Talk:Collatz conjecture

Collatz-graph is connected and acyclic.

Content:

1.Formulas for forward and backward sequences.

2.Family tree

3.Collatz sequence tree

4.Conclusion.

    Exploring other mathematical sequences:

5. (3*N+5)/2^m

6. Juggler sequence

https://sourceforge.net/projects/trial-collatz-proof/ Kavalenka (talk) 13:55, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

If you want to see a solution for Collatz Conjecture, refer to Volume 13 Issue 1 2025, Global Scientific Journal, "Unveiling the mystery of the Collatz Conjecture" by Sandoval Amui. It just takes elementary arithmetic (Geometric progressions) 2804:9188:1:9FBB:64EC:C3BF:D452:DDC3 (talk) 00:01, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Collatz conjecture|answered=yes}}

The article uses the word "begin" in excess. Can we use alternative synonyms please. 204.48.78.190 (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

: {{not done}} The word "begin" appears zero times in the article ("beginning" twice). --JBL (talk) 23:45, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

I found that the collatz conjecture can be solvable if the rules are modified. Let's consider it even if the last digit is divisible by 2, unless it's a decimal zero. If not, it's considered odd. So far, the numbers I have found do not end up on a loop or go infinitely. 122.53.180.74 (talk) 12:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

:To clarify, I meant the decimal numbers I've found. 122.53.180.74 (talk) 12:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

:If the rules are modified, it's not the Collatz conjecture. —Tamfang (talk) 21:49, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Max Siegel — a graduate student from the University of Southern California — seems to have put immense effort into developing a new approach to studying the Collatz conjecture.{{Citation |last=Siegel |first=Maxwell Charles |title=$\left(p,q\right)$-adic Analysis and the Collatz Conjecture |date=2024-12-03 |url=https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.02902 |access-date=2025-04-23 |publisher=arXiv |doi=10.48550/arXiv.2412.02902 |id=arXiv:2412.02902}}{{Cite web |title=Algebra |url=https://dornsife.usc.edu/mathematics/research-algebra/ |access-date=2025-04-23 |website=Department of Mathematics |language=en-US}} I'm not confident enough mathematically to add anything from his dissertation myself, but it may be noteworthy and it appears interesting. Thoughts? Ramanujaner (talk) 21:51, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

:Why's no one answering? His work is in souce [1] and source [2] shows that USC has accepted his thesis. It is quite novel and perhaps worth mentioning, is it not? Ramanujaner (talk) 19:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

::Seigel talks about it as perhaps being an interesting jump point. Seigel himself indicates it isn't a proof and while it may be interesting and useful to talk about in a forum devoted to it, neither the talk page nor the article itself is the place for that.Naraht (talk) 13:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

:I do not want to burst your bubble, but the work of Max Siegel does not help at all and is a trivial reinterpretation of the problem. I wasted my time having a deeper look into his work after I was convinced by reddits posts that he is not mentally ill. 133.6.130.80 (talk) 01:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

{{Reflist-talk}}