Do you think the Collat's conjecture is true /sci/?

what do you mean by true? It works, but it hasn't been proven or solved yet

>>8048464
Do you believe it is true?

>>8048467
Its probably true

Does it has been shown to be related to more complex fields?

I believe it is true
Just as most people believe that N=NP problem has no solution but yet no proof.

>>8048455
>Collat's conjecture
What about 2n + n%3 (mod 3)? Will it always end up back in the {1,2} subgraph of N? 5 + 2n - n%5? 5 + 3n - n%5? Will they both always collapse to {{1,4},{2,3}}? How is this not trivial to prove with rings/modular arithmetic?

>>8048455
brb proving this shit
i could use 500 bucks

>>8048455
Yet another example of shit created to keep smart people from doing anything useful in life.

We have computers now, let them handle this time sink.

>>8048505
>N=NP
please stop this meam

>>8048455
Can a circle be divided by chords into equal area parts without any of those parts being congruent?

>>8048658
You can't just throw computational time at a problem and expect a proof to fall out. This isn't physics.

>>8048678
Yes. Three chords is enough.

>>8048716
Oh? I'd like to see you try to prove that.

>>8048725
Prove in what capacity? Formally or intuitively?

>>8048731
Either way. Draw an example if you want. But beware that if you think it can be done with 3 chords your intuition is misleading you.

>>8048668
>waaaaaaaah computer science isn't hard muh chemical engineering

File: glo man.jpg (172KB, 667x667px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 667x667px

>>8048455

more easy to explain meme problems like this?

>>8048735
>your intuition is
Alright so for background: The last time I saw this question posted on this board, it was posted by a fool who was either one of these: http://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/17562328/#17562330 or else someone fool enough to fall for their stupidity. So I'd say there's about a 1e-20 chance you're not one of those fools. If you're not one of those fools, you can demonstrate that very quickly by showing me that you understand the question you've asked. Simply post the implicit equation for a circle and again for a line and I'll have reason to believe this isn't an elaborate 'troll'.

Until then, start by defining a zero length chord as a point on its circle.

Paul Erdős said about the Collatz conjecture: "Mathematics may not be ready for such problems."[9] He also offered $500 for its solution.[10]


500 dolla boyz, get to it

>>8048745
>a zero length chord
OK, so you can't do it. That's what I thought.

>>8048749

i'm finna hit a lick and get that

>>8048740
if you're trolling it isn't funny
I posted to stop saying
>N=NP
because N doesn't refer to any problem class in question
again, not sure if you're serious. just trying to explain

>>8048749
>Paul Erdős
>His parents were both Jewish mathematics teachers from a vibrant intellectual community.
>Erdős offered $500 for a solution.

>>8048764
That's a lot of money for mathematicians to be fair

>>8048455
There's actually a proof that the conjecture is true for *almost all integers. How they define almost all for integers, i don't know, but I'm sure it's analogous to the continuous "almost everywhere."

>>8048980
>almost all integers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almost_all

>>8048749
>>8048764
>$500
well he WAS a jew

>>8048980
Density 1 probably.

>>8048980
How could discrete density be analogous to continuous density? Both are extremely different