Timeline for Fibonacci series captures Euler $e=2.718\dots$
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 2023 at 20:53 | answer | added | Somos | timeline score: 6 | |
| May 13, 2023 at 9:31 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak |
edited tags
|
|
| Apr 2, 2023 at 1:01 | answer | added | Rafi | timeline score: 5 | |
| Oct 2, 2018 at 18:30 | vote | accept | T. Amdeberhan | ||
| Apr 23, 2017 at 12:55 | history | edited | T. Amdeberhan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Apr 15, 2017 at 14:16 | answer | added | Ira Gessel | timeline score: 22 | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 17:07 | comment | added | Greg Martin | @GerhardPaseman I suspect your comment is true, and can be proved from the special cases $n=0,1$ of the OP's assertion by taking linear combinations. | |
| Apr 12, 2017 at 22:10 | answer | added | Will Sawin | timeline score: 80 | |
| Apr 12, 2017 at 21:19 | comment | added | T. Amdeberhan | As I mentioned above, it would be nice to see alternative or novel proofs. | |
| Apr 12, 2017 at 21:05 | comment | added | Aaron Bergman | Can't you just do the sums using the Binet formula? | |
| Apr 12, 2017 at 21:04 | answer | added | Carlo Beenakker | timeline score: 31 | |
| Apr 12, 2017 at 21:04 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | Perhaps this is also true with F replaced by G, where G is a Fibonacci recurrence but G_0 and G_1 are two arbitrary numbers, excluding 0,0. Gerhard "Can't Build E From Nothing" Paseman, 2017.04.12. | |
| Apr 12, 2017 at 20:54 | history | asked | T. Amdeberhan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |