Tag Archives: recreational mathematics

Eternal LIFE

by in Geometry, Infinity, Mathematics, Programming and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The French mathematician Siméon-Denis Poisson (1781-1840) once said: « La vie n’est bonne qu’à deux choses : à faire des mathématiques et à les professer. » — “Life is good only for two things: doing mathematics and teaching mathematics.” The German philosopher Nietzsche wouldn’t have agreed. He thought (inter alia) that we must learn to accept life as eternally recurring. Everything we do and experience will happen again and again for ever. Can you accept life like that? Then your life is good.

But neither Poisson or Nietzsche knew that Life, with a capital L, would take on a new meaning in the 20th century. It became a mathematical game played on a grid of squares with counters. You start by placing counters in some pattern, regular or random, on the grid, then you add or remove counters according to three simple rules applied to each square of the grid:

1. If an empty square has exactly three counters as neighbors, put a new counter on the square.
2. If a counter has two or three neighbors, leave it where it is.
3. If a counter has less than two or more than three neighbors, remove it from the grid.

And there is a meta-rule: apply all three rules simultaneously. That is, you check all the squares on the grid before you add or remove counters. With these three simple rules, patterns of great complexity and subtlety emerge, growing and dying in a way that reminded the inventor of the game, the English mathematician John Conway, of living organisms. That’s why he called the game Life.

Let’s look at Life in action, with the seeding counters shown in green. Sometimes the seed will evolve and disappear, sometimes it will evolve into one or more fixed shapes, sometimes it will evolve into dynamic shapes that repeat again and again. Here’s an example of a seed that evolves and disappears:

Seeded with cross (arms 4+1+4) stage #1

Life stage #2

Life stage #3

Life stage #4

Life stage #5

Life stage #6

Life stage #7

Death at stage #8

Life from cross (animated)

The final stage represents death. Now here’s a cross that evolves towards dynamism:

Life seeded with cross (arms 3+1+3) stage #1

Life stage #2

Life stage #3

Life stage #4

Life stage #5

Life stage #6 (same as stage #4)

Life stage #7 (same as stage #5)

Life stage #8 (same as stage #4 again)

Life from cross (animated)

A line of three blocks swinging between horizontal and vertical is called a blinker:

Four blinkers

And here’s a larger cross that evolves towards stasis:

Life seeded with cross (arms 7+1+7) stage #1

Life stage #2

Life stage #3

Life stage #4

Life stage #5

Life stage #6

Life stage #7

Life stage #8

Life stage #9

Life stage #10

Life stage #11

Life stage #12

Life stage #13

Life stage #14

Life stage #15

Life stage #16

Life from cross (animated)

This diamond with sides of 24 blocks evolves towards even more dynamism:

Life from 24-sided diamond (animated)

Looping Life from 24-sided diamond (animated)

The game of Life obviously has many variants. In the standard form, you’re checking all eight squares around the square whose fate is in question. If that square is (x,y), these are the eight other squares you check:

(x+1,y+1), (x+0,y+1), (x-1,y+1), (x-1,y+0), (x-1,y-1), (x+0,y-1), (x+1,y-1), (x+1,y+0)

Now trying checking only four squares around (x,y), the ones above and below and to the left and the right:

(x+1,y+1), (x-1,y+1), (x-1,y-1), (x+1,y-1)

And apply a different set of rules:

1. If a square has one or three neighbors, it stays alive or (if empty) comes to life
2. Otherwise the square remains or becomes empty.

With that check and those rules, the seed first disappears, then re-appears, for ever (note that the game is being played on a torus):

Evolution of spiral seed

Eternally recurring spiral

This happens with any seed, so you can use Life to bring Nietzsche’s eternal recurrence to life:

Evolution of LIFE

Eternally recurring LIFE

Blancmange Butterfly

by in Blancmange Curves, Circles, Fractals, Geometry, Mathematics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Blancmange butterfly. Is that a ’60s psychedelic band? No, it’s one of the shapes you can get by playing with blancmange curves. As I described in “White Rites”, a blancmange curve is a fractal created by summing the heights of successively smaller and more numerous zigzags, like this:

blanc_all

Zigzags 1 to 10

blancmange_all

Zigzags 1 to 10 (animated)

blanc_solid

Blancmange curve

In the blancmange curves below, the height (i.e., the y co-ordinate) has been normalized so that all the images are the same height:

Construction of a normalized blancmange curve (animated)

This is the solid version:

Solid normalized blancmange curve (animated)

I wondered what happens when you wrap a blancmange curve around a circle. Well, this happens:

Construction of a blancmange circle (animated)

You get what might be called a blancmange butterfly. The solid version looks like this (patterns in the circles are artefacts of the graphics program I used):

Solid blancmange circle (animated)

Next I tried using arcs rather zigzags to construct the blancmange curves and blancmange circles:

Arching blancmange curve (i.e., constructed with arcs) (animated)

And below is the circular version of a blancmange curve constructed with arcs. The arching circular blancmanges look even more like buttocks and then intestinal villi (the fingerlike projections lining our intestines):

Arching blancmange circle (animated)

The variations on blancmange curves don’t stop there — in fact, they’re infinite. Below is a negative arching blancmange curve, where the heights of the original arching blancmange curve are subtracted from the (normalized) maximum height:

Negative arching blancmange curve (animated)

And here’s an arching blancmange curve that’s alternately negative and positive:

Negative-positive arching blancmange curve (animated)

The circular version looks like this:

Negative-positive arching blancmange circle (animated)

Finally, here’s an arching blancmange curve that’s alternately positive and negative:

Positive-negative arching blancmange curve (animated)

And the circular version:

Positive-negative arching blancmange circle (animated)

Elsewhere Other-Accessible…

• White Rites — more variations on blancmange curves

Nuts for Numbers

by in Arithmetic, Base Behavior, Integer Sequences, Mathematics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

I was looking at palindromes created by sums of consecutive integers. And I came across this beautiful result:

2772 = sum(22..77)

2772 = 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 + 26 + 27 + 28 + 29 + 30 + 31 + 32 + 33 + 34 + 35 + 36 + 37 + 38 + 39 + 40 + 41 + 42 + 43 + 44 + 45 + 46 + 47 + 48 + 49 + 50 + 51 + 52 + 53 + 54 + 55 + 56 + 57 + 58 + 59 + 60 + 61 + 62 + 63 + 64 + 65 + 66 + 67 + 68 + 69 + 70 + 71 + 72 + 73 + 74 + 75 + 76 + 77

You could call 2772 a nutty sum, because 77 is held inside 22 like a kernel inside a nutshell. Here some more nutty sums, sum(n1..n2), where n2 is a kernel in the shell of n1:

1599 = sum(19..59)
2772 = sum(22..77)
22113 = sum(23..211)
159999 = sum(199..599)
277103 = sum(203..771)
277722 = sum(222..777)
267786 = sum(266..778)
279777 = sum(277..797)
1152217 = sum(117..1522)
1152549 = sum(149..1525)
1152767 = sum(167..1527)
4296336 = sum(436..2963)
5330303 = sum(503..3303)
6235866 = sum(626..3586)
8418316 = sum(816..4183)
10470075 = sum(1075..4700)
11492217 = sum(1117..4922)
13052736 = sum(1306..5273)
13538277 = sum(1377..5382)
14557920 = sum(1420..5579)
15999999 = sum(1999..5999)
25175286 = sum(2516..7528)
26777425 = sum(2625..7774)
27777222 = sum(2222..7777)
37949065 = sum(3765..9490)
53103195 = sum(535..10319)
111497301 = sum(1101..14973)

Of course, you can go the other way and find nutty sums where sum(n1..n2) produces n1 as a kernel inside the shell of n2:

147 = sum(4..17)
210 = sum(1..20)
12056 = sum(20..156)
13467 = sum(34..167)
22797 = sum(79..227)
22849 = sum(84..229)
26136 = sum(61..236)
1145520 = sum(145..1520)
1208568 = sum(208..1568)
1334667 = sum(334..1667)
1540836 = sum(540..1836)
1931590 = sum(315..1990)
2041462 = sum(414..2062)
2041863 = sum(418..2063)
2158083 = sum(158..2083)
2244132 = sum(244..2132)
2135549 = sum(554..2139)
2349027 = sum(902..2347)
2883558 = sum(883..2558)
2989637 = sum(989..2637)

When you look at nutty sums in other bases, you’ll find that the number “210” is always triangular and always a nutty sum in bases > 2:

210 = sum(1..20) in b3 → 21 = sum(1..6) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b4 → 36 = sum(1..8) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b5 → 55 = sum(1..10) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b6 → 78 = sum(1..12) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b7 → 105 = sum(1..14) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b8 → 136 = sum(1..16) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b9 → 171 = sum(1..18) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b11 → 253 = sum(1..22) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b12 → 300 = sum(1..24) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b13 → 351 = sum(1..26) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b14 → 406 = sum(1..28) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b15 → 465 = sum(1..30) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b16 → 528 = sum(1..32) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b17 → 595 = sum(1..34) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b18 → 666 = sum(1..36) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b19 → 741 = sum(1..38) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) in b20 → 820 = sum(1..40) in b10
[…]

Why is 210 always a nutty sum like that? Because the formula for sum(n1..n2) is (n1*n2) * (n2-n1+1) / 2. In all bases > 2, the sum of 1 to 20 (where 20 = 2 * b) is therefore:

(1+20) * (20-1+1) / 2 = 21 * 20 / 2 = 21 * 10 = 210

And here are nutty sums of both kinds (n1 inside n2 and n2 inside n1) for base 8:

210 = sum(1..20) in b8 → 136 = sum(1..16) in b10
12653 = sum(26..153) → 5547 = sum(22..107)
23711 = sum(71..231) → 10185 = sum(57..153)
2022323 = sum(223..2023) → 533715 = sum(147..1043)
2032472 = sum(247..2032) → 537914 = sum(167..1050)
2271564 = sum(715..2264) → 619380 = sum(461..1204)
2307422 = sum(742..2302) → 626450 = sum(482..1218)
125265253 = sum(2526..15253) → 22375083 = sum(1366..6827)

3246710 = sum(310..2467) in b8 → 871880 = sum(200..1335)
in b10
5326512 = sum(512..3265) → 1420618 = sum(330..1717)
15540671 = sum(1571..5406) → 3588537 = sum(889..2822)
21625720 = sum(2120..6257) → 4664272 = sum(1104..3247)

And for base 9:

125 = sum(2..15) in b9 → 104 = sum(2..14) in b10
210 = sum(1..20) → 171 = sum(1..18)
12858 = sum(28..158) → 8720 = sum(26..134)
1128462 = sum(128..1462) → 609824 = sum(107..1109)
1288588 = sum(288..1588) → 708344 = sum(242..1214)
1475745 = sum(475..1745) → 817817 = sum(392..1337)
2010707 = sum(107..2007) → 1070017 = sum(88..1465)
2034446 = sum(344..2046) → 1085847 = sum(283..1500)
2040258 = sum(402..2058) → 1089341 = sum(326..1511)
2063410 = sum(341..2060) → 1104768 = sum(280..1512)
2215115 = sum(215..2115) → 1191281 = sum(176..1553)
2255505 = sum(555..2205) → 1217840 = sum(455..1625)
2475275 = sum(475..2275) → 1348880 = sum(392..1688)
2735455 = sum(735..2455) → 1499927 = sum(599..1832)

1555 = sum(15..55) in b9 → 1184 = sum(14..50) in b10
155858 = sum(158..558) → 96200 = sum(134..458)
1148181 = sum(181..1481) → 622720 = sum(154..1126)
2211313 = sum(213..2113) → 1188525 = sum(174..1551)
2211747 = sum(247..2117) → 1188880 = sum(205..1555)
6358585 = sum(685..3585) → 3404912 = sum(563..2669)
7037453 = sum(703..3745) → 3745245 = sum(570..2795)
7385484 = sum(784..3854) → 3953767 = sum(643..2884)
13518167 = sum(1367..5181) → 6685072 = sum(1033..3799)
15588588 = sum(1588..5588) → 7794224 = sum(1214..4130)
17603404 = sum(1704..6034) → 8859865 = sum(1300..4405)
26750767 = sum(2667..7507) → 13201360 = sum(2005..5515)

Post-Performative Post-Scriptum…

Viz ’s Mr Logic would be a fan of nutty sums. And unlike real nuts, they wouldn’t prove fatal:

Mr Logic Goes Nuts (strip from Viz comic)

(click for full-size)

Bi-Bell Basics

by in Arithmetic, Base Behavior, Binary numbers, Blancmange Curves, Fibonacci Sequence, Fractals, Geometry, Mathematics, Powers and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Here’s what you might call a Sisyphean sequence. It struggles upward, then slips back, over and over again:

1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 3, 1, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 3, 4, 1, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 3, 4, 2, 3, 3, 4, 3, 4, 4, 5, 1, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 3, 4, 2, 3, 3, 4, 3, 4, 4, 5, 2, 3, 3, 4, 3, 4, 4, 5, 3, 4, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 6, 1, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 3, 4, 2, 3, 3, 4, 3, 4, 4, 5, 2, 3, 3, 4, 3, 4, 4, 5, 3, 4, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 6, 2, 3, 3, 4, 3, 4, 4, 5, 3, 4, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 6, 3, 4, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 6, 4, 5, 5, 6, 5, 6, 6, 7, 1, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 3, 4, 2...


The struggle goes on for ever. Every time it reaches a new maximum, it will fall back to 1 at the next step. And in fact 1, 2, 3 and all other integers occur infinitely often in the sequence, because it represents the digit-sums of binary numbers:

1 ← 1
1 = 1+0 ← 10 in binary = 2 in base ten
2 = 1+1 ← 11 = 3
1 = 1+0+0 ← 100 = 4
2 = 1+0+1 ← 101 = 5
2 = 1+1+0 ← 110 = 6
3 = 1+1+1 ← 111 = 7
1 = 1+0+0+0 ← 1000 = 8
2 = 1+0+0+1 ← 1001 = 9
2 = 1+0+1+0 ← 1010 = 10
3 = 1+0+1+1 ← 1011 = 11
2 = 1+1+0+0 ← 1100 = 12
3 = 1+1+0+1 ← 1101 = 13
3 = 1+1+1+0 ← 1110 = 14
4 = 1+1+1+1 ← 1111 = 15
1 = 1+0+0+0+0 ← 10000 = 16
2 = 1+0+0+0+1 ← 10001 = 17
2 = 1+0+0+1+0 ← 10010 = 18
3 = 1+0+0+1+1 ← 10011 = 19
2 = 1+0+1+0+0 ← 10100 = 20


Now here’s a related sequence in which all integers do not occur infinitely often:

1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 15, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17, 15, 16, 17, 18, 18, 19, 20, 21, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20, 21, 22, 13, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 19, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 22, 23, 18, 19, 20, 21, 21, 22, 23, 24, 22, 23, 24, 25, 25, 26, 27, 28, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 14, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15...


The sequence represents the sum of the values of occupied columns in the binary numbers, reading from right to left:

10 in binary = 2 in base ten
21 (column values from right to left)
2*1 + 1*0 = 2

11 = 3
21
2*1 + 1*1 = 3

100 = 4
321 (column values from right to left)
3*1 + 2*0 + 1*0 = 3

101 = 5
321
3*1 + 2*0 + 1*1 = 4

110 = 6
321
3*1 + 2*1 + 1*0 = 5

111 = 7
321
3*1 + 2*1 + 1*1 = 6

1000 = 8
4321
4*1 + 3*0 + 2*0 + 1*0 = 4

1001 = 9
4321
4*1 + 3*0 + 2*0 + 1*1 = 5

1010 = 10
4321
4*1 + 3*0 + 2*1 + 1*0 = 6

1011 = 11
4321
4*1 + 3*0 + 2*1 + 1*1 = 7

1100 = 12
4321
4*1 + 3*1 + 2*0 + 1*0 = 7

1101 = 13
4321
4*1 + 3*1 + 2*0 + 1*1 = 8

1110 = 14
4321
4*1 + 3*1 + 2*1 + 1*0 = 9

1111 = 15
4321
4*1 + 3*1 + 2*1 + 1*1 = 10

10000 = 16
54321
5*1 + 4*0 + 3*0 + 2*0 + 1*0 = 5


In that sequence, although no number occurs infinitely often, some numbers occur more often than others. If you represent the count of sums up to a certain digit-length as a graph, you get a famous shape:

Bell curve formed by the count of column-sums in base 2

Bi-bell curves for 1 to 16 binary digits (animated)

In “Pi in the Bi”, I looked at that way of forming the bell curve and called it the bi-bell curve. Now I want to go further. Suppose that you assign varying values to the columns and try other bases. For example, what happens if you assign the values 2^p + 1 to the columns, reading from right to left, then use base 3 to generate the sums? These are the values of 2^p + 1:

2, 3, 5, 9, 17, 33, 65, 129, 257, 513, 1025...


And here’s an example of how you generate a column-sum in base 3:

2102 in base 3 = 65 in base ten
9532 (column values from right to left)
2*9 + 1*5 + 0*3 + 2*2 = 27


The graphs for these column-sums using base 3 look like this as the digit-length rises. They’re no longer bell-curves (and please note that widths and heights have been normalized so that all graphs fit the same space):

Graph for the count of column-sums in base 3 using 2^p + 1 (digit-length <= 7)

(width and height are normalized)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 1 (dl<=8)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 1 (dl<=9)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 1 (dl<=10)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 1 (dl<=11)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 1 (dl<=12)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 1 (animated)

Now try base 3 and column-values of 2^p + 2 = 3, 4, 6, 10, 18, 34, 66, 130, 258, 514, 1026…

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 2 (dl<=7)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 2 (dl<=8)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 2 (dl<=9)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 2 (dl<=10)

Graph for base 3 and 2^p + 2 (animated)

Now try base 5 and 2^p + 1 for the columns. The original bell curve has become like a fractal called the blancmange curve:

Graph for base 5 and 2^p + 1 (dl<=7)

Graph for base 5 and 2^p + 1 (dl<=8)

Graph for base 5 and 2^p + 1 (dl<=9)

Graph for base 5 and 2^p + 1 (dl<=10)

Graph for base 5 and 2^p + 1 (animated)

And finally, return to base 2 and try the Fibonacci numbers for the columns:

Graph for base 2 and Fibonacci numbers = 1,1,2,3,5… (dl<=7)

Graph for base 2 and Fibonacci numbers (dl<=9)

Graph for base 2 and Fibonacci numbers (dl<=11)

Graph for base 2 and Fibonacci numbers (dl<=13)

Graph for base 2 and Fibonacci numbers (dl<=15)

Graph for base 2 and Fibonacci numbers (animated)

Previously Pre-Posted…

• Pi in the Bi — bell curves generated by binary digits

The Odd Couple

by in Arithmetic, Mathematics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

12,285

Together with 14,595 the smallest pair of odd amicable numbers, discovered by [the American mathematician] B.H. Brown in 1939. — The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Numbers, David Wells (1986)

Sphiral Architect

by in Fibonacci Sequence, Geometry, φ, Mathematics and tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

If you’re a fan of Black Sabbath, you may have misread the title of this blog-post. But it’s not “Spiral Architect”, it’s “Sphiral Architect”. And this is a sphiral:

A sphiral
(the red square is the center)

But why do I call it a sphiral? The answer starts with the Fibonacci sequence, which is at once a perfectly simple and profoundly complex sequence of numbers. It’s very easy to create, yet yields endless riches. Simply seed the sequence with 1s, then add the previous two numbers in the sequence to get the next:


1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597, 2584, 4181, 6765, 10946, 17711, 28657, 46368, 75025, 121393, 196418, 317811, 514229, 832040, 1346269, 2178309, 3524578, 5702887, 9227465, 14930352, 24157817, 39088169, 63245986, 102334155, 165580141, 267914296, 433494437, 701408733, 1134903170, 1836311903, 2971215073, 4807526976, 7778742049, 12586269025...

Each pair of numbers provides a better and better approximation to phi or φ, an irrational number whose decimal digits never end and never fall into a repeating pattern. It satisfies the equations 1/x = x-1 and x^2 = x+1:


1.6180339887498948482045868343656381177203091798... = φ

1 / 1.6180339887498948482045868343656381177203091798... = 0.6180339887498948482045868343656381177203091798...

1.6180339887498948482045868343656381177203091798...^2 = 2.6180339887498948482045868343656381177203091798...

Here are the approximations to φ supplied by successive pairs of numbers in the Fibonacci sequence:


1 = 1/1
2 = 2/1
1.5 = 3/2
1.666... = 5/3
1.6 = 8/5
1.625 = 13/8
1.6153846153846... = 21/13
1.619047619047619047619047... = 34/21
1.6176470588235294117647... = 55/34
1.6181818... = 89/55
1.617977528... = 144/89
1.6180555... = 233/144
1.618025751... = 377/233
1.6180371352785... = 610/377
1.6180327868852459... = 987/610
1.618034447821681864235... = 1597/987
1.6180338134... = 2584/1597
1.61803405572755... = 4181/2584
1.6180339631667... = 6765/4181
1.6180339985218... = 10946/6765
1.618033985... = 17711/10946
1.61803399... = 28657/17711
1.6180339882... = 46368/28657
1.6180339889579... = 75025/46368
1.61803398867... = 121393/75025
1.61803398878... = 196418/121393
1.6180339887383... = 317811/196418
1.6180339887543225376... = 514229/317811
1.6180339887482... = 832040/514229
1.61803398875... = 1346269/832040
1.6180339887496481... = 2178309/1346269
1.618033988749989... = 3524578/2178309
1.61803398874985884835... = 5702887/3524578
1.6180339887499... = 9227465/5702887
1.6180339887498895958965978... = 14930352/9227465
1.6180339887498968544... = 24157817/14930352
1.618033988749894... = 39088169/24157817
1.61803398874989514... = 63245986/39088169
1.6180339887498947364... = 102334155/63245986
1.61803398874989489... = 165580141/102334155
1.618033988749894831892914... = 267914296/165580141
1.618033988749894854435... = 433494437/267914296
1.618033988749894845824745843278261031063704284629608753202985163 = 701408733/433494437
1.6180339887498948491136... = 1134903170/701408733
1.618033988749894847857... = 1836311903/1134903170
1.61803398874989484833721... = 2971215073/1836311903
1.6180339887498948481... = 4807526976/2971215073
1.61803398874989484822... = 7778742049/4807526976
1.618033988749894848197... = 12586269025/7778742049
1.6180339887498948482... = 20365011074/12586269025
1.6180339887498948482045868343656381177203091798... = φ

I decided to look at how integers could be the partial sums of unique Fibonacci numbers. For example:


Using 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89...

1 = 1
2 = 2
3 = 1+2 = 3
4 = 1+3
5 = 2+3 = 5
6 = 1+2+3 = 1+5
7 = 2+5
8 = 1+2+5 = 3+5 = 8
9 = 1+3+5 = 1+8
10 = 2+3+5 = 2+8
11 = 1+2+3+5 = 1+2+8 = 3+8
12 = 1+3+8
13 = 2+3+8 = 5+8 = 13
14 = 1+2+3+8 = 1+5+8 = 1+13
15 = 2+5+8 = 2+13
16 = 1+2+5+8 = 3+5+8 = 1+2+13 = 3+13
17 = 1+3+5+8 = 1+3+13
18 = 2+3+5+8 = 2+3+13 = 5+13
19 = 1+2+3+5+8 = 1+2+3+13 = 1+5+13
20 = 2+5+13
21 = 1+2+5+13 = 3+5+13 = 8+13 = 21
22 = 1+3+5+13 = 1+8+13 = 1+21
23 = 2+3+5+13 = 2+8+13 = 2+21
24 = 1+2+3+5+13 = 1+2+8+13 = 3+8+13 = 1+2+21 = 3+21
25 = 1+3+8+13 = 1+3+21
26 = 2+3+8+13 = 5+8+13 = 2+3+21 = 5+21
27 = 1+2+3+8+13 = 1+5+8+13 = 1+2+3+21 = 1+5+21
28 = 2+5+8+13 = 2+5+21
29 = 1+2+5+8+13 = 3+5+8+13 = 1+2+5+21 = 3+5+21 = 8+21
30 = 1+3+5+8+13 = 1+3+5+21 = 1+8+21
31 = 2+3+5+8+13 = 2+3+5+21 = 2+8+21

All integers can be represented as partial sums of unique Fibonacci numbers. But what happens when you start removing numbers from the beginning of the Fibonacci sequence, then trying to find partial sums of the integers? Some integers are sumless:


Using 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144...

1 has no sum
2 = 2
3 = 3
4 has no sum
5 = 2+3 = 5
6 has no sum
7 = 2+5
8 = 3+5 = 8
9 has no sum
10 = 2+3+5 = 2+8
11 = 3+8
12 has no sum
13 = 2+3+8 = 5+8 = 13
14 has no sum
15 = 2+5+8 = 2+13
16 = 3+5+8 = 3+13
17 has no sum
18 = 2+3+5+8 = 2+3+13 = 5+13
19 has no sum
20 = 2+5+13
21 = 3+5+13 = 8+13 = 21
22 has no sum
23 = 2+3+5+13 = 2+8+13 = 2+21
24 = 3+8+13 = 3+21
25 has no sum
26 = 2+3+8+13 = 5+8+13 = 2+3+21 = 5+21
27 has no sum
28 = 2+5+8+13 = 2+5+21
29 = 3+5+8+13 = 3+5+21 = 8+21
30 has no sum
31 = 2+3+5+8+13 = 2+3+5+21 = 2+8+21

Now try removing more Fibonacci numbers from the sequence:


Using 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233...

1 to 2 have no sums
3 = 3
4 has no sum
5 = 5
6 to 7 have no sums
8 = 3+5 = 8
9 to 10 have no sums
11 = 3+8
12 has no sum
13 = 5+8 = 13
14 to 15 have no sums
16 = 3+5+8 = 3+13
17 has no sum
18 = 5+13
19 to 20 have no sums
21 = 3+5+13 = 8+13 = 21
22 to 23 have no sums
24 = 3+8+13 = 3+21
25 has no sum
26 = 5+8+13 = 5+21
27 to 28 have no sums
29 = 3+5+8+13 = 3+5+21 = 8+21
30 to 31 have no sums
32 = 3+8+21

Using 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377...

1 to 4 have no sums
5 = 5
6 to 7 have no sums
8 = 8
9 to 12 have no sums
13 = 5+8 = 13
14 to 17 have no sums
18 = 5+13
19 to 20 have no sums
21 = 8+13 = 21
22 to 25 have no sums
26 = 5+8+13 = 5+21
27 to 28 have no sums
29 = 8+21
30 to 33 have no sums
34 = 5+8+21 = 13+21 = 34
35 to 38 have no sums
39 = 5+13+21 = 5+34
40 to 41 have no sums
42 = 8+13+21 = 8+34
43 to 46 have no sums
47 = 5+8+13+21 = 5+8+34 = 13+34
48 to 51 have no sums
52 = 5+13+34

Using 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610...

1 to 7 have no sums
8 = 8
9 to 12 have no sums
13 = 13
14 to 20 have no sums
21 = 8+13 = 21
22 to 28 have no sums
29 = 8+21
30 to 33 have no sums
34 = 13+21 = 34
35 to 41 have no sums
42 = 8+13+21 = 8+34
43 to 46 have no sums
47 = 13+34
48 to 54 have no sums
55 = 8+13+34 = 21+34 = 55

Now ask: what fraction of integers can’t be represented as sums as you remove 1,2,3,5… from the Fibonacci sequence? Let’s approach the answer visually and represent the sums on a spiral created in the same way as an Ulam spiral. When the Fib-sums can’t use 1, you get this spiral:

2,3,5-sphiral
(integers that are the partial sums of unique Fibonacci numbers from 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89…)

I call it a sphiral, because φ appears in the ratio of white-to-black space in the spiral, as we shall see. Phi also appears in these sphirals:

3,5,8,13-sphiral

5,8,13,21-sphiral

8,13,21,34-sphiral

Sum sphirals from 1,2,3,5 to 8,13,21,34(animated)

How does φ appear in the sphirals? Well, I think it must appear in lots more ways than I’m able to see. But one simple way, as remarked above, is that φ governs the ratio of white-to-black space in each sphiral. When all Fibonacci numbers can be used, there’s no black space, because all integers can be represented as sums of 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89… But that changes as numbers are dropped from the beginning of the Fibonacci sequence:


0.6180339887... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144...
0.6180339887... = 1/φ^1
0.3819660112... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233...
0.3819660112... = 1/φ^2
0.2360679774... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377...
0.2360679774... = 1/φ^3
0.1458980337... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610...
0.1458980337... = 1/φ^4
0.0901699437... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987...
0.0901699437... = 1/φ^5
0.05572809... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597...
0.05572809... = 1/φ^6
0.0344418537... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597, 2584...
0.0344418537... = 1/φ^7
0.0212862362... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597, 2584, 4181...
0.0212862362... = 1/φ^8
0.0131556174... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597, 2584, 4181, 6765...
0.0131556174... = 1/φ^9
0.0081306187... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597, 2584, 4181, 6765, 10946...
0.0081306187... = 1/φ^10

But why stick to the standard Fibonacci sequence? If you seed a Fibonacci-like sequence with 2s instead of 1s, you get these numbers:


2, 2, 4, 6, 10, 16, 26, 42, 68, 110, 178, 288, 466, 754, 1220, 1974, 3194, 5168, 8362, 13530, 21892, 35422, 57314, 92736, 150050, 242786, 392836, 635622, 1028458, 1664080, 2692538, 4356618, 7049156, 11405774, 18454930, 29860704, 48315634, 78176338, 126491972, 204668310...

Obviously, all numbers in the 2,2,4-sequence are even, so no odd number is the partial sum of unique numbers in the sequence. But all even numbers are partial sums of the sequence. In other words:


0.5 of integers can be represented as partial sums of 2, 2, 4, 6, 10, 16, 26, 42, 68, 110...

So what happens when you drop the 2s and represent the sums graphically? You get this attractive sphiral:

4,6,10,16-sphiral (lo-res)

4,6,10,16-sphiral (hi-res)

In the 4,6,10,16-sphiral, the ratio of white-to-black space is 0.3090169943749474241… This is because:


0.3090169943749474241... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 4, 6, 10, 16, 26, 42, 68, 110, 178, 288...
0.3090169943749474241... = φ^1 * 0.5

Now try the 6,10,16,26-sphiral and 10,16,26,42-sphiral:

6,10,16,26-sphiral

10,16,26,42-sphiral

In the 4,6,10,16-sphiral, the ratio of white-to-black space is 0.190983005625… This is because:


0.190983005625... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 6, 10, 16, 26, 42, 68, 110, 178, 288, 466...
0.190983005625... = φ^2 * 0.5

And so on:


0.1180339887498948482... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 10, 16, 26, 42, 68, 110, 178, 288, 466, 754...
0.1180339887498948482... = φ^3 * 0.5
0.072949016875... of integers can be represented as partial sums of 16, 26, 42, 68, 110, 178, 288, 466, 754, 1220...
0.072949016875... = φ^4 * 0.5

Fine as Nine

by in Geometry, Integer Sequences, Mathematics, Polygons, Reciprocals, Triangular Numbers and tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

This is a regular nonagon (a polygon with nine sides):

A nonagon or enneagon (from Wikipedia)

And this is the endlessly repeating decimal of the reciprocal of 7:

1/7 = 0.142857142857142857142857…

What is the curious connection between 1/7 and nonagons? If I’d been asked that a week ago, I’d’ve had no answer. Then I found a curious connection when I was looking at the leading digits of polygonal numbers. A polygonal number is a number that can be represented in the form of a polygon. Triangular numbers look like this:


* = 1

*
** = 3

*
**
*** = 6

*
**
***
**** = 10

*
**
***
****
***** = 15

By looking at the shapes rather than the numbers, it’s easy to see that you generate the triangular numbers by simply summing the integers:


1 = 1
1+2=3
1+2+3=6
1+2+3+4=10
1+2+3+4+5=15

Now try the square numbers:


* = 1

**
** = 4

***
***
*** = 9

****
****
****
**** = 16

*****
*****
*****
*****
***** = 25


You generate the square numbers by summing the odd integers:


1 = 1
1+3 = 4
1+3+5 = 9
1+3+7 = 16
1+3+7+9 = 25

Next come the pentagonal numbers, the hexagonal numbers, the heptagonal numbers, and so on. I was looking at the leading digits of these numbers and trying to find patterns. For example, when do the leading digits of the k-th triangular number, tri(k), match the digits of k? This is when:


tri(1) = 1
tri(19) = 190
tri(199) = 19900
tri(1999) = 1999000
tri(19999) = 199990000
tri(199999) = 19999900000
[...]

That pattern is easy to explain. The formula for the k-th polygonal number is k * ((pn-2)*k + (4-pn)) / 2, where pn = 3 for the triangular numbers, 4 for the square numbers, 5 for the pentagonal numbers, and so on. Therefore the k-th triangular number is k * (k + 1) / 2. When k = 19, the formula is 19 * (19 + 1) / 2 = 19 * 20 / 2 = 19 * 10 = 190. And so on. Now try the pol(k) = leaddig(pol(k)) for higher polygonal numbers. The patterns are easy to predict until you get to the nonagonal numbers:


square(10) = 100
square(100) = 10000
square(1000) = 1000000
square(10000) = 100000000
square(100000) = 10000000000
[...]

pentagonal(7) = 70
pentagonal(67) = 6700
pentagonal(667) = 667000
pentagonal(6667) = 66670000
pentagonal(66667) = 6666700000
[...]

hexagonal(6) = 66
hexagonal(51) = 5151
hexagonal(501) = 501501
hexagonal(5001) = 50015001
hexagonal(50001) = 5000150001
[...]

heptagonal(5) = 55
heptagonal(41) = 4141
heptagonal(401) = 401401
heptagonal(4001) = 40014001
heptagonal(40001) = 4000140001
[...]

octagonal(4) = 40
octagonal(34) = 3400
octagonal(334) = 334000
octagonal(3334) = 33340000
octagonal(33334) = 3333400000
[...]

nonagonal(4) = 46
nonagonal(30) = 3075
nonagonal(287) = 287574
nonagonal(2858) = 28581429
nonagonal(28573) = 2857385719
nonagonal(285715) = 285715000000
nonagonal(2857144) = 28571444285716
nonagonal(28571430) = 2857143071428575
nonagonal(285714287) = 285714287571428574
nonagonal(2857142858) = 28571428581428571429
nonagonal(28571428573) = 2857142857385714285719
nonagonal(285714285715) = 285714285715000000000000
nonagonal(2857142857144) = 28571428571444285714285716
nonagonal(28571428571430) = 2857142857143071428571428575
nonagonal(285714285714287) = 285714285714287571428571428574
nonagonal(2857142857142858) = 28571428571428581428571428571429
nonagonal(28571428571428573) = 2857142857142857385714285714285719
nonagonal(285714285714285715) = 285714285714285715000000000000000000
nonagonal(2857142857142857144) = 28571428571428571444285714285714285716
nonagonal(28571428571428571430) = 2857142857142857143071428571428571428575
[...]

What’s going on with the leading digits of the nonagonals? Well, they’re generating a different reciprocal. Or rather, they’re generating the multiple of a different reciprocal:


1/7 * 2 = 2/7 = 0.285714285714285714285714285714...

And why does 1/7 have this curious connection with the nonagonal numbers? Because the nonagonal formula is k * (7k-5) / 2 = k * ((9-2) * k + (4-pn)) / 2. Now look at the pentadecagonal numbers, where pn = 15:


pentadecagonal(1538461538461538461540) = 15384615384615384615406923076923076923076930

2/13 = 0.153846153846153846153846153846...

pentadecagonal formula = k * (13k - 11) / 2 = k * ((15-2)*k + (4-15)) / 2

Penultimately, let’s look at the icosikaihenagonal numbers, where pn = 21:


icosikaihenagonal(2) = 21
icosikaihenagonal(12) = 1266
icosikaihenagonal(107) = 107856
icosikaihenagonal(1054) = 10544743
icosikaihenagonal(10528) = 1052878960
icosikaihenagonal(105265) = 105265947385
icosikaihenagonal(1052633) = 10526335263165
icosikaihenagonal(10526317) = 1052631731578951
icosikaihenagonal(105263159) = 105263159210526318
icosikaihenagonal(1052631580) = 10526315801578947370
icosikaihenagonal(10526315791) = 1052631579163157894746
icosikaihenagonal(105263157896) = 105263157896368421052636
icosikaihenagonal(1052631578949) = 10526315789497368421052643
icosikaihenagonal(10526315789475) = 1052631578947542105263157900
icosikaihenagonal(105263157894738) = 105263157894738263157894736845
icosikaihenagonal(1052631578947370) = 10526315789473706842105263157905
icosikaihenagonal(10526315789473686) = 1052631578947368689473684210526331
icosikaihenagonal(105263157894736843) = 105263157894736843000000000000000000
icosikaihenagonal(1052631578947368422) = 10526315789473684220526315789473684211
icosikaihenagonal(10526315789473684212) = 1052631578947368421257894736842105263166

2/19 = 0.1052631578947368421052631579

icosikaihenagonal formula = k * (19k - 17) / 2 = k * ((21-2)*k + (4-21)) / 2

And ultimately, let’s look at this other pattern in the leading digits of the triangular numbers, which I can’t yet explain at all:


tri(904) = 409060
tri(6191) = 19167336
tri(98984) = 4898965620
tri(996694) = 496699963165
tri(9989894) = 49898996060565
tri(99966994) = 4996699994681515
tri(999898994) = 499898999601055515
tri(9999669994) = 49996699999451815015
tri(99998989994) = 4999898999960055555015
tri(999996699994) = 499996699999945018150015
tri(9999989899994) = 49999898999996005055550015
tri(99999966999994) = 4999996699999994500181500015
tri(999999898999994) = 499999898999999600500555500015
[...]

A Walk on the Wide Side

by in Base Behavior, Digit-sums, Fibonacci Sequence, Integer Sequences, Irrational numbers, φ, Mathematics, Phi and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How wide is a number? The obvious answer is to count digits and say that 1 and 9 are one digit wide, 11 and 99 are two digits wide, 111 and 999 are three digits wide, and so on. But that isn’t a very good answer. 111 and 999 are both three digits wide, but 999 is nine larger times than 111. And although 111 and 999 are both one digit wider than 11 and 99, 111 is much closer to 99 than 999 is to 111.

So there’s got to be a better answer to the question. I came across it indirectly, when I started looking at carries in powers. I wanted to know how fast a number grew in digit-width as it was multiplied repeatedly by, say, 2. For example, 2^3 = 8 and 2^4 = 16, so there’s been a carry at the far left and 2^4 = 16 has increased in digit-width by 1 over 2^3 = 8. After that, 2^6 = 64 and 2^7 = 128, so there’s another carry and another increase in digit-width. I wrote a program to sum the carries and divide them by the power. If I were better at math, I would’ve known what the value of carries / power was going to be. Here’s the program beginning to find it (it begins with a carry of 1, to mark 2^0 = 1 as creating a digit ex nihilo, as it were):


8 = 2^3
16 = 2^4 → 2 / 4 = 0.5
64 = 2^6
128 = 2^7 → 3 / 7 = 0.4285714285714285714285714286
512 = 2^9
1024 = 2^10 → 4 / 10 = 0.4
8192 = 2^13
16384 = 2^14 → 5 / 14 = 0.3571428571428571428571428571
65536 = 2^16
131072 = 2^17 → 6 / 17 = 0.3529411764705882352941176471
524288 = 2^19
1048576 = 2^20 → 7 / 20 = 0.35
8388608 = 2^23
16777216 = 2^24 → 8 / 24 = 0.3...
67108864 = 2^26
134217728 = 2^27 → 9 / 27 = 0.3...
536870912 = 2^29
1073741824 = 2^30 → 10 / 30 = 0.3...
8589934592 = 2^33
17179869184 = 2^34 → 11 / 34 = 0.3235294117647058823529411765
68719476736 = 2^36
137438953472 = 2^37 → 12 / 37 = 0.3243243243243243243243243243
549755813888 = 2^39
1099511627776 = 2^40 → 13 / 40 = 0.325
8796093022208 = 2^43
17592186044416 = 2^44 → 14 / 44 = 0.318...
70368744177664 = 2^46
140737488355328 = 2^47 → 15 / 47 = 0.3191489361702127659574468085
562949953421312 = 2^49
1125899906842624 = 2^50 → 16 / 50 = 0.32
9007199254740992 = 2^53
18014398509481984 = 2^54 → 17 / 54 = 0.3148...
72057594037927936 = 2^56
144115188075855872 = 2^57 → 18 / 57 = 0.3157894736842105263157894737
576460752303423488 = 2^59
1152921504606846976 = 2^60 → 19 / 60 = 0.316...
9223372036854775808 = 2^63
18446744073709551616 = 2^64 → 20 / 64 = 0.3125
73786976294838206464 = 2^66
147573952589676412928 = 2^67 → 21 / 67 = 0.3134328358208955223880597015
590295810358705651712 = 2^69
1180591620717411303424 = 2^70 → 22 / 70 = 0.3142857...
9444732965739290427392 = 2^73
18889465931478580854784 = 2^74 → 23 / 74 = 0.3108...
75557863725914323419136 = 2^76
151115727451828646838272 = 2^77 → 24 / 77 = 0.3116883...
604462909807314587353088 = 2^79
1208925819614629174706176 = 2^80 → 25 / 80 = 0.3125
9671406556917033397649408 = 2^83
19342813113834066795298816 = 2^84 → 26 / 84 = 0.3095238095238095238095238095
77371252455336267181195264 = 2^86
154742504910672534362390528 = 2^87 → 27 / 87 = 0.3103448275862068965517241379
618970019642690137449562112 = 2^89
1237940039285380274899124224 = 2^90 → 28 / 90 = 0.31...
9903520314283042199192993792 = 2^93
19807040628566084398385987584 = 2^94 → 29 / 94 = 0.3085106382978723404255319149
79228162514264337593543950336 = 2^96
158456325028528675187087900672 = 2^97 → 30 / 97 = 0.3092783505154639175257731959
633825300114114700748351602688 = 2^99
1267650600228229401496703205376 = 2^100 → 31 / 100 = 0.31

After calculating 2^p higher and higher (I discarded trailing digits of 2^p), I realized that the answer — carries / power — was converging on a value of slightly less than 0.30103. In the end (doh!), I realized that what I was calculating was the logarithm of 2 in base 10:


log(2) = 0.3010299956639811952137388947...
10^0.301029995663981... = 2

You can use then same carries-and-powers method to approximate the values of other logarithms:


log(1) = 0
log(2) = 0.3010299956639811952137388947...
log(3) = 0.4771212547196624372950279033...
log(4) = 0.6020599913279623904274777894...
log(5) = 0.6989700043360188047862611053...
log(6) = 0.7781512503836436325087667980...
log(7) = 0.8450980400142568307122162586...
log(8) = 0.9030899869919435856412166842...
log(9) = 0.9542425094393248745900558065...

I also realized logarithms are a good answer to the question I raised above: How wide is a number? The logs of the powers of 2 are multiples of log(2):


    log(2^1) = log(2) = 0.301029995663981195213738894
    log(2^2) = log(4) = 0.602059991327962390427477789 = 2 * log(2)
    log(2^3) = log(8) = 0.903089986991943585641216684 = 3 * log(2)
   log(2^4) = log(16) = 1.204119982655924780854955579 = 4 * log(2)
   log(2^5) = log(32) = 1.505149978319905976068694474 = 5 * log(2)
   log(2^6) = log(64) = 1.806179973983887171282433368 = 6 * log(2)
  log(2^7) = log(128) = 2.107209969647868366496172263 = 7 * log(2)
  log(2^8) = log(256) = 2.408239965311849561709911158 = 8 * log(2)
  log(2^9) = log(512) = 2.709269960975830756923650053 = 9 * log(2)
log(2^10) = log(1024) = 3.010299956639811952137388947 = 10 * log(2)

4 is 2 times larger than 2 and, in a sense, the width of 4 is 0.301029995663981… greater than the width of 2. As you can see, when the integer part of the log-sum increases by 1, so does the digit-width of the power:


 log(2^3) = log(8) = 0.903089986991943585641216684 = 3 * log(2)
log(2^4) = log(16) = 1.204119982655924780854955579 = 4 * log(2)

[...]

 log(2^6) = log(64) = 1.806179973983887171282433368 = 6 * log(2)
log(2^7) = log(128) = 2.107209969647868366496172263 = 7 * log(2)

[...]

  log(2^9) = log(512) = 2.709269960975830756923650053 = 9 * log(2)
log(2^10) = log(1024) = 3.01029995663981195213738894 = 10 * log(2)

In other words, powers of 2 are increasing in width by 0.301029995663981… units. When the increase flips the integer part of the log-sum up by 1, the digit-width or digit-count also increases by 1. To find the digit-count of a number, n, in a particular base, you simply take the integer part of log(n,b) and add 1. In base 10, the log of 123456789 is 8.091514… The integer part is 8 and 8+1 = 9. But it also makes perfect sense that log(1) = 0. No matter how many times you multiply a number by 1, the number never changes. That is, its width stays the same. So you can say that 1 has a width of 0, while 2 has a width of 0.301029995663981…

Logarithms also answer a question pre-previously raised on Overlord of the Über-Feral: Why are the Fibonacci numbers so productive in base 11 for digsum(fib(k)) = k? In base 10, such numbers are quickly exhausted:


digsum(fib(1)) = 1 = digsum(1)
digsum(fib(5)) = 5 = digsum(5)
digsum(fib(10)) = 10 = digsum(55)
digsum(fib(31)) = 31 = digsum(1346269)
digsum(fib(35)) = 35 = digsum(9227465)
digsum(fib(62)) = 62 = digsum(4052739537881)
digsum(fib(72)) = 72 = digsum(498454011879264)
digsum(fib(175)) = 175 = digsum(1672445759041379840132227567949787325)
digsum(fib(180)) = 180 = digsum(18547707689471986212190138521399707760)
digsum(fib(216)) = 216 = digsum(619220451666590135228675387863297874269396512)
digsum(fib(251)) = 251 = digsum(12776523572924732586037033894655031898659556447352249)
digsum(fib(252)) = 252 = digsum(20672849399056463095319772838289364792345825123228624)
digsum(fib(360)) = 360
digsum(fib(494)) = 494
digsum(fib(540)) = 540
digsum(fib(946)) = 946
digsum(fib(1188)) = 1188
digsum(fib(2222)) = 2222

In base 11, such numbers go on and on:


digsum(fib(1),b=11) = 1 = digsum(1) (k=1)
digsum(fib(5),b=11) = 5 = digsum(5) (k=5)
digsum(fib(12),b=11) = 12 = digsum(1A2) (k=13)
digsum(fib(38),b=11) = 38 = digsum(855138A1) (k=41)
digsum(fib(49)) = 49 = digsum(2067A724762) (k=53) (c=5)
digsum(fib(50)) = 50 = digsum(542194A6905) (k=55)
digsum(fib(55)) = 55 = digsum(54756364A280) (k=60)
digsum(fib(56)) = 56 = digsum(886283256841) (k=61)
digsum(fib(82)) = 82 = digsum(57751318A9814A6410) (k=90)
digsum(fib(89)) = 89 = digsum(140492673676A06482A2) (k=97)
digsum(fib(144)) = 144 = digsum(401631365A48A784A09392136653457871) (k=169) (c=10)
digsum(fib(159)) = 159 = digsum(67217257641069185100889658A1AA72A0805) (k=185)
digsum(fib(166)) = 166 = digsum(26466A3A88237918577363A2390343388205432) (k=193)
digsum(fib(186)) = 186 = digsum(6A963147A9599623A20A05390315140A21992A96005) (k=215)
digsum(fib(221)) = 221 (k=265) (c=15)
digsum(fib(225)) = 225 (k=269)
digsum(fib(2A1)) = 2A1 (k=353)
digsum(fib(2A3)) = 2A3 (k=355)

[...]

digsum(fib(39409)) = 39409 (k=56395)
digsum(fib(3958A)) = 3958A (k=56605) (c=295)
digsum(fib(3965A)) = 3965A (k=56693)
digsum(fib(3A106)) = 3A106 (k=57360)
digsum(fib(3AA46)) = 3AA46 (k=58493)
digsum(fib(40140)) = 40140 (k=58729)
digsum(fib(4222A)) = 4222A (k=61500) (c=300)
digsum(fib(42609)) = 42609 (k=61961)
digsum(fib(42775)) = 42775 (k=62155)
digsum(fib(4287A)) = 4287A (k=62281)
digsum(fib(430A2)) = 430A2 (k=62669)
digsum(fib(43499)) = 43499 (k=63149) (c=305)
digsum(fib(435A9)) = 435A9 (k=63281)

[...]

digsum(fib(157476)) = 157476 (k=244140) (c=525)
digsum(fib(158470)) = 158470 (k=245465)
digsum(fib(159037)) = 159037 (k=246275)
digsum(fib(159285)) = 159285 (k=246570)
digsum(fib(159978)) = 159978 (k=247409)
digsum(fib(162993)) = 162993 (k=252750) (c=530)
digsum(fib(163A32)) = 163A32 (k=254135)
digsum(fib(164918)) = 164918 (k=255329)
digsum(fib(166985)) = 166985 (k=258065)
digsum(fib(167234)) = 167234 (k=258493)
digsum(fib(167371)) = 167371 (k=258655) (c=535)
digsum(fib(1676A5)) = 1676A5 (k=259055)
digsum(fib(16992A)) = 16992A (k=261997)

[...]

When do these numbers run out in base 11? I don’t know, but I do know why there are so many of them. The answer involves the logarithm of a special number. The most famous aspect of Fibonacci numbers is that the ratio, fib(k) / fib(k-1), of successive numbers converges on an irrational constant known as Φ. Here are the first Fibonacci numbers, where fib(k) = fib(k-2) + fib(k-1) (in other words, 1+1 = 2, 1+2 = 3, 2+3 = 5, and so on):


1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597, 2584, 4181, 6765, ...

And here are the first ratios:


1 / 1 = 1
2 / 1 = 2
3 / 2 = 1.5
5 / 3 = 1.6...
8 / 5 = 1.6
13 / 8 = 1.625
21 / 13 = 1.6153846...
34 / 21 = 1.619047...
55 / 34 = 1.617647058823529411764705882
89 / 55 = 1.618...
144 / 89 = 1.617977528089887640449438202
233 / 144 = 1.61805...
377 / 233 = 1.618025751072961373390557940
610 / 377 = 1.618037135278514588859416446
987 / 610 = 1.618032786885245901639344262
1597 / 987 = 1.618034447821681864235055724
2584 / 1597 = 1.618033813400125234815278648
4181 / 2584 = 1.618034055727554179566563468
6765 / 4181 = 1.618033963166706529538387946
[...]

The ratios get closer and closer to Φ = 1.618033988749894848204586834… = (√5 + 1) / 2. In other words, fib(k) ≈ fib(k-1) * Φ = fib(k-1) * 1.618… in base 10. This means that the digit-length of fib(k) ≈ integer(k * log(&Phi)) + 1. In base b, the average value of a digit in a Fibonacci number is (b^2-b) / 2b. Therefore in base 10, the average value of a digit is (10^2-10) / 20 = 90 / 20 = 4.5. The average value of digsum(fib(k)) ≈ 4.5 * log(&Phi) * k = 4.5 * 0.20898764… * k = 0.940444… * k. It isn’t surprising that as fib(k) gets larger, digsum(fib(k)) tends to get smaller than k.

In base 10, anyway. But what about base 11? In base 11, log(Φ) = 0.20068091818623… and the average value of a base-11 digit in fib(k) is 5 = 110 / 22 = (11^2 – 11) / 22. Therefore the average value of digsum(fib(k)) in base 11 is 5 * log(&Phi) * k = 5 * 0.20068091818623… * k = 1.00340459… * k. The average value of digsum(fib(k)) is much closer to k and it’s not surprising that for so many fib(k) in base 11, digsum(fib(k)) = k. In base 11, log(Φ) ≈ 1/5 and because the average digval is 5, digsum(fib(k)) ≈ 5 * 1/5 * k = 1 * k = k. As we’ve seen, that isn’t true in base 10. Nor is it true in base 12, where log(Φ) = 0.1936538843826… and average digval is 5.5 = (12^2 – 12) / 24 = 132 / 24. Therefore the average value in base 12 of digsum(fib(k)) = 1.0650963641… * k. The function digsum(fib(k)) = k rapidly dries up in base 12, just as it does in base 10:


digsum(fib(1),b=12) = 1 = digsum(1) (k=1)
digsum(fib(5),b=12) = 5 = digsum(5) (k=5)
digsum(fib(11) = 11 = digsum(175) (k=13)
digsum(fib(12) = 12 = digsum(275) (k=14)
digsum(fib(75) = 75 = digsum(976446538A0863811) (k=89) (c=5)
digsum(fib(80) = 80 = digsum(1B3643B50939808B400) (k=96)
digsum(fib(A3) = A3 = digsum(35147A566682BB9529034402) (k=123)
digsum(fib(165) = 165 (k=221)
digsum(fib(283) = 283 (k=387)
digsum(fib(2AB) = 2AB (k=419) (c=10)
digsum(fib(39A) = 39A (k=550)
digsum(fib(460) = 460 (k=648)
digsum(fib(525) = 525 (k=749)
digsum(fib(602) = 602 (k=866)
digsum(fib(624) = 624 (k=892) (c=15)
digsum(fib(781) = 781 (k=1105)
digsum(fib(1219) = 1219 (k=2037)

Previously Pre-Posted…

• Mötley Vüe — more on digsum(fib(k)) = k

Two be Continued…

by in Base Behavior, Digit-sums, Fibonacci Sequence, Integer Sequences, Mathematics, Phi and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Here’s a useless fact that nobody interested in mathematics would ever forget: digsum(fib(2222)) = 2222. That is, if you add the digits of the 2222nd Fibonacci number, you get 2222:


fib(2222) = 104,966,721,620,282,584,734,867,037,988,863,914,269,721,309,244,628,258,918,225,835,217,264,239,539,186,480,867,849,267,122,885,365,019,934,494,625,410,255,045,832,359,715,759,649,385,824,745,506,982,513,773,397,742,803,445,080,995,617,047,976,796,168,678,756,479,470,761,439,513,575,962,955,568,645,505,845,492,393,360,201,582,183,610,207,447,528,637,825,187,188,815,786,270,477,935,419,631,184,553,635,981,047,057,037,341,800,837,414,913,595,584,426,355,208,257,232,868,908,837,817,478,483,039,310,790,967,631,454,123,105,472,742,221,897,397,857,677,674,619,381,961,429,837,434,434,636,098,678,708,225,493,682,469,561

2222 = 1 + 0 + 4 + 9 + 6 + 6 + 7 + 2 + 1 + 6 + 2 + 0 + 2 + 8 + 2 + 5 + 8 + 4 + 7 + 3 + 4 + 8 + 6 + 7 + 0 + 3 + 7 + 9 + 8 + 8 + 8 + 6 + 3 + 9 + 1 + 4 + 2 + 6 + 9 + 7 + 2 + 1 + 3 + 0 + 9 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 6 + 2 + 8 + 2 + 5 + 8 + 9 + 1 + 8 + 2 + 2 + 5 + 8 + 3 + 5 + 2 + 1 + 7 + 2 + 6 + 4 + 2 + 3 + 9 + 5 + 3 + 9 + 1 + 8 + 6 + 4 + 8 + 0 + 8 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 4 + 9 + 2 + 6 + 7 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 8 + 8 + 5 + 3 + 6 + 5 + 0 + 1 + 9 + 9 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 9 + 4 + 6 + 2 + 5 + 4 + 1 + 0 + 2 + 5 + 5 + 0 + 4 + 5 + 8 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 5 + 9 + 7 + 1 + 5 + 7 + 5 + 9 + 6 + 4 + 9 + 3 + 8 + 5 + 8 + 2 + 4 + 7 + 4 + 5 + 5 + 0 + 6 + 9 + 8 + 2 + 5 + 1 + 3 + 7 + 7 + 3 + 3 + 9 + 7 + 7 + 4 + 2 + 8 + 0 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 0 + 8 + 0 + 9 + 9 + 5 + 6 + 1 + 7 + 0 + 4 + 7 + 9 + 7 + 6 + 7 + 9 + 6 + 1 + 6 + 8 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 7 + 5 + 6 + 4 + 7 + 9 + 4 + 7 + 0 + 7 + 6 + 1 + 4 + 3 + 9 + 5 + 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 5 + 9 + 6 + 2 + 9 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 6 + 8 + 6 + 4 + 5 + 5 + 0 + 5 + 8 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 9 + 2 + 3 + 9 + 3 + 3 + 6 + 0 + 2 + 0 + 1 + 5 + 8 + 2 + 1 + 8 + 3 + 6 + 1 + 0 + 2 + 0 + 7 + 4 + 4 + 7 + 5 + 2 + 8 + 6 + 3 + 7 + 8 + 2 + 5 + 1 + 8 + 7 + 1 + 8 + 8 + 8 + 1 + 5 + 7 + 8 + 6 + 2 + 7 + 0 + 4 + 7 + 7 + 9 + 3 + 5 + 4 + 1 + 9 + 6 + 3 + 1 + 1 + 8 + 4 + 5 + 5 + 3 + 6 + 3 + 5 + 9 + 8 + 1 + 0 + 4 + 7 + 0 + 5 + 7 + 0 + 3 + 7 + 3 + 4 + 1 + 8 + 0 + 0 + 8 + 3 + 7 + 4 + 1 + 4 + 9 + 1 + 3 + 5 + 9 + 5 + 5 + 8 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 6 + 3 + 5 + 5 + 2 + 0 + 8 + 2 + 5 + 7 + 2 + 3 + 2 + 8 + 6 + 8 + 9 + 0 + 8 + 8 + 3 + 7 + 8 + 1 + 7 + 4 + 7 + 8 + 4 + 8 + 3 + 0 + 3 + 9 + 3 + 1 + 0 + 7 + 9 + 0 + 9 + 6 + 7 + 6 + 3 + 1 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 1 + 2 + 3 + 1 + 0 + 5 + 4 + 7 + 2 + 7 + 4 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 8 + 9 + 7 + 3 + 9 + 7 + 8 + 5 + 7 + 6 + 7 + 7 + 6 + 7 + 4 + 6 + 1 + 9 + 3 + 8 + 1 + 9 + 6 + 1 + 4 + 2 + 9 + 8 + 3 + 7 + 4 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 3 + 4 + 6 + 3 + 6 + 0 + 9 + 8 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 7 + 0 + 8 + 2 + 2 + 5 + 4 + 9 + 3 + 6 + 8 + 2 + 4 + 6 + 9 + 5 + 6 + 1

Numbers like this, where k = digsum(fib(k)), are rare. And 2222 is almost certainly the last of them. These are the relevant listings at the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences:


0, 1, 5, 10, 31, 35, 62, 72, 175, 180, 216, 251, 252, 360, 494, 504, 540, 946, 1188, 2222 — A020995, Numbers k such that the sum of the digits of Fibonacci(k) is k.

0, 1, 5, 55, 1346269, 9227465, 4052739537881, 498454011879264, 1672445759041379840132227567949787325, 18547707689471986212190138521399707760, 619220451666590135228675387863297874269396512... — A067515, Fibonacci numbers with index = digit sum.

At least, they’re rare in base 10. What about other bases? Well, they’re rare in all other bases except one: base 11. When I looked there, I quickly found more than 450 numbers where digsum(fib(k),b=11) = k. So here’s an interesting little problem: Why is base 11 so productive? Or maybe I should say: Φ is base 11 so productive?

Primal Stream

by in Integer Sequences, Mathematics, Prime numbers and tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

It’s obvious when you think about: an even number can never be the sum of two consecutive integers. Conversely, an odd number (except 1) is always the sum of two consecutive integers: 3 = 1 + 2; 5 = 2 + 3; 7 = 3 + 4; 9 = 4 + 5; and so on. The sum of three consecutive integers can be either odd or even: 6 = 1 + 2 + 3; 9 = 2 + 3 + 4. The sum of four consecutive integers must always be even: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10; 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 14. And so on.

But notice that 9 is the sum of consecutive integers in two different ways: 9 = 4 + 5 = 2 + 3 + 4. Having spotted that, I decided to look for numbers that were the sums of consecutive integers in the most different ways. These are the first few:

3 = 1 + 2 (number of sums = 1)
9 = 2 + 3 + 4 = 4 + 5 (s = 2)
15 = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 4 + 5 + 6 = 8 + 7 = (s = 3)
45 (s = 5)
105 (s = 7)
225 (s = 8)
315 (s = 11)
945 (s = 15)
1575 (s = 17)
2835 (s = 19)
3465 (s = 23)
10395 (s = 31)


It was interesting that the number of different consecutive-integer sums for n was most often a prime number. Next I looked for the sequence at the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences and discovered something that I hadn’t suspected:

A053624 Highly composite odd numbers: where d(n) increases to a record.

1, 3, 9, 15, 45, 105, 225, 315, 945, 1575, 2835, 3465, 10395, 17325, 31185, 45045, 121275, 135135, 225225, 405405, 675675, 1576575, 2027025, 2297295, 3828825, 6891885, 11486475, 26801775, 34459425, 43648605, 72747675, 130945815 — A053624 at OEIS

The notes add that the sequence is “Also least number k such that the number of partitions of k into consecutive integers is a record. For example, 45 = 22+23 = 14+15+16 = 7+8+9+10+11 = 5+6+7+8+9+10 = 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9, six such partitions, but all smaller terms have fewer such partitions (15 has four).” When you don’t count the number n itself as a partition of n, you get 3 partitions for 15, i.e. consecutive integers sum to 15 in 3 different ways, so s = 3. I looked at more values for s and found that the stream of primes continued to flow:

3 → s = 1
9 = 3^2 → s = 2 (prime)
15 = 3 * 5 → s = 3 (prime)
45 = 3^2 * 5 → s = 5 (prime)
105 = 3 * 5 * 7 → s = 7 (prime)
225 = 3^2 * 5^2 → s = 8 = 2^3
315 = 3^2 * 5 * 7 → s = 11 (prime)
945 = 3^3 * 5 * 7 → s = 15 = 3 * 5
1575 = 3^2 * 5^2 * 7 → s = 17 (prime)
2835 = 3^4 * 5 * 7 → s = 19 (prime)
3465 = 3^2 * 5 * 7 * 11 → s = 23 (prime)
10395 = 3^3 * 5 * 7 * 11 → s = 31 (prime)
17325 = 3^2 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 → s = 35 = 5 * 7
31185 = 3^4 * 5 * 7 * 11 → s = 39 = 3 * 13
45045 = 3^2 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 → s = 47 (prime)
121275 = 3^2 * 5^2 * 7^2 * 11 → s = 53 (prime)
135135 = 3^3 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 → s = 63 = 3^2 * 7
225225 = 3^2 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 * 13 → s = 71 (prime)
405405 = 3^4 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 → s = 79 (prime)
675675 = 3^3 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 * 13 → s = 95 = 5 * 19
1576575 = 3^2 * 5^2 * 7^2 * 11 * 13 → s = 107 (prime)
2027025 = 3^4 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 * 13 → s = 119 = 7 * 17
2297295 = 3^3 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 → s = 127 (prime)
3828825 = 3^2 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 → s = 143 = 11 * 13
6891885 = 3^4 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 → s = 159 = 3 * 53
11486475 = 3^3 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 → s = 191 (prime)
26801775 = 3^2 * 5^2 * 7^2 * 11 * 13 * 17 → s = 215 = 5 * 43
34459425 = 3^4 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 → s = 239 (prime)
43648605 = 3^3 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 * 19 → s = 255 = 3 * 5 * 17
72747675 = 3^2 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 * 19 → s = 287 = 7 * 41
130945815 = 3^4 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 * 19 → s = 319 = 11 * 29


I can’t spot any way of predicting when n will yield a primal s, but I like the way that a simple question took an unexpected turn. When a number sets a record for the number of different ways it can be the sum of consecutive integers, that number will also be a highly composite odd number.