Does there exist $a_0$, such that ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ is unbounded?
$begingroup$
Suppose ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ is a sequence, defined by the recurrence relation
$$
a_{n+1} = phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) - a_n,
$$
where $sigma$ denotes the divisor sum function and $phi$ is Euler's totient function. Does there exist $a_0$ such that the corresponding ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ is unbounded?
As $phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) geq 2a_n$ (see here: Is $phi(n) + sigma(n) geq 2n$ always true?), every sequence of this type is monotonically non-decreasing. This means that it is bounded iff it contains an element $a_n$ such that $phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) = 2a_n$. We know, that to satisfy this equation, $a_n$ must either be $1$ or prime (see: Find all positive integers $n$ such that $phi(n)+sigma(n)=2n$.). Thus, the question is equivalent to: "Does every such sequence ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ with $a_0 geq 2$ contain a prime element?". And I do not know how to proceed further.
Any help will be appreciated.
number-theory elementary-number-theory recurrence-relations totient-function divisor-sum
$endgroup$
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Suppose ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ is a sequence, defined by the recurrence relation
$$
a_{n+1} = phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) - a_n,
$$
where $sigma$ denotes the divisor sum function and $phi$ is Euler's totient function. Does there exist $a_0$ such that the corresponding ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ is unbounded?
As $phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) geq 2a_n$ (see here: Is $phi(n) + sigma(n) geq 2n$ always true?), every sequence of this type is monotonically non-decreasing. This means that it is bounded iff it contains an element $a_n$ such that $phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) = 2a_n$. We know, that to satisfy this equation, $a_n$ must either be $1$ or prime (see: Find all positive integers $n$ such that $phi(n)+sigma(n)=2n$.). Thus, the question is equivalent to: "Does every such sequence ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ with $a_0 geq 2$ contain a prime element?". And I do not know how to proceed further.
Any help will be appreciated.
number-theory elementary-number-theory recurrence-relations totient-function divisor-sum
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You mean "Does there exists an $a_0$ such that the sequence doesn't contain a prime element", don't you?
$endgroup$
– N. S.
Aug 24 '18 at 16:28
1
$begingroup$
It looks like there are a lot of numbers with this property, with $a_0 = 22$ being the smallest.
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
Here the numbers up to 1000
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 18:32
$begingroup$
It is possible to make the sequence monotonically increase for arbitrarily large number of terms. We can keep increasing the power of $2$ that divides $a_0$. However, I am not sure whether it is possible for the sequence to be unbounded, in other words, monotonically increase forever. This seems most likely for base values such as $a_0=22$. If one can actually prove that there exists a sequence that does not contain any terms of the form $k^2$ or $2k^2$, then the sequence will be unbounded.
$endgroup$
– Haran
Sep 18 '18 at 15:00
1
$begingroup$
Alternative formulation: $a_{n+1} = a_n + sum_{d mid a_n,, d < a_n} left(1 + muleft(frac{a_n}{d}right)right) d$ where $mu$ is the Möbius function.
$endgroup$
– Peter Taylor
Sep 27 '18 at 16:02
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Suppose ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ is a sequence, defined by the recurrence relation
$$
a_{n+1} = phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) - a_n,
$$
where $sigma$ denotes the divisor sum function and $phi$ is Euler's totient function. Does there exist $a_0$ such that the corresponding ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ is unbounded?
As $phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) geq 2a_n$ (see here: Is $phi(n) + sigma(n) geq 2n$ always true?), every sequence of this type is monotonically non-decreasing. This means that it is bounded iff it contains an element $a_n$ such that $phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) = 2a_n$. We know, that to satisfy this equation, $a_n$ must either be $1$ or prime (see: Find all positive integers $n$ such that $phi(n)+sigma(n)=2n$.). Thus, the question is equivalent to: "Does every such sequence ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ with $a_0 geq 2$ contain a prime element?". And I do not know how to proceed further.
Any help will be appreciated.
number-theory elementary-number-theory recurrence-relations totient-function divisor-sum
$endgroup$
Suppose ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ is a sequence, defined by the recurrence relation
$$
a_{n+1} = phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) - a_n,
$$
where $sigma$ denotes the divisor sum function and $phi$ is Euler's totient function. Does there exist $a_0$ such that the corresponding ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ is unbounded?
As $phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) geq 2a_n$ (see here: Is $phi(n) + sigma(n) geq 2n$ always true?), every sequence of this type is monotonically non-decreasing. This means that it is bounded iff it contains an element $a_n$ such that $phi(a_n) + sigma(a_n) = 2a_n$. We know, that to satisfy this equation, $a_n$ must either be $1$ or prime (see: Find all positive integers $n$ such that $phi(n)+sigma(n)=2n$.). Thus, the question is equivalent to: "Does every such sequence ${a_n}_{n=0}^{infty}$ with $a_0 geq 2$ contain a prime element?". And I do not know how to proceed further.
Any help will be appreciated.
number-theory elementary-number-theory recurrence-relations totient-function divisor-sum
number-theory elementary-number-theory recurrence-relations totient-function divisor-sum
edited Dec 12 '18 at 9:46
Klangen
1,70511334
1,70511334
asked Aug 21 '18 at 13:39
Yanior WegYanior Weg
1,16511036
1,16511036
$begingroup$
You mean "Does there exists an $a_0$ such that the sequence doesn't contain a prime element", don't you?
$endgroup$
– N. S.
Aug 24 '18 at 16:28
1
$begingroup$
It looks like there are a lot of numbers with this property, with $a_0 = 22$ being the smallest.
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
Here the numbers up to 1000
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 18:32
$begingroup$
It is possible to make the sequence monotonically increase for arbitrarily large number of terms. We can keep increasing the power of $2$ that divides $a_0$. However, I am not sure whether it is possible for the sequence to be unbounded, in other words, monotonically increase forever. This seems most likely for base values such as $a_0=22$. If one can actually prove that there exists a sequence that does not contain any terms of the form $k^2$ or $2k^2$, then the sequence will be unbounded.
$endgroup$
– Haran
Sep 18 '18 at 15:00
1
$begingroup$
Alternative formulation: $a_{n+1} = a_n + sum_{d mid a_n,, d < a_n} left(1 + muleft(frac{a_n}{d}right)right) d$ where $mu$ is the Möbius function.
$endgroup$
– Peter Taylor
Sep 27 '18 at 16:02
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
You mean "Does there exists an $a_0$ such that the sequence doesn't contain a prime element", don't you?
$endgroup$
– N. S.
Aug 24 '18 at 16:28
1
$begingroup$
It looks like there are a lot of numbers with this property, with $a_0 = 22$ being the smallest.
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
Here the numbers up to 1000
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 18:32
$begingroup$
It is possible to make the sequence monotonically increase for arbitrarily large number of terms. We can keep increasing the power of $2$ that divides $a_0$. However, I am not sure whether it is possible for the sequence to be unbounded, in other words, monotonically increase forever. This seems most likely for base values such as $a_0=22$. If one can actually prove that there exists a sequence that does not contain any terms of the form $k^2$ or $2k^2$, then the sequence will be unbounded.
$endgroup$
– Haran
Sep 18 '18 at 15:00
1
$begingroup$
Alternative formulation: $a_{n+1} = a_n + sum_{d mid a_n,, d < a_n} left(1 + muleft(frac{a_n}{d}right)right) d$ where $mu$ is the Möbius function.
$endgroup$
– Peter Taylor
Sep 27 '18 at 16:02
$begingroup$
You mean "Does there exists an $a_0$ such that the sequence doesn't contain a prime element", don't you?
$endgroup$
– N. S.
Aug 24 '18 at 16:28
$begingroup$
You mean "Does there exists an $a_0$ such that the sequence doesn't contain a prime element", don't you?
$endgroup$
– N. S.
Aug 24 '18 at 16:28
1
1
$begingroup$
It looks like there are a lot of numbers with this property, with $a_0 = 22$ being the smallest.
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
It looks like there are a lot of numbers with this property, with $a_0 = 22$ being the smallest.
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
Here the numbers up to 1000
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 18:32
$begingroup$
Here the numbers up to 1000
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 18:32
$begingroup$
It is possible to make the sequence monotonically increase for arbitrarily large number of terms. We can keep increasing the power of $2$ that divides $a_0$. However, I am not sure whether it is possible for the sequence to be unbounded, in other words, monotonically increase forever. This seems most likely for base values such as $a_0=22$. If one can actually prove that there exists a sequence that does not contain any terms of the form $k^2$ or $2k^2$, then the sequence will be unbounded.
$endgroup$
– Haran
Sep 18 '18 at 15:00
$begingroup$
It is possible to make the sequence monotonically increase for arbitrarily large number of terms. We can keep increasing the power of $2$ that divides $a_0$. However, I am not sure whether it is possible for the sequence to be unbounded, in other words, monotonically increase forever. This seems most likely for base values such as $a_0=22$. If one can actually prove that there exists a sequence that does not contain any terms of the form $k^2$ or $2k^2$, then the sequence will be unbounded.
$endgroup$
– Haran
Sep 18 '18 at 15:00
1
1
$begingroup$
Alternative formulation: $a_{n+1} = a_n + sum_{d mid a_n,, d < a_n} left(1 + muleft(frac{a_n}{d}right)right) d$ where $mu$ is the Möbius function.
$endgroup$
– Peter Taylor
Sep 27 '18 at 16:02
$begingroup$
Alternative formulation: $a_{n+1} = a_n + sum_{d mid a_n,, d < a_n} left(1 + muleft(frac{a_n}{d}right)right) d$ where $mu$ is the Möbius function.
$endgroup$
– Peter Taylor
Sep 27 '18 at 16:02
|
show 3 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Not a complete answer, but a heuristic intuition why probably many numbers fulfill your requirement, in particular $22$.
We want to show $a_n$ is never prime. If you observe the sequence with $a_0=22$ you will notice that all terms are even, and hence not prime. If we can show $a_n$ is even for all $n$, we are done. If we try induction, we find the following.
Recall that $phi(n)$ is even for all $n>2$, so if $a_{n-1}>2$ is even, then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is even. Now recall that $$sigma(p_1^{k_1}...p_i^{k_i})=(1+p_1+...+p_1^{k_1})(1+p_2+...+p_2^{k_2})...(1+p_i+...+p_i^{k_i}).$$
For odd primes $p$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is even if and only if $k$ is odd. And for $p=2$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is odd no matter what $k$ is. Hence $sigma(n)$ is even if and only if there is an odd prime that divides $n$ an odd number of times. So $sigma(n)$ is odd if and only if $n$ is a square, or $2n$ is a square.
The rest of this argument will be heuristic. Let's calculate the probability of $sigma(n)$ being odd. Since we deduced that this is equivalent to either $n$ or $2n$ being a square, we find $mathbb{P}(sigma(n)mbox{ odd})approxfrac2{sqrt{n}}$. Therefore $$mathbb{P}(a_nmbox{ converges})lessapprox2left(frac1{sqrt{a_0}}+frac1{sqrt{a_1}}+...right)$$ If $a_n$ grows exponentially, which it appears to do, then this gives us a finite probability that $a_n$ converges. Also notice that this probability itself then also converges to $0$ as $a_0toinfty$. So heuristically speaking, it seems likely that almost all even $a_0$ make the sequence diverge.
Interestingly, the converse holds for odd numbers, as then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is odd, which we just argued has a low probability. Maybe something else can be said about different factors from $2$ though.
In conclusion, as I feel is quite often the case in number theory, it seems likely we know the answer, but there is no clear way to prove this. Again, the main problem is that the sequence is defined by adding and subtracting, but we are interested in the factors, which is what makes it difficult to analyse.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
"as $a_0 to 0$" should be "as $a_0 to infty$. and it's not obvious to me as to why the probability goes to 0 as $a_0 to infty$.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 5:44
$begingroup$
If you have an exponential growth, then we are looking at $sum frac1{sqrt{a_0}x^n}=frac1{sqrt{a_0}}sum x^{-n}$
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 13 '18 at 9:01
$begingroup$
I didn't know the "if" was carrying over to the next sentence. respectfully, you should write more clearly.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 10:12
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2889876%2fdoes-there-exist-a-0-such-that-a-n-n-0-infty-is-unbounded%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Not a complete answer, but a heuristic intuition why probably many numbers fulfill your requirement, in particular $22$.
We want to show $a_n$ is never prime. If you observe the sequence with $a_0=22$ you will notice that all terms are even, and hence not prime. If we can show $a_n$ is even for all $n$, we are done. If we try induction, we find the following.
Recall that $phi(n)$ is even for all $n>2$, so if $a_{n-1}>2$ is even, then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is even. Now recall that $$sigma(p_1^{k_1}...p_i^{k_i})=(1+p_1+...+p_1^{k_1})(1+p_2+...+p_2^{k_2})...(1+p_i+...+p_i^{k_i}).$$
For odd primes $p$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is even if and only if $k$ is odd. And for $p=2$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is odd no matter what $k$ is. Hence $sigma(n)$ is even if and only if there is an odd prime that divides $n$ an odd number of times. So $sigma(n)$ is odd if and only if $n$ is a square, or $2n$ is a square.
The rest of this argument will be heuristic. Let's calculate the probability of $sigma(n)$ being odd. Since we deduced that this is equivalent to either $n$ or $2n$ being a square, we find $mathbb{P}(sigma(n)mbox{ odd})approxfrac2{sqrt{n}}$. Therefore $$mathbb{P}(a_nmbox{ converges})lessapprox2left(frac1{sqrt{a_0}}+frac1{sqrt{a_1}}+...right)$$ If $a_n$ grows exponentially, which it appears to do, then this gives us a finite probability that $a_n$ converges. Also notice that this probability itself then also converges to $0$ as $a_0toinfty$. So heuristically speaking, it seems likely that almost all even $a_0$ make the sequence diverge.
Interestingly, the converse holds for odd numbers, as then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is odd, which we just argued has a low probability. Maybe something else can be said about different factors from $2$ though.
In conclusion, as I feel is quite often the case in number theory, it seems likely we know the answer, but there is no clear way to prove this. Again, the main problem is that the sequence is defined by adding and subtracting, but we are interested in the factors, which is what makes it difficult to analyse.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
"as $a_0 to 0$" should be "as $a_0 to infty$. and it's not obvious to me as to why the probability goes to 0 as $a_0 to infty$.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 5:44
$begingroup$
If you have an exponential growth, then we are looking at $sum frac1{sqrt{a_0}x^n}=frac1{sqrt{a_0}}sum x^{-n}$
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 13 '18 at 9:01
$begingroup$
I didn't know the "if" was carrying over to the next sentence. respectfully, you should write more clearly.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 10:12
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Not a complete answer, but a heuristic intuition why probably many numbers fulfill your requirement, in particular $22$.
We want to show $a_n$ is never prime. If you observe the sequence with $a_0=22$ you will notice that all terms are even, and hence not prime. If we can show $a_n$ is even for all $n$, we are done. If we try induction, we find the following.
Recall that $phi(n)$ is even for all $n>2$, so if $a_{n-1}>2$ is even, then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is even. Now recall that $$sigma(p_1^{k_1}...p_i^{k_i})=(1+p_1+...+p_1^{k_1})(1+p_2+...+p_2^{k_2})...(1+p_i+...+p_i^{k_i}).$$
For odd primes $p$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is even if and only if $k$ is odd. And for $p=2$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is odd no matter what $k$ is. Hence $sigma(n)$ is even if and only if there is an odd prime that divides $n$ an odd number of times. So $sigma(n)$ is odd if and only if $n$ is a square, or $2n$ is a square.
The rest of this argument will be heuristic. Let's calculate the probability of $sigma(n)$ being odd. Since we deduced that this is equivalent to either $n$ or $2n$ being a square, we find $mathbb{P}(sigma(n)mbox{ odd})approxfrac2{sqrt{n}}$. Therefore $$mathbb{P}(a_nmbox{ converges})lessapprox2left(frac1{sqrt{a_0}}+frac1{sqrt{a_1}}+...right)$$ If $a_n$ grows exponentially, which it appears to do, then this gives us a finite probability that $a_n$ converges. Also notice that this probability itself then also converges to $0$ as $a_0toinfty$. So heuristically speaking, it seems likely that almost all even $a_0$ make the sequence diverge.
Interestingly, the converse holds for odd numbers, as then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is odd, which we just argued has a low probability. Maybe something else can be said about different factors from $2$ though.
In conclusion, as I feel is quite often the case in number theory, it seems likely we know the answer, but there is no clear way to prove this. Again, the main problem is that the sequence is defined by adding and subtracting, but we are interested in the factors, which is what makes it difficult to analyse.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
"as $a_0 to 0$" should be "as $a_0 to infty$. and it's not obvious to me as to why the probability goes to 0 as $a_0 to infty$.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 5:44
$begingroup$
If you have an exponential growth, then we are looking at $sum frac1{sqrt{a_0}x^n}=frac1{sqrt{a_0}}sum x^{-n}$
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 13 '18 at 9:01
$begingroup$
I didn't know the "if" was carrying over to the next sentence. respectfully, you should write more clearly.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 10:12
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Not a complete answer, but a heuristic intuition why probably many numbers fulfill your requirement, in particular $22$.
We want to show $a_n$ is never prime. If you observe the sequence with $a_0=22$ you will notice that all terms are even, and hence not prime. If we can show $a_n$ is even for all $n$, we are done. If we try induction, we find the following.
Recall that $phi(n)$ is even for all $n>2$, so if $a_{n-1}>2$ is even, then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is even. Now recall that $$sigma(p_1^{k_1}...p_i^{k_i})=(1+p_1+...+p_1^{k_1})(1+p_2+...+p_2^{k_2})...(1+p_i+...+p_i^{k_i}).$$
For odd primes $p$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is even if and only if $k$ is odd. And for $p=2$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is odd no matter what $k$ is. Hence $sigma(n)$ is even if and only if there is an odd prime that divides $n$ an odd number of times. So $sigma(n)$ is odd if and only if $n$ is a square, or $2n$ is a square.
The rest of this argument will be heuristic. Let's calculate the probability of $sigma(n)$ being odd. Since we deduced that this is equivalent to either $n$ or $2n$ being a square, we find $mathbb{P}(sigma(n)mbox{ odd})approxfrac2{sqrt{n}}$. Therefore $$mathbb{P}(a_nmbox{ converges})lessapprox2left(frac1{sqrt{a_0}}+frac1{sqrt{a_1}}+...right)$$ If $a_n$ grows exponentially, which it appears to do, then this gives us a finite probability that $a_n$ converges. Also notice that this probability itself then also converges to $0$ as $a_0toinfty$. So heuristically speaking, it seems likely that almost all even $a_0$ make the sequence diverge.
Interestingly, the converse holds for odd numbers, as then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is odd, which we just argued has a low probability. Maybe something else can be said about different factors from $2$ though.
In conclusion, as I feel is quite often the case in number theory, it seems likely we know the answer, but there is no clear way to prove this. Again, the main problem is that the sequence is defined by adding and subtracting, but we are interested in the factors, which is what makes it difficult to analyse.
$endgroup$
Not a complete answer, but a heuristic intuition why probably many numbers fulfill your requirement, in particular $22$.
We want to show $a_n$ is never prime. If you observe the sequence with $a_0=22$ you will notice that all terms are even, and hence not prime. If we can show $a_n$ is even for all $n$, we are done. If we try induction, we find the following.
Recall that $phi(n)$ is even for all $n>2$, so if $a_{n-1}>2$ is even, then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is even. Now recall that $$sigma(p_1^{k_1}...p_i^{k_i})=(1+p_1+...+p_1^{k_1})(1+p_2+...+p_2^{k_2})...(1+p_i+...+p_i^{k_i}).$$
For odd primes $p$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is even if and only if $k$ is odd. And for $p=2$ we have $(1+p+...+p^k)$ is odd no matter what $k$ is. Hence $sigma(n)$ is even if and only if there is an odd prime that divides $n$ an odd number of times. So $sigma(n)$ is odd if and only if $n$ is a square, or $2n$ is a square.
The rest of this argument will be heuristic. Let's calculate the probability of $sigma(n)$ being odd. Since we deduced that this is equivalent to either $n$ or $2n$ being a square, we find $mathbb{P}(sigma(n)mbox{ odd})approxfrac2{sqrt{n}}$. Therefore $$mathbb{P}(a_nmbox{ converges})lessapprox2left(frac1{sqrt{a_0}}+frac1{sqrt{a_1}}+...right)$$ If $a_n$ grows exponentially, which it appears to do, then this gives us a finite probability that $a_n$ converges. Also notice that this probability itself then also converges to $0$ as $a_0toinfty$. So heuristically speaking, it seems likely that almost all even $a_0$ make the sequence diverge.
Interestingly, the converse holds for odd numbers, as then $a_n$ is even if and only if $sigma(a_{n-1})$ is odd, which we just argued has a low probability. Maybe something else can be said about different factors from $2$ though.
In conclusion, as I feel is quite often the case in number theory, it seems likely we know the answer, but there is no clear way to prove this. Again, the main problem is that the sequence is defined by adding and subtracting, but we are interested in the factors, which is what makes it difficult to analyse.
edited Dec 13 '18 at 13:38
answered Dec 13 '18 at 0:37
SmileyCraftSmileyCraft
3,401516
3,401516
$begingroup$
"as $a_0 to 0$" should be "as $a_0 to infty$. and it's not obvious to me as to why the probability goes to 0 as $a_0 to infty$.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 5:44
$begingroup$
If you have an exponential growth, then we are looking at $sum frac1{sqrt{a_0}x^n}=frac1{sqrt{a_0}}sum x^{-n}$
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 13 '18 at 9:01
$begingroup$
I didn't know the "if" was carrying over to the next sentence. respectfully, you should write more clearly.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 10:12
add a comment |
$begingroup$
"as $a_0 to 0$" should be "as $a_0 to infty$. and it's not obvious to me as to why the probability goes to 0 as $a_0 to infty$.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 5:44
$begingroup$
If you have an exponential growth, then we are looking at $sum frac1{sqrt{a_0}x^n}=frac1{sqrt{a_0}}sum x^{-n}$
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 13 '18 at 9:01
$begingroup$
I didn't know the "if" was carrying over to the next sentence. respectfully, you should write more clearly.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 10:12
$begingroup$
"as $a_0 to 0$" should be "as $a_0 to infty$. and it's not obvious to me as to why the probability goes to 0 as $a_0 to infty$.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 5:44
$begingroup$
"as $a_0 to 0$" should be "as $a_0 to infty$. and it's not obvious to me as to why the probability goes to 0 as $a_0 to infty$.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 5:44
$begingroup$
If you have an exponential growth, then we are looking at $sum frac1{sqrt{a_0}x^n}=frac1{sqrt{a_0}}sum x^{-n}$
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 13 '18 at 9:01
$begingroup$
If you have an exponential growth, then we are looking at $sum frac1{sqrt{a_0}x^n}=frac1{sqrt{a_0}}sum x^{-n}$
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 13 '18 at 9:01
$begingroup$
I didn't know the "if" was carrying over to the next sentence. respectfully, you should write more clearly.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 10:12
$begingroup$
I didn't know the "if" was carrying over to the next sentence. respectfully, you should write more clearly.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Dec 13 '18 at 10:12
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2889876%2fdoes-there-exist-a-0-such-that-a-n-n-0-infty-is-unbounded%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
You mean "Does there exists an $a_0$ such that the sequence doesn't contain a prime element", don't you?
$endgroup$
– N. S.
Aug 24 '18 at 16:28
1
$begingroup$
It looks like there are a lot of numbers with this property, with $a_0 = 22$ being the smallest.
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
Here the numbers up to 1000
$endgroup$
– Paul
Aug 29 '18 at 18:32
$begingroup$
It is possible to make the sequence monotonically increase for arbitrarily large number of terms. We can keep increasing the power of $2$ that divides $a_0$. However, I am not sure whether it is possible for the sequence to be unbounded, in other words, monotonically increase forever. This seems most likely for base values such as $a_0=22$. If one can actually prove that there exists a sequence that does not contain any terms of the form $k^2$ or $2k^2$, then the sequence will be unbounded.
$endgroup$
– Haran
Sep 18 '18 at 15:00
1
$begingroup$
Alternative formulation: $a_{n+1} = a_n + sum_{d mid a_n,, d < a_n} left(1 + muleft(frac{a_n}{d}right)right) d$ where $mu$ is the Möbius function.
$endgroup$
– Peter Taylor
Sep 27 '18 at 16:02