Let's define the radical of the positive integer $n$ as $$\operatorname{rad}(n)=\prod_{\substack{p\mid n\\ p\text{ prime}}}p$$ and consider the following Fibonacci-like sequence $$a_{n+1}=\operatorname{rad}(a_{n})+\operatorname{rad}(a_{n-1})$$ If $a_1=1,\,a_2=1$ the sequence coincides with OEIS A121369 $$1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 7, 9, 10, 13, 23, 36, 29, 35, 64, 37, 39, 76, 77, ...$$ If $a_1=2,\,a_2=2$ the sequence becomes $$2, 2, 4, 4, 4, ...$$ If $a_1=3,\,a_2=3$ the sequence becomes $$3, 3, 6, 9, 9, 6, 9, ...$$ If $a_1=5,\,a_2=5$ the sequence becomes $$5, 5, 10, 15, 25, 20, 15, 25, ...$$ If $a_1=7,\,a_2=7$ the sequence becomes $$7, 7, 14, 21, 35, 56, 49, 21, 28, 35, 49, 42, 49, 49, 14, 21, ...$$ The above sequences, except for the first, are all periodic. Continuing with the successive prime numbers, we obtain:
for $\,p=11,\,$ a sequence with a period length of $\,9$,
for $\,p=13,\,$ a sequence with a period length of $\,81$,
but for $\,p=17\,$ and $\,p=19\,$ two apparently divergent sequences.
Other primes that generate periodic sequences are (the respective period lengths in brackets):
$$23 (9), 29 (12), 31 (207), 37 (27), 41 (36), 47 (39), 73 (198), 79 (60)$$
Some questions arise from the previous experimental observations:
is the period length always a multiple of $3$ (not considering the case $p=2$)?
also in the doubtful cases mentioned above, does the sequence become periodic at some point?
given the starting prime number, is it possible to predict the length of the period of the generated sequence or, at least, to identify some pattern?
I have posted a more general question of the same nature here.
Edit
For the calculation of $\,\operatorname{rad}(n)\,$ I used the sympy.primefactors() method inside Python:
from sympy import primefactors
def rad(num):
primes = primefactors(num)
value = 1
for p in primes:
value *= p
return value
(a0, a1) = (17, 17)
for n in range(2, 10001):
a2 = rad(a1) + rad(a0)
print(n, a2)
a0 = a1
a1 = a2
Just a comment, in the intention to recognize patterns giving hints towards analytical arguments about periodicities.
In the table below I show the sequences for $N=60$ steps for the primes $p=3..97$ where every sequence is divided by the leading prime; plus the sequence for $p=1$ as top row. The leading column in the table is the initial prime (or $1$) . The sequences start in the second column. This picture looks somehow frappant and makes me think further...
Second comment. Here is the list of the cyclelengthes of all so far known cycles when a prime $p$ is given.
Checks went to maximal length $600$ of a cycle, and all primenumbers below $10\,000$ were tested needing approx. $500$ sec. The factorization was done with Pari/GP and its option "prime_proven" for the factorization, which means no pseudoprimes allowed.
I've found the same primenumbers as in @Peter's comment. Repetitions began at index $k$
$$ \small \begin{array} {r} p & cyclen & k & a_k & a_{k+1} \\ \hline 2 & 1 & 3 & 4 & 4 \\ 3 & 3 & 3 & 6 & 9 \\ 5 & 3 & 4 & 15 & 25 \\ 7 & 12 & 3 & 14 & 21 \\ 11 & 9 & 50 & 253 & 484 \\ 13 & 81 & 5 & 65 & 104 \\ 23 & 9 & 56 & 299 & 460 \\ 29 & 12 & 5 & 145 & 232 \\ 31 & 207 & 6 & 248 & 217 \\ 37 & 27 & 4 & 111 & 185 \\ 41 & 36 & 4 & 123 & 205 \\ 47 & 39 & 5 & 235 & 376 \\ 73 & 198 & 4 & 219 & 365 \\ 79 & 60 & 28 & 4819 & 8453 \\ 83 & 48 & 36 & 3320 & 2573 \\ 107 & 87 & 13 & 3103 & 3745 \\ 367 & 54 & 36 & 14680 & 11377 \\ 1669 & 90 & 25 & 51739 & 75105 \end{array} $$
3'rd Comment
In MO Peter Taylor gave a simple observation to question 1: the periodicity $\pmod 2$ has cyclelength $3$ .
This is (surely) obvious by oddness of $(a_1,a_2)=(p_1,p_2)$ and necessary evenneness of $a_3$ and oddness of $a_4$ and so on, and answers that question, by the basic consideration that the overall cycle-length must be a multiple of any such elementary (sub-)cycle length.