Wythoff' array and Wechsler's Sequence

  • Thread starter Thread starter ramsey2879
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Array Sequence
ramsey2879
Messages
841
Reaction score
3
Wythoff's square array is Sloane's reference A035513 in the online encyclopedia of sequences (click the "table" button to see the sequence as a table) and Allan Wechsler's sequence is A022344. To my knowledge the following connection has not been noted before.

Let T(i,j) be defined from the table as follows T(1,1) = 1, T(1,2) = 2 and T(2,1) = 4 and let A(i) be the Wechsler's sequence starting with A(1) = 1

Then x(i,j) are integers defined by the following relation:

If T(i,j) is even then

\frac{5*T_{(i,j)}^{2}}{4} - A_{i}*(-1)^{i} = x_{(i,j)}^{2}

If T(i,j) is odd then

\frac{5*T_{(i,j)}^{2} - 1}{4} -A_{i}*(-1)^{i} = x_{(i,j)}^{2} + x_{(i,j)}

for j>2 and T_{(i,j)} is odd

x_{(i,j)} = x_{(i,j-1)} + x_{(i,j-2)} [\tex]<br /> <br /> for j&gt;2 and T_{(i,j)} is even<br /> <br /> x_{(i,j)} = x_{(i,j-1)} + x_{(i,j-2)} + 1[\tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ramsey2879 said:
Wythoff's square array is Sloane's reference A035513 in the online encyclopedia of sequences (click the "table" button to see the sequence as a table) and Allan Wechsler's sequence is A022344. To my knowledge the following connection has not been noted before.

Let T(i,j) be defined from the table as follows T(1,1) = 1, T(1,2) = 2 and T(2,1) = 4 and let A(i) be the Wechsler's sequence starting with A(1) = 1

Then x(i,j) are integers defined by the following relation:

If T(i,j) is even then

\frac{5*T_{(i,j)}^{2}}{4} - A_{i}*(-1)^{i} = x_{(i,j)}^{2}

If T(i,j) is odd then

\frac{5*T_{(i,j)}^{2} - 1}{4} -A_{i}*(-1)^{i} = x_{(i,j)}^{2} + x_{(i,j)}

for j>2 and T_{(i,j)} is odd

x_{(i,j)} = x_{(i,j-1)} + x_{(i,j-2)}

for j>2 and T_{(i,j)}[\tex] is even<br /> <br /> x_{(i,j)} = x_{(i,j-1)} + x_{(i,j-2)} + 1
<br /> <br /> On the other hand since A_{i} = |T_{i,j}^{2}-T_{i,j-1}*T_{i,j+1}|, and since an odd square -1 divided by 4 is an oblong number, it occurred to me that the above could be simplified to:<br /> <br /> T_(n,k)^2 + 4*T_(n,k-1)*T_(n,k+1) = g(i,k)^2<br /> <br /> The formula for T_(n,k)<br /> <br /> <br /> T_{n,k} = F_{k+1}*floor(n*tau) + (n-1)*F_{k}<br /> <br /> F(n) are the fibonacci numbers with F(0) = 0 and F(1) = 1 and tau is the golden ratio.<br /> <br /> Also I found that g(i,k) is another row of the Wythoff array<br /> <br /> The mapping is as follows:<br /> <br /> g(1,k) = T(2,k-1)<br /> g(2,k) = T(16,k-3)<br /> g(3,k) = T(9,k-1)<br /> g(4,k) = T(13,k-1)<br /> g(5,k) = T(45,k-3)<br /> g(6,k) = T(20,k-1)<br /> g(7,k) = T(63,k-3)<br /> g(8,k) = T(27,k-1)<br /> g(9,k) = T(31,k-1)<br /> g(10,k) =T(92,k-3)<br /> <br /> I find it interesting that the 3&#039;s and 1&#039;s follow the Fibonacci rabbit sequence with 3&#039;s substituted for the zeros; and there appears to be two separate rabbit patterns associated with the series of differences of the row numbers with the differences 7 and 4 associated with the 1&#039;s and the differences 29 and 18 associated with the 3&#039;s. Does anyone care to attempt a proof or to verify my findings?
 
Last edited:
ramsey2879 said:
On the other hand since A_{i} = |T_{i,j}^{2}-T_{i,j-1}*T_{i,j+1}|, and since an odd square -1 divided by 4 is an oblong number, it occurred to me that the above could be simplified to:

T_(n,k)^2 + 4*T_(n,k-1)*T_(n,k+1) = g(i,k)^2
Hey, it turns out that the above Fibonacci relationship can be used to derive the formula for Pythagorean triples and vice versa. Great for introducing math to young students.

if a,b,c are three consecutive numbers in a Fibonacci sequence then b^2 + 4ac is a square. How to make this the square hypotenuse of a primative Pythagorean triple? Simple make a and c coprime squares. Why havn't I seen this posted before?
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'
This is the question, I understand the concept, in ##\mathbb{Z_n}## an element is a is a unit if and only if gcd( a,n) =1. My understanding of backwards substitution, ... i have using Euclidean algorithm, ##471 = 3⋅121 + 108## ##121 = 1⋅108 + 13## ##108 =8⋅13+4## ##13=3⋅4+1## ##4=4⋅1+0## using back-substitution, ##1=13-3⋅4## ##=(121-1⋅108)-3(108-8⋅13)## ... ##= 121-(471-3⋅121)-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24(471-3⋅121## ##=121-471+3⋅121-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24⋅471+72⋅121##...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top