Question

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1q2DpLVjAvGSjJCs6bme04Nlr6KmZqvS16bdRc

- what is your opinion from this please ?

Answer 1

this will be right

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1q2DpLVjAvGSjJCs6bme04Nlr6KmZqvS16bdRc1FpnSY/edit

Answer 2

Yep, good work :0
I've nothing to say about this :)

Answer 3

I'd say @jhonyy9 !

Answer 4

I'd say !

Answer 5

i didnt get hw u went to 8n2/2 from 6n2 + 4

Answer 6

wow this is sooo great johnyy..... im glad you found that..lol

Answer 7

how do you think this ???

Answer 8

do you like this so much ?

Answer 9

yeahhh its great i think

Answer 10

you are really a good researcher lol

Answer 11

well gootta go now have fun...great day now

Answer 12

thnx.............

Answer 13

2n --- ... -- 5n2/2
What do you mean by this, exactly?

Answer 14

@jhonyy9 i don't think u have generalized your proof for accounting for all values of K by varying k from 0 to infinity, also i m not sure you hv used mathematical induction.Though you can stake your claim for that 500 $

Answer 15

You define \(n_2=2\), you seem to say that any even number reduces to \(5n_2/2=10\) in a collatz chain without actually proving it, or am I missing something?

Answer 16

@dape so i think you see it right that not just any even number --- all numbers indifferent are odd or even can being reduced to 5n2/2 --- 10/2 --- 5 so than because is odd will be 5*3+1 --- 16 and from theses examples can be reduced that 16/2 --- 8 --- 8/2 --- 4 --- 4/2 --- 2 --- 2/2 --- 1 so that always will be resulted 1

HOPE so much that is understandably sure right NOW !!!

Answer 17

So you are claiming that all numbers can be reduced to 10 in a collatz chain?

Answer 18

yes right and if you see it too there is proven that ,,YES" ALL numbers indifferent even or odd can being redused to 10 and after this result that ALL numbers from this will result like final number the 1

hope so much that is understandably

thank you for your cooperation in this

Answer 19

21 can't be reduced to 10... It goes 21*3+1=64->32->16->8->4->2->1

Answer 20

The same is true for 85.

Answer 21

yes is right but if you check on my proof in cases of these numbers where not can being reduced to 5n2/2 so there you can seeing that always result in case of every numbers 8/2 from what will result secure,sure the last number 1

right ?

Answer 22

I don't see a proof for the numbers that doesn't reduce to 10.

Answer 23

so than check it for all numbers redused to 8n2/2 --- 4n2/2 --- 2n2/2 --- 2/2 =1

- so you need to know again that n2 sign 2 just to make differents from 2 i have wrote n2

OK ?

Answer 24

OK A QUESTION: PROVE THAT FOR A NUMBER TO REDUCE TO 1 by such way At first it must reduce to 16.....EXCEPT(2,4,8)

Answer 25

so with this conditions,substitutions from Collatz's conjecture that so if odd than multiplie by 3 and add to 1 or if even just divide by 2 so with these conditions yes is sure that after you reduce these numbers to 16 what you can continue like 16/2 --- 8 so 8/2 --- 4 so 4/2 --- 2 so 2/2 --- 1

- so now is OK ?

Answer 26

by proof of this please check the ,,google document from this site

Answer 27

please

Answer 28

Sorry to say but...... I didnt got the proof

Answer 29

@sauravshakya check it on this website and will get the needed proof of .... there by math induction so that is sure that need to reduce every numbers to 16
- so if you check it there on my proof you can getting this proof from what you have wrote before

Answer 30

Then, I think its a great one....... as I like Number theorey.

Answer 31

thank you so this sign that you have understood it all from this sure right

OK so YES ???

Answer 32

so you have got there the necessary proof from what you have wrote before by mathinduction ?

Answer 33

Oh no...... It just came to my find. If the numbers ( except 2,4,8) has to reduce to one then,
At first it must be 2.
Now, to be 2 it must be 4.
Now, to be 4 it must be 8 because (4-1=3 is a prime)
Now, to be 8 it must be 16 as (8-1=7 is a prime number)
Now, 16-1 = 15 is not a prime So, 15 is divisible by others.....(for example 5*3+1=16)

Answer 34

Does it make sense

Answer 35

NOW, TO BE 16 IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR A NUMBER TO BE 32 AS IT CAN BE 5 ALSO.

Answer 36

oh yes but if it is 5 so than multiplie by 3 and assum 1 and so will get 16 too

YES ?

Answer 37

YES

Answer 38

BUT U CANNOT get 8 or 4 that way

Answer 39

not is necessary because if you check on my proof you see that in case of every numbers we can getting not 10 how i have wrote before in my firstly reply before so we can getting in case of every numbers 16 so from what is very easy getting 8 divided by 2 and 4 and 2 and to end,finaly 1

Answer 40

right ???

Answer 41

@sauravshakya please you i have close this my question now but i will put here imediatly one new proof from google docs. site

- so i like please you check it too and i like please you write me please what is your opinion from this

Answer 42

OK ?

Answer 43

OK..... GREAT