Check if infinite series divisible individually by a number or not?












0












$begingroup$


We are given first three numbers of a infinite series and the next elements of series would be decided by following formula:



Tn= Tn-1 + Tn-2 + Tn-3



If we are given the first three numbers as 1, 1, 1, then the series would look like this:



1, 1, 1, 3, 5, 9, 17, 31, . . . .



Now I wanted to ask the logic on how to check if all the elements of the series are indivisible by a number individually. For example, we know that the above series is not divisible by 27. Thanks in advance!










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is a bit vague. For small numbers, like $n=27$, you can just write out the entire sequence $pmod n$. After all, it has to be periodic (as there are only finitely many values available). Of course, even for small $n$, the period can be quite large. For $n=27$ you can notice that $(a_{40},a_{41},a_{42})=(10,10,10)$ so from there on the sequence is just $10$ times what it was up to $a_{39}$. As it is not $0$ in that range, it is never $0$.
    $endgroup$
    – lulu
    Jan 5 at 13:49
















0












$begingroup$


We are given first three numbers of a infinite series and the next elements of series would be decided by following formula:



Tn= Tn-1 + Tn-2 + Tn-3



If we are given the first three numbers as 1, 1, 1, then the series would look like this:



1, 1, 1, 3, 5, 9, 17, 31, . . . .



Now I wanted to ask the logic on how to check if all the elements of the series are indivisible by a number individually. For example, we know that the above series is not divisible by 27. Thanks in advance!










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is a bit vague. For small numbers, like $n=27$, you can just write out the entire sequence $pmod n$. After all, it has to be periodic (as there are only finitely many values available). Of course, even for small $n$, the period can be quite large. For $n=27$ you can notice that $(a_{40},a_{41},a_{42})=(10,10,10)$ so from there on the sequence is just $10$ times what it was up to $a_{39}$. As it is not $0$ in that range, it is never $0$.
    $endgroup$
    – lulu
    Jan 5 at 13:49














0












0








0





$begingroup$


We are given first three numbers of a infinite series and the next elements of series would be decided by following formula:



Tn= Tn-1 + Tn-2 + Tn-3



If we are given the first three numbers as 1, 1, 1, then the series would look like this:



1, 1, 1, 3, 5, 9, 17, 31, . . . .



Now I wanted to ask the logic on how to check if all the elements of the series are indivisible by a number individually. For example, we know that the above series is not divisible by 27. Thanks in advance!










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




We are given first three numbers of a infinite series and the next elements of series would be decided by following formula:



Tn= Tn-1 + Tn-2 + Tn-3



If we are given the first three numbers as 1, 1, 1, then the series would look like this:



1, 1, 1, 3, 5, 9, 17, 31, . . . .



Now I wanted to ask the logic on how to check if all the elements of the series are indivisible by a number individually. For example, we know that the above series is not divisible by 27. Thanks in advance!







sequences-and-series arithmetic-progressions






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Jan 5 at 13:38









SarquesSarques

1




1












  • $begingroup$
    This is a bit vague. For small numbers, like $n=27$, you can just write out the entire sequence $pmod n$. After all, it has to be periodic (as there are only finitely many values available). Of course, even for small $n$, the period can be quite large. For $n=27$ you can notice that $(a_{40},a_{41},a_{42})=(10,10,10)$ so from there on the sequence is just $10$ times what it was up to $a_{39}$. As it is not $0$ in that range, it is never $0$.
    $endgroup$
    – lulu
    Jan 5 at 13:49


















  • $begingroup$
    This is a bit vague. For small numbers, like $n=27$, you can just write out the entire sequence $pmod n$. After all, it has to be periodic (as there are only finitely many values available). Of course, even for small $n$, the period can be quite large. For $n=27$ you can notice that $(a_{40},a_{41},a_{42})=(10,10,10)$ so from there on the sequence is just $10$ times what it was up to $a_{39}$. As it is not $0$ in that range, it is never $0$.
    $endgroup$
    – lulu
    Jan 5 at 13:49
















$begingroup$
This is a bit vague. For small numbers, like $n=27$, you can just write out the entire sequence $pmod n$. After all, it has to be periodic (as there are only finitely many values available). Of course, even for small $n$, the period can be quite large. For $n=27$ you can notice that $(a_{40},a_{41},a_{42})=(10,10,10)$ so from there on the sequence is just $10$ times what it was up to $a_{39}$. As it is not $0$ in that range, it is never $0$.
$endgroup$
– lulu
Jan 5 at 13:49




$begingroup$
This is a bit vague. For small numbers, like $n=27$, you can just write out the entire sequence $pmod n$. After all, it has to be periodic (as there are only finitely many values available). Of course, even for small $n$, the period can be quite large. For $n=27$ you can notice that $(a_{40},a_{41},a_{42})=(10,10,10)$ so from there on the sequence is just $10$ times what it was up to $a_{39}$. As it is not $0$ in that range, it is never $0$.
$endgroup$
– lulu
Jan 5 at 13:49










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















-1












$begingroup$

One way, is to apply it to remainders. Then the values that are added are never bigger than the number you want to find the remainder on division by. Since odd+odd+odd=odd , we get that the sequence will never be even for example. You could Also expand the reccurence for n greater than the number of terms you have:$$T_n=T_{n-2}+2*T_{n-3}+3*T_{n-4}+2T_{n-5}+T_{n-6}$$ is another version that works for all n>6. For any composite that's not a power of a prime though, it's easier to test its coprime divisors (ironically prime powers or single primes are easiest) if 1 of these fails so will all numbers it's a divisor of. So 2 failing destroys all even numbers divisibility. All we need is to transform it into the correct form of reccurence to test these.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













    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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062725%2fcheck-if-infinite-series-divisible-individually-by-a-number-or-not%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









    -1












    $begingroup$

    One way, is to apply it to remainders. Then the values that are added are never bigger than the number you want to find the remainder on division by. Since odd+odd+odd=odd , we get that the sequence will never be even for example. You could Also expand the reccurence for n greater than the number of terms you have:$$T_n=T_{n-2}+2*T_{n-3}+3*T_{n-4}+2T_{n-5}+T_{n-6}$$ is another version that works for all n>6. For any composite that's not a power of a prime though, it's easier to test its coprime divisors (ironically prime powers or single primes are easiest) if 1 of these fails so will all numbers it's a divisor of. So 2 failing destroys all even numbers divisibility. All we need is to transform it into the correct form of reccurence to test these.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      -1












      $begingroup$

      One way, is to apply it to remainders. Then the values that are added are never bigger than the number you want to find the remainder on division by. Since odd+odd+odd=odd , we get that the sequence will never be even for example. You could Also expand the reccurence for n greater than the number of terms you have:$$T_n=T_{n-2}+2*T_{n-3}+3*T_{n-4}+2T_{n-5}+T_{n-6}$$ is another version that works for all n>6. For any composite that's not a power of a prime though, it's easier to test its coprime divisors (ironically prime powers or single primes are easiest) if 1 of these fails so will all numbers it's a divisor of. So 2 failing destroys all even numbers divisibility. All we need is to transform it into the correct form of reccurence to test these.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        -1












        -1








        -1





        $begingroup$

        One way, is to apply it to remainders. Then the values that are added are never bigger than the number you want to find the remainder on division by. Since odd+odd+odd=odd , we get that the sequence will never be even for example. You could Also expand the reccurence for n greater than the number of terms you have:$$T_n=T_{n-2}+2*T_{n-3}+3*T_{n-4}+2T_{n-5}+T_{n-6}$$ is another version that works for all n>6. For any composite that's not a power of a prime though, it's easier to test its coprime divisors (ironically prime powers or single primes are easiest) if 1 of these fails so will all numbers it's a divisor of. So 2 failing destroys all even numbers divisibility. All we need is to transform it into the correct form of reccurence to test these.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        One way, is to apply it to remainders. Then the values that are added are never bigger than the number you want to find the remainder on division by. Since odd+odd+odd=odd , we get that the sequence will never be even for example. You could Also expand the reccurence for n greater than the number of terms you have:$$T_n=T_{n-2}+2*T_{n-3}+3*T_{n-4}+2T_{n-5}+T_{n-6}$$ is another version that works for all n>6. For any composite that's not a power of a prime though, it's easier to test its coprime divisors (ironically prime powers or single primes are easiest) if 1 of these fails so will all numbers it's a divisor of. So 2 failing destroys all even numbers divisibility. All we need is to transform it into the correct form of reccurence to test these.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Feb 18 at 13:43

























        answered Feb 18 at 13:20









        Roddy MacPheeRoddy MacPhee

        418117




        418117






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062725%2fcheck-if-infinite-series-divisible-individually-by-a-number-or-not%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Bressuire

            Cabo Verde

            Gyllenstierna