Is the number represented by the decimal
0.001001002003005008013021034055089144233377610...0.001001002003005008013021034055089144233377610...0.001001002003005008013021034055089144233377610...
rational, or irrational? Please justify your answer.
Note by Matt Enlow 7 years, 2 months ago
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
_italics_
**bold**
__bold__
- bulleted- list
1. numbered2. list
paragraph 1paragraph 2
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
This is a quote
# I indented these lines # 4 spaces, and now they show # up as a code block. print "hello world"
\(
\)
\[
\]
2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Let x=∑n=1∞F(n)10−3nx=\sum _{ n=1 }^{ \infty }{ F(n){ 10 }^{ -3n } } x=∑n=1∞F(n)10−3n. A little foodling with this, using an approach you (yes, you, Matt) used in another problem similar to this, gets us the equation to solve: 1000(1000x−x−1)=x1000(1000x-x-1)=x1000(1000x−x−1)=x, which means x is rational. I leave it to the reader as an exercise to find that value x. Thanks for the tip on how to do this, Matt!
The other version that I like: Is the decimal
0.1123581321345589144...0.1123581321345589144...0.1123581321345589144...
rational or irrational?
It simplifies the consideration of "What happens if the fibonacci number has 4 digits or more?"
Log in to reply
@Calvin Lin Hmmm i remember this one from somewhere else not sure where,
to proof The periodic sequence, It can be shown that fibonacci sequence is never eventually periodic Which goes to show that it is irrational.
I think we discussed this on brilliant a while back.
Yup, I believe that there was a past discussion about it. This is a gem, and worth revisiting.
@Calvin Lin – Ok lets see If i remember we write the above sequence like
F=0.f1f2f3.........fnF=0.{ f }_{ 1 }{ f }_{ 2 }{ f }_{ 3 }.........{ f }_{ n }F=0.f1f2f3.........fn, F(n)≡f(n)mod10F(n)\equiv f(n)mod10F(n)≡f(n)mod10, Then fn+2=fn+1+fnmod10 { f }_{ n+2 }={ f }_{ n+1 }+{ f }_{ n }mod10fn+2=fn+1+fnmod10
We can develop on this to show the existance of a fibonacci sequence congruent to −1mod10k-1 mod{ 10 }^{ k }−1mod10k but we will have to show that for any modulus p -- Fnmodpforn(−∞to∞){ F }_{ n }mod\quad p for\quad n(-\infty \quad to\quad \infty )Fnmodpforn(−∞to∞), is periodic.
I will have to think about it a bit more, My number theory is a rough.
@Beakal Tiliksew – Can you post the link to the previous discussion?
@Eddie The Head – i found the answer before i could figure it out, since it is a solution of @Calvin Lin , i won't post it here,so as not to spoil it.and for others to try it, i could mail you the link if you want.
You can try by proving that
For every kkk there exists a fibonacci number whose decimal representation ends in kkk 9's ,
One idea that we can try is proving that given any digit, and any number n, there always exist some Fibonacci number that has a sequence of that digit n times. If we were to prove that we can always find in some Fibonacci number a sequence like 11111.. as arbitrarily long as we'd like, that would pretty much prove that the decimal never repeats, and therefore it'd be irrational.
Would I want to try proving this? Ah, maybe too much for me now.
If I were to make a snap judgement on this one, I'd say not only it's probably irrational, it's probably even transcendental. I'm almost afraid to try touching this one.
As a matter of fact, Calvin, your suggested decimal number is similar to Champernowne's constant, which is 0.123456789101112131415..., which was shown to be transcendental. Not easy to do that.
u r ans r complez why is math complex
The first question I'd have is, what does the number look like after you get to four digit Fibonacci numbers? Would the thousand's digit of one segment add to the one's digit of the previous?
Yes, great question. And I would say that your suggestion as to how to resolve this ambiguity is the one that makes the most sense. (Also see @Calvin Lin 's comment.)
It equals 1000998999\frac{1000}{998999}9989991000, a rational number (see my response to Eddie the Head).
since it can be converted into p/q.form...it should be rational number..what do u say..???
How can you convert it to p/q form??It has no repeating parts as far as I see :p ..But I would love to see a rigorous solution
The generating function for the Fibonacci sequence is
F(x)=f0+f1x+f2x2+f3x3+…F(x)=f_0+f_1x+f_2x^2+f_3x^3+\dotsF(x)=f0+f1x+f2x2+f3x3+…
Since fn=fn−1+fn−2f_n=f_{n-1}+f_{n-2}fn=fn−1+fn−2, we have to cancel some terms
F(x)=f0+f1x+f2x2+f3x3+…F(x)=f_0+f_1x+f_2x^2+f_3x^3+\dotsF(x)=f0+f1x+f2x2+f3x3+… xF(x)=f0x+f1x2+f2x3+f3x4+…xF(x)=f_0x+f_1x^2+f_2x^3+f_3x^4+\dotsxF(x)=f0x+f1x2+f2x3+f3x4+… x2F(x)=f0x2+f1x3+f2x4+f3x5+…x^2F(x)=f_0x^2+f_1x^3+f_2x^4+f_3x^5+\dotsx2F(x)=f0x2+f1x3+f2x4+f3x5+…
Gathering the coefficients of (1−x−x2)F(x)(1-x-x^2)F(x)(1−x−x2)F(x), we get
(1−x−x2)F(x)=f0+(f1−f0)x+(f2−f1−f0)x2+(f3−f2−f3)x3+⋯=f0+(f1−f0)x(1-x-x^2)F(x)=f_0+(f_1-f_0)x+(f_2-f_1-f_0)x^2+(f_3-f_2-f_3)x^3+\dots=f_0+(f_1-f_0)x(1−x−x2)F(x)=f0+(f1−f0)x+(f2−f1−f0)x2+(f3−f2−f3)x3+⋯=f0+(f1−f0)x
Hence,
F(x)=f0+(f1−f0)x1−x−x2=x1−x−x2=f0+f1x+f2x2+f3x3+…F(x)=\frac{f_0+(f_1-f_0)x}{1-x-x^2}=\frac{x}{1-x-x^2}=f_0+f_1x+f_2x^2+f_3x^3+\dotsF(x)=1−x−x2f0+(f1−f0)x=1−x−x2x=f0+f1x+f2x2+f3x3+…
If we want to encode this into a decimal, we just let x=11000x=\frac{1}{1000}x=10001. The answer is
f0+f1⋅11000+f2⋅110002+f3⋅110003+⋯=110001−11000−110002=1000998999f_0+f_1\cdot\frac{1}{1000}+f_2\cdot\frac{1}{1000^2}+f_3\cdot\frac{1}{1000^3}+\dots=\frac{\frac{1}{1000}}{1-\frac{1}{1000}-\frac{1}{1000^2}}=\frac{1000}{998999}f0+f1⋅10001+f2⋅100021+f3⋅100031+⋯=1−10001−10002110001=9989991000
But beware of convergence issues! 11000\frac{1}{1000}10001 is sufficiently small, so I assumed it converged, which it did. Challenge: find 0.001002003004…0.001002003004\dots0.001002003004… and 0.001004009016025…0.001004009016025\dots0.001004009016025….
@Cody Johnson – Challenge 1.\textbf{Challenge 1.}Challenge 1.
F(x)=x+2x2+3x3+4x4+...............F(x) = x + 2x^{2} + 3x^{3} + 4x^{4}+...............F(x)=x+2x2+3x3+4x4+............... xF(x)=x2+2x3+3x4+........xF(x) = x^{2} + 2x^{3} + 3x^{4}+........xF(x)=x2+2x3+3x4+........
(1−x)F(x)=x+x2+x3+x4+.........(1-x)F(x) = x + x^{2} + x^{3} + x^{4}+.........(1−x)F(x)=x+x2+x3+x4+......... F(x)=x(1−x)2F(x) = \frac{x}{(1-x)^{2}}F(x)=(1−x)2x Hence we have f(11000)=1000998001f(\frac{1}{1000}) = \frac{1000}{998001}f(10001)=9980011000
We can clearly see that the terms converge.
Challenge 2.\textbf{Challenge 2.}Challenge 2.
In this problem we must use the same approach twice,the resulting generating function F(x)=1+x2(1−x)3F(x) = \frac{1+x^{2}}{(1-x)^{3}}F(x)=(1−x)31+x2
Hence F(11000)=1000001000998001F(\frac{1}{1000}) = \frac{1000001000}{998001}F(10001)=9980011000001000
@Cody Johnson – But what will your logicbe for convergence? I think it is because the denominator is incresing exponentially and the numerator is not.
@Eddie The Head – The Fibonacci does increase exponentially with ratio 5+12\frac{\sqrt5+1}225+1, but this is less than 100010001000.
Just do partial fraction decomposition on the LHS and you can find the interval of convergence.
@Cody Johnson – Nice...I'm familiar with the usage of generating functions in association with the terms of a series but in this case it didn't come to my mind at a first glance....,.
What value of p and q would you say they are??
rational because no is not repeated till now
irrational
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
Let x=∑n=1∞F(n)10−3n. A little foodling with this, using an approach you (yes, you, Matt) used in another problem similar to this, gets us the equation to solve: 1000(1000x−x−1)=x, which means x is rational. I leave it to the reader as an exercise to find that value x. Thanks for the tip on how to do this, Matt!
The other version that I like: Is the decimal
0.1123581321345589144...
rational or irrational?
It simplifies the consideration of "What happens if the fibonacci number has 4 digits or more?"
Log in to reply
@Calvin Lin Hmmm i remember this one from somewhere else not sure where,
to proof The periodic sequence, It can be shown that fibonacci sequence is never eventually periodic Which goes to show that it is irrational.
I think we discussed this on brilliant a while back.
Log in to reply
Yup, I believe that there was a past discussion about it. This is a gem, and worth revisiting.
Log in to reply
F=0.f1f2f3.........fn, F(n)≡f(n)mod10, Then fn+2=fn+1+fnmod10
We can develop on this to show the existance of a fibonacci sequence congruent to −1mod10k but we will have to show that for any modulus p -- Fnmodpforn(−∞to∞), is periodic.
I will have to think about it a bit more, My number theory is a rough.
Log in to reply
Log in to reply
@Calvin Lin , i won't post it here,so as not to spoil it.and for others to try it, i could mail you the link if you want.
i found the answer before i could figure it out, since it is a solution ofYou can try by proving that
For every k there exists a fibonacci number whose decimal representation ends in k 9's ,
One idea that we can try is proving that given any digit, and any number n, there always exist some Fibonacci number that has a sequence of that digit n times. If we were to prove that we can always find in some Fibonacci number a sequence like 11111.. as arbitrarily long as we'd like, that would pretty much prove that the decimal never repeats, and therefore it'd be irrational.
Would I want to try proving this? Ah, maybe too much for me now.
If I were to make a snap judgement on this one, I'd say not only it's probably irrational, it's probably even transcendental. I'm almost afraid to try touching this one.
As a matter of fact, Calvin, your suggested decimal number is similar to Champernowne's constant, which is 0.123456789101112131415..., which was shown to be transcendental. Not easy to do that.
u r ans r complez why is math complex
The first question I'd have is, what does the number look like after you get to four digit Fibonacci numbers? Would the thousand's digit of one segment add to the one's digit of the previous?
Log in to reply
Yes, great question. And I would say that your suggestion as to how to resolve this ambiguity is the one that makes the most sense. (Also see @Calvin Lin 's comment.)
It equals 9989991000, a rational number (see my response to Eddie the Head).
since it can be converted into p/q.form...it should be rational number..what do u say..???
Log in to reply
How can you convert it to p/q form??It has no repeating parts as far as I see :p ..But I would love to see a rigorous solution
Log in to reply
The generating function for the Fibonacci sequence is
F(x)=f0+f1x+f2x2+f3x3+…
Since fn=fn−1+fn−2, we have to cancel some terms
F(x)=f0+f1x+f2x2+f3x3+… xF(x)=f0x+f1x2+f2x3+f3x4+… x2F(x)=f0x2+f1x3+f2x4+f3x5+…
Gathering the coefficients of (1−x−x2)F(x), we get
(1−x−x2)F(x)=f0+(f1−f0)x+(f2−f1−f0)x2+(f3−f2−f3)x3+⋯=f0+(f1−f0)x
Hence,
F(x)=1−x−x2f0+(f1−f0)x=1−x−x2x=f0+f1x+f2x2+f3x3+…
If we want to encode this into a decimal, we just let x=10001. The answer is
f0+f1⋅10001+f2⋅100021+f3⋅100031+⋯=1−10001−10002110001=9989991000
But beware of convergence issues! 10001 is sufficiently small, so I assumed it converged, which it did. Challenge: find 0.001002003004… and 0.001004009016025….
Log in to reply
Challenge 1.
F(x)=x+2x2+3x3+4x4+............... xF(x)=x2+2x3+3x4+........
(1−x)F(x)=x+x2+x3+x4+......... F(x)=(1−x)2x Hence we have f(10001)=9980011000
We can clearly see that the terms converge.
Challenge 2.
In this problem we must use the same approach twice,the resulting generating function F(x)=(1−x)31+x2
Hence F(10001)=9980011000001000
Log in to reply
25+1, but this is less than 1000.
The Fibonacci does increase exponentially with ratioJust do partial fraction decomposition on the LHS and you can find the interval of convergence.
What value of p and q would you say they are??
rational because no is not repeated till now
irrational