Skip to main content

Timeline for Relaxed Collatz 3x+1 conjecture

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

19 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 25, 2022 at 16:01 answer added Terry Tao timeline score: 8
Sep 22, 2022 at 4:02 answer added Terry Tao timeline score: 16
Dec 27, 2017 at 5:27 comment added Alexander Burstein At the risk of sounding completely clueless, would it be any easier or harder to prove or disprove a generalized version of the conjecture (this one or the original) with the operations $bq\mapsto q$ and $bq+r\mapsto (b+1)(bq+r)+(b-r)$ for any other $b\in\mathbb{N}$ and all $q,r\in\mathbb{N}$ such that $0<r<b$?
Dec 15, 2017 at 10:12 answer added Dan Brumleve timeline score: 11
Dec 15, 2017 at 3:42 comment added Dan Brumleve Expanding the tree generated by the two operations gives a set with polynomial density, but I think we won't be able to prove it that way, since apparently the best result on the density of counterexamples to the Collatz conjecture is in the wrong direction. terrytao.wordpress.com/2011/08/25/… If there were fewer than $n^c$ counterexamples less than $n$, then we could jump out.
S Dec 14, 2017 at 20:01 history suggested Rodrigo de Azevedo CC BY-SA 3.0
Minor improvements
Dec 14, 2017 at 18:06 review Suggested edits
S Dec 14, 2017 at 20:01
Nov 28, 2017 at 15:53 comment added Robert Frost @GerhardPaseman "The Threshold Might Be Two" Paseman. There's an interesting connection between this problem and a special property the number $2$ has, as the exponent in discrete calculus. The weakened Collatz Conjecture (no nontrivial cycles) is equivalent to a statement in discrete calculus which looks a bit like a Hensel lift in base 2. Robert "$\Delta_n(x)$ has to be precisely $2x+2^{v_2(x)}$" Frost
Jul 5, 2017 at 10:28 comment added Robert Frost This describes every $x$ as is the set of all strings in base $3$, and the conjecture is that for every such string there's some length of string of $1$'s which can follow it, to make it a power of $2$. Some measure of orthogonality of the function $3x+1$ to the integers in the $2$-adic metric space away from the vicinity of $1$ would seem to do it.
Jul 5, 2017 at 10:13 comment added Robert Frost The simplest answer in the affirmative would follow if for every integer $x$ there exists some $n$ such that $3^nx+\frac{3^n-1}{2}\in\{2^m:m\in\mathbb{N}\}$. In other words we can iterate $3x+1$ and always eventually arrive at some power of $2$.
Sep 4, 2015 at 13:00 comment added Suvrit Perhaps the Markov Chain view may be interesting to look at here...
Sep 4, 2015 at 3:19 history edited Max Alekseyev CC BY-SA 3.0
added 3 characters in body
Sep 4, 2015 at 2:48 history edited Max Alekseyev CC BY-SA 3.0
added 217 characters in body
Sep 4, 2015 at 0:19 comment added Gerhard Paseman @YaakovBaruch, I am surprised. I must have been thinking about something different from what I said. Thank you for the links. Gerhard "And It Wasn't Floor Either" Paseman, 2015.09.03
Sep 3, 2015 at 23:48 comment added Max Alekseyev @wythagoras: In fact, 27 can take just 23 steps (and that's the minimum): 27 -> 82 -> 41 -> 124 -> 373 -> 1120 -> 560 -> 280 -> 140 -> 70 -> 35 -> 106 -> 53 -> 160 -> 80 -> 40 -> 20 -> 10 -> 5 -> 16 -> 8 -> 4 -> 2 -> 1.
Sep 3, 2015 at 22:17 comment added Yaakov Baruch @GerhardPaseman: the idea fails for $\alpha=\frac{\sqrt(5)+1}{2}$ (and 7 as starting point) and more generally for salem numbers. See item 29 in the Lagarias's survey on the $3x+1$ problem: arxiv.org/pdf/math/0309224.pdf; for more detail: math.grinnell.edu/~chamberl/papers/3x_survey_eng.pdf
Sep 3, 2015 at 18:47 comment added Gerhard Paseman If instead of 3x+1 you had ceil(\alpha x + 1) with \alpha smaller than 2, you could show convergence pretty easily. My feeling is that there is a threshold between 2 and 3 where for \alpha below the threshold, it will be easy to prove convergence, and for \alpha above it, it will be hard. Gerhard "The Threshold Might Be Two" Paseman, 2015.09.03
Sep 3, 2015 at 18:24 comment added wythagoras It can certainly reduce the time for reducing it to zero by a good amount. For example 27 takes at most 48 steps (out of possibilities considered) instead of 112.
Sep 3, 2015 at 17:05 history asked Max Alekseyev CC BY-SA 3.0