Showing posts with label Pickover. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pickover. Show all posts

Tuesday, 4 July 2023

Nested Radicals

I came across a problem in Cliff Pickover's Twitter feed. It is depicted in Figure 1.


Figure 1

No solution was offered so I did a search of Google Images and came up with a link to MathWorld. It is there that a solution is offered:$$ \sqrt{x}=\sqrt[3]{x  \, \sqrt[3]{x  \, \sqrt[3]{x \cdots}}}$$This is an instance of a more general formula:$$ x^{1/(n-1)}=\sqrt[n]{x \, \sqrt[n]{x \, \sqrt[n]{x \, \cdots}}}$$When \(n=3\), we get the original formula that Pickover was referencing. There are other interesting results in the MathWorld article. The following is particularly striking:$$ x^{e-2}=\sqrt{x  \, \sqrt[3]{x \, \sqrt[4] {x \, \sqrt[5]{x  \cdots}}}}$$Presh Talwalkar has a very helpful article on this topic that explains how this last result is obtained. See Figure 2.

Figure 2

A few days later, I came across another nested radical problem in a YouTube video. This is the problem: $$ ?=\sqrt{2+\sqrt{2-\sqrt{2 + \sqrt{2 - \cdots}}}}$$The solution is quite different to the previous approach and begins by replacing the ? with a \(y\) and making use of the fact that the nested radical is infinite:$$ \begin{align} y &= \sqrt{2+\sqrt{2-\sqrt{2 + \sqrt{2 - \cdots}}}} \\ &=\sqrt{2+ \sqrt{2 - y}}\end{align}$$Now we have to impose limits on the range of values that \(y\) can take. A little inspections shows that: $$ \sqrt{2} \leq y \leq 2$$Now we can proceed to find \(y\) by squaring both sides twice and then gathering terms together:$$ \begin{align} y^2 &= 2+\sqrt{2-y} \\ y^2-2 &= \sqrt{2-y} \\ (y^2-2)^2 &= 2-y \\ y^4 -4y^2+4 &= 2-y \\ y^4 - 4y^2 +y +2 &= 0 \\ y^2(y^2-4)+y+2 &=0 \\y^2(y+2)(y-2)+y+2 &= 0 \\(y+2)(y^2(y-2)+1) &= 0 \\ (y+2)(y^3-2y^2+1) &= 0     \end{align}$$Now \(y-1\) divides the cubic expression and so the LHS of the quartic equation becomes: $$ (y+2)(y-1)(y^2-y-1) = 0 $$ There are four solutions \(y_1, y_2, y_3\) and \(y_4\): $$ \begin{align} y_1 &= -2 \\ y_2 &= 1 \\ y_3 &= \frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2} \\ y_4 &= \frac{1-\sqrt{5}}{2} \end{align} $$Due to restrictions placed on \(y\) however, only \(y_3\) is a valid solution and its value of course is \( \phi \). Thus solution is $$ \phi =\sqrt{2+\sqrt{2-\sqrt{2 + \sqrt{2 - \cdots}}}}$$This is not the only nested radical to produce \( \phi \). An even simpler expression is: $$ \phi=\sqrt{1+\sqrt{1+\sqrt{1+\cdots}}}$$See WOLFRAM Demonstrations Link titled Nested Square Root Representation of the Golden Ratio for more details. Another site at iiTutor shows that:$$ \begin{align} 2 &= \sqrt{2+\sqrt{2+\sqrt{2+\cdots}}}\\1 &= \sqrt{2-\sqrt{2-\sqrt{2-\cdots}}} \end{align}$$

Wednesday, 29 September 2021

Automorphic Numbers

I came across automorphic numbers in a tweet by Cliff Pickover. He pointed out that:

 \(376\) is an automorphic number, meaning a number whose square "ends" in the same digits as the number itself. \(376\) has the property that its cube and fourth power also end in the same digits.

  • \(376^2=141376\)
  • \(376^3=53157376\)
  • \(376^4=19987173376\)

I thought I'd investigate how many of these numbers there up to one million. It turns out that there aren't many. They are:

  • 0 0
  • 1 1 
  • 5 25
  • 6 36
  • 25 625
  • 76 5776
  • 376 141376
  • 625 390625
  • 9376 87909376
  • 90625 8212890625
  • 109376 11963109376
  • 890625 793212890625

Surprisingly when we consider the cubes of numbers, the count increases substantially but the same numbers as for the squares reappear:

  • 0 0 square also
  • 1 1 square also
  • 5 12square also
  • 6 21square also
  • 25 15625 square also
  • 76 438976 square also
  • 376 53157376 square also
  • 625 244140625 square also
  • 9376 824238309376 square also
  • 90625 744293212890625 square also
  • 109376 1308477051109376 square also
  • 890625 706455230712890625 square also
However, it should be emphasised that there are many other trimorphic numbers apart from these e.g. \(24^2=13824\). The trimorphic numbers are listed in OEIS A033819.


 A033819

Trimorphic numbers: \(n^3\) ends with \(n\).                  


0, 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 24, 25, 49, 51, 75, 76, 99, 125, 249, 251, 375, 376, 499, 501, 624, 625, 749, 751, 875, 999, 1249, 3751, 4375, 4999, 5001, 5625, 6249, 8751, 9375, 9376, 9999, 18751, 31249, 40625, 49999, 50001, 59375, 68751, 81249, 90624, 90625, ...

With fourth powers however, the count again is more modest and the same numbers reappear:

  • 0 0 square and cube also
  • 1 1 square and cube also
  • 5 62square and cube also
  • 6 129square and cube also
  • 25 390625 square and cube also
  • 76 33362176 square and cube also
  • 376 19987173376 square and cube also
  • 625 152587890625 square and cube also
  • 9376 7728058388709376 square and cube also
  • 90625 67451572418212890625 square and cube also
  • 109376 143115985942139109376 square and cube also
  • 890625 629186689853668212890625 square and cube also

This property of these numbers continues indefinitely and as Wikipedia states:

There are four 10-adic fixed points of \( f(x)=x^{2}\), the last 10 digits of which are one of these:

  • \( \ldots 0000000000 \)
  • \(  \ldots 0000000001 \)
  • \(  \ldots 8212890625 \)
    (sequence A018247 in the OEIS)
  • \(  \ldots 1787109376 \)
    (sequence A018248 in the OEIS)

Thus we see why all the automorphic number appear as they do, forming OEIS A003226. Apparently such numbers can also be called curious numbers or circular numbers.


 A003226

Automorphic numbers: \(m^2\) ends with \(m\).                 

0, 1, 5, 6, 25, 76, 376, 625, 9376, 90625, 109376, 890625, 2890625, 7109376, 12890625, 87109376, 212890625, 787109376, 1787109376, 8212890625, 18212890625, 81787109376, 918212890625, 9918212890625, 40081787109376, 59918212890625, 259918212890625, 740081787109376, ... 

Of course, automorphic numbers can exist in any base. For a given base \(b\), the number of \(b\)-adic fixed points is determined by 2^(number of distinct prime factors). Because 10 is the product of two distinct prime factors, it has \(2^2=4\) fixed points. Likewise with 6 and 12 (even though \(12=2^2 \times 3\), it has only two distinct prime factors). Of course, for prime numbered bases such as 2, 3, 5 etc. and perfect powers such as 4, 8, 9, 16 etc., there are only 2 fixed points and these are the trivial 0 and 1. Here is a permalink that will generate automorphic numbers in any base (up to 36) and for any power.

Applied to base 30 (that is comprised of three prime factors) it can be seen that there are \(2^3=8\) distinct 30-adic fixed points. Here are the 30-morphic numbers up to one million:

  • 0 0
  • 1 1
  • 6 16
  • a 3a
  • f 7f
  • g 8g
  • l el
  • p kp
  • 3a b3a
  • 7f 1q7f
  • ap 3rap
  • j6 c8j6
  • mg grmg
  • ql nmql
  • 13a 1713a
  • 2j6 6t2j6
  • 3mg e23mg
  • q7f mt1q7f
  • rap osirap
  • sql roisql
  • 1q7f 3fe1q7f
  • b2j6 42s9b2j6
  • csql 5i15csql
  • h13a 9k7oh13a
  • irap brjsirap
  • s3mg qb0fs3mg
There's a lot more to this topic of course but at least this post serves as an introduction to the topic and perhaps I can pursue other aspects later.

Saturday, 5 December 2020

The Juggler Sequence

Today I stumbled upon the so-called Juggler sequence explained by Wikipedia as
an integer sequence that starts with a positive integer \(a_0 \), with each subsequent term in the sequence defined by the recurrence relation:
$$a_{k+1}= \begin{cases}

\left \lfloor a_k^{\frac{1}{2}} \right \rfloor, & \mbox{if } a_k \mbox{ is even} \\

\\

\left \lfloor a_k^{\frac{3}{2}} \right \rfloor, & \mbox{if } a_k \mbox{ is odd}.

\end{cases}$$
Juggler sequences were publicised by American mathematician and author Clifford A. Pickover. The name is derived from the rising and falling nature of the sequences, like balls in the hands of a juggler. If a juggler sequence reaches 1, then all subsequent terms are equal to 1. It is conjectured that all juggler sequences eventually reach 1. This conjecture has been verified for initial terms up to one million, but has not been proved. Juggler sequences therefore present a problem that is similar to the Collatz conjecture, about which Paul ErdÅ‘s stated that "mathematics is not yet ready for such problems". 

Figure 1 shows the SageMath code (permalink) to determine the trajectory for any given number, along with the numbers of steps required and the maximum value reached.

Figure 1

Most numbers reach the value 1 quickly but others are more stubborn. Records are set as we move through the natural numbers and these numbers form OEIS sequence A094679. The sequence begins:

1, 2, 3, 9, 19, 25, 37, 77, 163, 193, 1119, 1155, 4065, 4229, 4649, 7847, 13325, 34175, 59739, 78901, 636731, 1122603, 1301535, 2263913, 5947165, 72511173, 78641579, 125121851, 198424189, ...

OEIS A094698 shows what these records are: 

0, 1, 6, 7, 9, 11, 17, 19, 43, 73, 75, 80, 88, 96, 107, 131, 166, 193, 201, 258, 263, 268, 271, 298, 335, 340, 443, 479, 484 

Comparing the two sequences we can see that there are 73 steps required for 193 to reach 1. The maximum value reached is a rather large during the trajectory is:

6743569603489758391265376070807357156339920158784377929096419715849060516985205368792190354996630779167466266586213526771780967700267133711091446786931423291036091166608223302792047793105565012490585915410391500762927066039966992101729450252321626382793545523711387059090

With such large numbers being involved, it's better to use a logarithmic scale for viewing the trajectory of a given number. For example, the trajectory of 1003 has 15 steps with maximum value 39526058. Here is its trajectory and Figure 2 gives a graphical representation: 1003, 31765, 5661392, 2379, 116035, 39526058, 6286, 79, 702, 26, 5, 11, 36, 6, 2, 1.

Figure 2: juggler trajectory of 1003

GeeksforGeeks gives the C++, C, Java, Python, C# and PHP code to generate the juggler trajectory for any natural number input.