n.
If you type [insert recurrence relation here], a(0)=2, a(1)=3, a(2) = 6 in wolfram alpha, you'll get the exact solution.
There are infinite methods to solve it so we can say that series is divergent?.Scott said:The "absolute value" method I referred to was this:
## v_i = v_{i-2} - v_{i-1} +1 ##
can generate this sequence:
2, -3, 6, -8, 15, -22, ...
The absolute value of each element in that sequence gives you the sequence we were working with.
The reason it is divergent is because the sum of the terms does not approach any particular finite value.engnrshyckh said:There are infinite methods to solve it so we can say that series is divergent?
Nothing. It's to throw off the scent.zoki85 said:What on Earth the pyramidal structure of the puzzle has to do with that sequence recursive relation?