I hate the math community so much it's unreal. I saw some guy who discovered that for the Collatz sequence, all starting values of the form 16k+7 will always contain a number 27k+13 in their sequence. And he was asking for feedback and the idiots tried to prove him wrong and delete his posts, and their attempted disproofs were also incorrect.

Then I validated it for thousands of numbers with a C# program and I also realized that 27k+13 always appears at the same number in the sequence every time which only makes it more profound and interesting. I am not him but I felt bad for him and now I am curious of the implications of his findings.

Why is the math community so stupid?

Example starting value of k=1 is 23. So starting collatz sequence with 23 will contain 27k+13 aka 40 as one of the terms. And it does. And this 27k+13 term always shows up in the same spot in the sequence for all values of k.

>>16696096 (OP)
The entire math community is still subject to the human condition. Intelligence and wisdom doesn't erase these things at all.

>>16696096 (OP)
16k + 7
48k + 22
24k + 11
72k + 34
36k + 17
108k + 52
54k + 26
27k + 13

Great, it showed up. Now what? Why is this interesting at all?

>>16696107
If k is big enough the sequence will hit 16k + 7 again.

>>16696113
Then publish such a k and you will have disproved the collatz conjecture

>>16696096 (OP)
>State a claim
>Not everyone immediately believes you
>This is somehow a problem
Sounds like you just want everyone to coddle you and only ever give you affirmation. You're a weak willed faggot, probably one of those kids that thinks the real world has participation trophies.

>>16696096 (OP)
>C#
ok pajeet.

>>16696124
Or, he just enjoys seeing patterns in nature, something which is impossible for npcs like you

>>16696141
Did you reply to the wrong person? That has nothing to do with what I posted. Someone made a claim, not everyone immediately believed it. This is not a problem for anyone other than OP. And the only reason it's a problem for OP is because OP is a faggot (see my previous post).

>>16696096 (OP)
Why are you surprised? the Collatz problem induces a lot of anger in people because you're reminding people of the amount of time they've wasted on it.

>>16696107
Not OP. Never thought about the conjecture this way, starting with some integer of the form ak + b. In this way, the "proof" is obvious to me. It's a growing sequence with the coefficients a,b pseudorandomly changing (I suspect normally), and that as the sequence grows it'll eventually hit a point where both a and b are identical powers of 2, and hence the algorithm will reduce it to 1. Formalizing this into a proof I'm sure is the issue, but seeing this has illuminated the problem for me. This also explains how Conway generalized the conjecture and how, as I suspected, there are other algorithms of the form an + b (a ≠ 3, b ≠ 1) that will also terminate to 1

>>16696138
pajeets is java anon
c# is probably vietnamese or something

>>16696148
Me again. I suppose this could be tracked by writing the difference between a and b for every iteration, and scanning for patterns. You'd have to track the odd and even iterations separately and I wonder if you'll see a monotone decreasing difference for one of them. Upon inspection it appears not, so I would then take the quotient a/b and see how that looks

>>16696107
>why is this interesting?
It actually falls apart at 27k+13. Because now the k coefficient is finally odd which means it will never be even again because you can only multiply k by 3 and you never add 1 to k. And even if you have some method of doing that, 27k is the first odd in the sequence. This was actually his grand point which I forgot to mention in my OP lol.

>>16696107
You have to start a new unique sequence after that cause 27k is odd.

>>16696096 (OP)
usually its glow niggers chimping out when this happens

>>16696124
hi glow nigger.

>>16696107
It is much more profound when you make it simpler with 2x+1.

Then the sequence is. ax+b. And consider x = 1.

2x+1
6x+4
3x+2 <- here a is odd.
9x+7 <- This is a power of 2.

Now for x = 1 you stop at 9x+7 which is 16.

Now, if you consider 27x+13 for x=1. This is 40, which divides by 2 until you reach 5 which is 3x+2 again.

If you consider x = 2 it adds a new layer but in theory the same patterns exist. Lol.

>>16696096 (OP)
link the thread OP

>>16696096 (OP)
seems like whats happening is prime factors of 2 are being removed and prime factors of 3 are being added to 23 until every prime factor of 2 is gone.

once that happens you have to borrow from the addition argument

>>16696096 (OP)
>>>16696096 (OP)
>discovered that for the Collatz sequence, all starting values of the form 16k+7 will always contain a number 27k+13 in their sequence.
Without proof it's not true.
>Then I validated it for thousands of numbers with a C# program and I also realized that 27k+13 always appears at the same number in the sequence every time which only makes it more profound and interesting. I am not him but I felt bad for him and now I am curious of the implications of his findings.
Are you retarded? That's not how proofs work. He just derived a new conjecture from a conjecture. If he has nothing to offer mathematically of course mathematicians will be pissed you're trying to shove your shit into the forum.

>>16696358
>conjectures are bad
good try glow nigger

>>16696358
>without proof it is not true
Someone in this thread proved it already here >>16696107.
If you consider this proof, it is 3(16k+7)+1, or (so to speak"16k+7")/2, etc. You just plug in 16k+7 for n and you can prove it always hits even coefficients of k for a while until it finally reaches an odd. Then thid becomes interesting because at this step you can no longer continue the sequence. Furthermore, it appears like many interesting qualities are revealed if you study theze behaviors.

Such as, for x=1, it appears like whenever you have a starting number ax+b where a is even and b is odd the first step where a is odd is the last step before a power of 2. Lol.

>>16696358
>That's not how proofs work
It's still not a bad start to check for any counterexamples as part of exploration.
>>16696358
>If he has nothing to offer mathematically of course mathematicians will be pissed you're trying to shove your shit into the forum
It's discussion

>>16696394
>It's discussion
? So is talking politics and it offers nothing mathematical.
>>16696383
>Someone in this thread proved it already here >>16696107.
So? It seems like the original poster couldn't even be bothered to give such a proof, he even had to make a simulation to fucking guess if it was true at all. Are you really so gullible as to think such a person has anything to offer to discussion with mathematicians? Seems like idiots figuring out basic arithmetic.
>>16696379
fucking retard. conjecture of the year.

I'm not defending that community, sounds retarded.

>>16696124
>thinks the real world has participation trophies.
Absolutely does for some classes of people

>>16696150
>>16696138
Java being a Jeet language is a fake meme.
In my experience, I honestly see a lot more programming in Java done by White men.
I see plenty C++ tutorials by Indians dudes.

The true languages for White men are probably:
C, Fortran, Rust, Haskell, ect.

>>16697965
Lisp is the white mans language