(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
The On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences (OEIS)
login

Revision History for A001566

(Bold, blue-underlined text is an addition; faded, red-underlined text is a deletion.)

Showing entries 1-10 | older changes
a(0) = 3; thereafter, a(n) = a(n-1)^2 - 2.
(history; published version)
#189 by Michael De Vlieger at Fri Mar 01 09:34:51 EST 2024
STATUS

reviewed

approved

#188 by Joerg Arndt at Fri Mar 01 03:55:02 EST 2024
STATUS

proposed

reviewed

#187 by Amiram Eldar at Fri Mar 01 03:31:18 EST 2024
STATUS

editing

proposed

#186 by Amiram Eldar at Fri Mar 01 03:26:03 EST 2024
LINKS

Chance Sanford, <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.03765">Infinite Series Involving Fibonacci Numbers Via Apéry-Like Formulae</a>, arXiv:1603.03765 [math.NT], 2016.

<a href="/index/Aa#AHSL">Index entries for sequences of form a(n+1)=a(n)^2 + ...</a>.

FORMULA

Sum_{n>=0} a(n)/Fibonacci(2^(n+2)) = A094874 (Sanford, 2016). - Amiram Eldar, Mar 01 2024

STATUS

approved

editing

#185 by Alois P. Heinz at Mon Jan 08 09:33:20 EST 2024
STATUS

proposed

approved

#184 by Michel Marcus at Mon Jan 08 09:32:08 EST 2024
STATUS

editing

proposed

#183 by Michel Marcus at Mon Jan 08 09:31:59 EST 2024
REFERENCES

M. Mendes France and A. J. van der Poorten, From geometry to Euler identities, Theoret. Comput. Sci., 65 (1989), 213-220.

LINKS

M. Mendes France and A. J. van der Poorten, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3975(89)90045-5">From geometry to Euler identities</a>, Theoret. Comput. Sci., 65 (1989), 213-220.

STATUS

approved

editing

#182 by Michel Marcus at Sat Sep 23 01:19:21 EDT 2023
FORMULA

a(n) = A000032(2^(n+1)). a(n) = 5*Fibonacci(2^n)^2+2 = 5*A058635(n)^2+2, for n>0.

a(n) = A000032(2^(n+1)).

a(n) = 5*Fibonacci(2^n)^2+2 = 5*A058635(n)^2+2, for n>0. - Jianglin Luo, Sep 21 2023

STATUS

proposed

approved

#181 by Jianglin Luo at Fri Sep 22 20:08:48 EDT 2023
STATUS

editing

proposed

Discussion
Fri Sep 22
20:12
Jianglin Luo: en, I agree to revert my last edit.
#180 by Michel Marcus at Fri Sep 22 11:00:42 EDT 2023
STATUS

proposed

editing

Discussion
Fri Sep 22
11:04
Amiram Eldar: I don't see the point in changing my contribution. My formula is valid for all n >= 0. Adding another formula in the same line just spoils it, since the reader may think that it is valid only for n > 0.
There are many formulas for A000032 and each of them can be used for converting my basic formula to something more complicated. I think that the new formula should stay where it is and not be put inside mine.
14:52
Jon E. Schoenfield: So maybe the best thing to do is just to revert this edit?