This is an indirect follow-up of the previous post I did on the Collatz conjecture. After a few responses, we managed to get to the fact that if we have $n\in\mathbb N$ and cyclic $(e_n)$ such that $e_0\equiv1~(\textrm{mod}~2)$, $e_{n+1}=e_{min}=e_0$ and that for all $k\in\mathbb N$ we have the relation $e_{k+1}=\frac{3e_k+1}{2^{\nu_2(3e_k+1)}}$, then $$\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\nu_2(3e_k+1)>n\log_23$$ and I found out that for $n\le108$, this inequation was violated. I asked if this inequation was violated for all $n$ such that for all $k < n \implies e_0< e_k$, which would henceforth imply the inexistence of cyclic sequences. However, I know realize this might be a bit out of reach, so we could rather interpret this result as a way to say that all non-trivial cycles have length $>108$, as it's basically the number of steps to get from $e_0$ to $e_n$ in $(a_n)$ such that $a_n=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}(3a_n+1)/2&a_n~\text{odd}\\a_n/2&\rm otheriwse\end{array}\right.$. However, I manage to get way higher recently, and I don't really know what the current record holder is (I only know Lagaria's $301\;994$...), so I'll put this here anyway to know whether it is a correct lower bound or if someone points out an error... ^^' Anyway, first off, we know that since $e_0$ is minimal, then for all $n\in\mathbb N^*$ we'd have $$\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\nu_2(3e_k+1) < n\log_2\left(3+\frac1{e_0}\right)$$ However, since LHS is an integer, we would have $$\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\nu_2(3e_k+1) < n\log_23$$ as long there no integer $m$ between $n\log_23$ and $n\log_2(3+1/e_0)$... Hence, we have $$\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\nu_2(3e_k+1) \ge n\log_23$$ $$\iff\exists~m\in\mathbb N^*:n\log_23 < m < n\log_2\left(3+\frac1{e_0}\right)$$ $$\iff\exists~m\in\mathbb N^*:2^{m/n} < 3+\frac1{e_0}$$ We can get the minimal value of $m$ with $m=\lceil n\log_23\rceil$. Hence, $$\iff 2^{\lceil n\log_23\rceil/n} < 3+\frac1{e_0}$$ $$\iff 2^{\lceil n\log_23\rceil/n}e_0 < 3e_0+1$$ So what I did is, I made an algorithmic which computes for larger and larger values of $n$ if $\lfloor2^{\lceil n\log_23\rceil/n}e_0\rfloor < 3e_0+1$ because the programming language I used works better with integer values. Despite all of this, I only managed to get up to $n=225\;640\;000$ until it crashed (it's numerically correct though, since I have set precision to 50 digits after the decimal point, despite the amount needed being only 21). Using Wolfram Alpha, the first instance of $\lfloor n\log_2(3e_n+1)\rfloor\ne\lfloor n\log_23\rfloor$ I managed to check manually was $n=10^{18}+283$ (by descending from $10^{20}$), so all I can say is that there exists a lower bound of $(e_n)$ (and definitely $(a_n)$ as well) cycle lengths between $225\;640\;000$ and $10^{18}+283$ (or between $357\;630\;939$ $(10^{18}+283)\log_23$ in $(a_n)$ dynamics if I'm correct). It would take me 20 million years with the algorithm I did to get to $10^{18}+283$ because my programming skills are kind of weak... Anyway, if there is no higher lower bound yet, mine is gonna have to be $225\;640\;000$, I guess ! And if there's higher, then... I'm going to have to do it in another programming language or something to get more efficient results, I don't know...
2026-03-25 12:21:14.1774441274
New record for for lower bound of non-trivial cycle lengths of Collatz sequences?
398 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in SEQUENCES-AND-SERIES
- How to show that $k < m_1+2$?
- Justify an approximation of $\sum_{n=1}^\infty G_n/\binom{\frac{n}{2}+\frac{1}{2}}{\frac{n}{2}}$, where $G_n$ denotes the Gregory coefficients
- Negative Countdown
- Calculating the radius of convergence for $\sum _{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{\left(\sqrt{ n^2+n}-\sqrt{n^2+1}\right)^n}{n^2}z^n$
- Show that the sequence is bounded below 3
- A particular exercise on convergence of recursive sequence
- Proving whether function-series $f_n(x) = \frac{(-1)^nx}n$
- Powers of a simple matrix and Catalan numbers
- Convergence of a rational sequence to a irrational limit
- studying the convergence of a series:
Related Questions in COLLATZ-CONJECTURE
- Why do these Collatz values seemingly explode and then implode?
- What's the image of the function $f(x)=(3x+2^{v_2(x)})$ on the Prufer 2-group?
- Assuring Lipschitzian and contraction of a mapping
- Finding an equation for fixed points
- Are there any false variants of the Collatz conjecture for which the probability heuristic works?
- Investigating natural numbers in relations with prime numbers
- Some details about 'Collatz Conjecture'?
- Are the prime-free sequences $x_{n+1}=4x_n+1$ of odd numbers in bijection with the square numbers greater than $16$?
- Simplistic Odd Collatz formulas
- Are there specific numbers for which the Collatz Conjecture is proven?
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
Using Pari/GP and hoping I understand you correctly I show programming and results. (Pari/GP is interpreted and easily programmed like python. You can obtain it for free at website)
Now we use the convergents of the continued fraction of $\log_2(3)$ because they give us the numbers $n$ (I use $N$ for the numbers of steps, and $S$ for the sum-of-the-exponents)
Now we use your limit-value from your earlier posting (you should this reminder include in your current OP!):
Now I show, how the formula and the computation of the comparision can be much much improved. You wrote $$ \left \lfloor 2^{\left \lceil n \log_2 3 \right \rceil /n } e_0 \right \rfloor \lt 3 e_0 +1 \tag 1 $$ First improvement: in Pari/GP you don't have the need to transform this into integers. We can stay with $$ 2^{S/N} < 3 + 1/e_0 \qquad \qquad \text{where } S=\lceil N \log_2 3 \rceil \tag 2 $$ but $S$ can also be taken from the first row of the convergents of the cont.frac, however only of each second one. (The other one leads to $2^S< 3^N$ and thus to $e_k$ from the negative numbers).
Now we improve the computation even more. $$ 2^{S/N} < 3 + 1/e_0 \qquad \qquad \text{where } S=\lceil N \log_2 3 \rceil $$ Taking logarithms to base $2$ and improving the rhs: $$ S/N < \log_2(3 + 1/e_0) \\ S /N < \log_2 3 + \log_2(1 + 1/3/e_0) \tag 3 $$ improving the lhs $$ S/N = ( 1 + N \log_2 3 - \{ N \log_2 3 \})/N \\ \qquad = \log_2 3 + ( 1 - \{ N \log_2 3 \} )/N $$ comparing lhs and rhs and reduce then by the equal summand $$( 1 - \{ N \log_2 3 \})/N < \log_2(1 + 1/3/e_0) \tag 4 $$ making constants $\text{ld}_3 = \log_2(3)$ and $\chi^* = \log_2(1 + 1/3/e_0)$ $$( 1 - \{ N \text{ld}_3 \})/N < \chi^* \tag 5 $$
From here on, $N \ge 6586818670 $ , cycles are possible (regarding our type of criteria!).
However, this does not mean, that not for some larger $N$ our criteria still might allow to disprove specific cycles, as we see in the following list.
For instance, the longest cycle whis is disproved by this criteria and where $N$ is from the continued fractions is for $N=127940101513462006853$. Actually, there are some higher $N$ disprovable this way, but not for further $N$ from the convergents (I found some higher $N$ manually searching). But no disproof of this type can be occur for $N>1/\chi^* \approx 208\, 576\, 659\, 774\, 868\, 320\, 450$ (my manually found maximum $N$ that this criteria can disprove was $N=208\, 576\, 659\, 753\, 891\, 832\, 997$ - see here). Here we need stronger criteria than the one given.
The remainder of the list (extended to 46 entries of the convergents):