Collatz Conjecture Unrevised Proof Attempt

By: The illusion of the Fernando Rosas self

3 + 1
, () =
2

, () =
2
(, 1 (), 2 (), 3 (), () )

The Trajectory of j has three possible behaviors for all integers > 0
Convergent trajectory, Divergent trajectory to infinity, and non-trivial cyclic trajectory
We will prove that the divergent and cyclic trajectories are impossible by contradiction.

Impossibility of divergence proof

Sub-proof of case with no division by 2

Suppose there exists a sequence of iterates that has no even element and diverges to
infinity, then we can easily produce the results of such sequence

3+1 31
= + 12( + 1) = ( + 1) 1
2 21

9+5 32
= 2 + 1 + 14( + 1) = ( + 1) 1
4 22

27+19 33
= 3 + 2 + 38( + 1)= ( + 1) 1
8 23

81+65 34
= 1
5 + 4 + 16 ( + 1)= ( + 1) 1
16 24

243+211 35
= 7 + 6 + 19 ( + 1)= ( + 1) 1
32 32 25

3 3 2 3
The () term is equivalent to 2 + 2 = 2 ( + 1) 1 =
Consequently,
+ 1 must be a factor of 2+1 , which implies + 1 2+1
cannot be a specific odd integer since lim 2+1
Therefore, () with only odd elements cannot exist.
Impossibility of divergence proof
Define any progressive odd integer such that it belongs to the set 3 + 4
Define any regressive odd integer such that it belongs to the set 1 + 4

Redefine () =

3 3
, () = () = 2 ( + 1) 1 = 2 (3 + 4 + 1) 1 = 3(2 + 2)
1 =

3+1 1 ()
, () = 2 (1 ()), 1 () = 2 (1 ()) = =
2 2
1 3+1 3 1
(2) = () +
2 4 4
3 1 1 1
= 4 (1 + 4) + 4 = 3 (4 + ) + 4 = 1 + 3 =

, () = () = 2 =

(1 (), 2 (), 3 (), () )

()
( 11 (), 1 2 (), 1 3 (), 1 1 () )
()
( 21 (), 2 2 (), 2 3 (), 2 2 () )
()
( 1 (), 2 (), 3 (), () )
()

let = = ()
let
1 = 1 =
1 () ()
2 = 2
= 2 () ()
let = = ()
let = ()
= ()

+ =
+ 1 + 2 + =
+ 1 =
+ 2 =
1 = 2 1
= 1 + 2
=
 = () ()
1 = () 1 1 ()
2 = () 2 2 ()
= () ()
1 + 1 = 2

Analysis of reiterations between () 2 (1 ())

2 2+1 2
21
.

=

=

= 2, = 2 = 6, = 6
7-pp 67-p
71-pp
= 3, = 3 75-p
11-p 79-ppp
15-ppp 83-p
87-pp
= 4, = 4 91-p
19-p 95-pppp
23-pp 99-p
27-p 103-pp
31-pppp 107-p
111-ppp
= 5, = 5 115-p
35-p 119-pp
39-pp 123-p
43-p 127-pppppp
47-ppp
51-p
55-pp
59-p
63-ppppp
 .
= , =
2. 22 =
1, 23 =
2 1 = 2, =
1, 1 = , 2+1 1.
+ 1
+1 = ,
2
= ( + 1 2 ) 2
= 2 . 2 ( + 1
2 ) 2
= 2 . (),

, .
2
= , .

64
, = 127, = 127 + 1 64 = 64. 26 = 1
20
= 51, = 51 + 1 32 = 20. 2 = 5
2
Respond to Collag3n
Suppose () () 2 (1 ())

+ = = > 0

2 2+1 . ,
= ( () 2 ) 2
= 2 ()
31
1 (1 +
21
31
2 + 1) 1 = 31 21 + 21 ( + 1) 1,
= 1 , + 1 = 2 = 21
> 1 , +1 21 +1

Whenever
() = () 11 () = 1 () =
3+1
3+1 21 + 2+1 ( + 1) 1 + 1 = 1 +1
2+1 11 () 2+1
1 11 () 1 2+1
, 2 () = , 2 () 2
2 2
2 2 (1 1 ())
1 1 () 2 2
2 2 (1 1 ()) 2 21 +2 +1
3
2 () ,
2
lim 2 / () by contradiction of lower bound surpassing ()

() () 2 (1 ())

Whenever
() = () 11 () =
1 () + 1 =
1 , 2 2 (1 1 ()) 2
2 () + 1.
2 2 (1 1 ())
() = 2 ( 1 ()) = 0 , () 2 ( 1 ()) 1
2 1 2 1
1+ 2+1
1 + 1 > 2
1 3+1
1 () = ( +1 ( + 1) 1) > 2+1
2
3+1
( +1 (+1)1) 2+1
1 1 2
2 (1 ()) = >
2 2
1
2 2 (1 2 ()) = 3(2 (11 ()) + 1)
Suppose21 (11 ()) 2 ,
1 1
3(21 (11 ()) + 1) 1 = , (21 (11 ()) + 1)
2 2
1 1 32
= , (2 (1 ()) + 1) > 2+1
2 2

Since all reiterations of () cannot diverge as proved by the impossibility of no division

by 2 the reiterations must be finite such that there exist at least one () =
() 11 () = 1 () + 1 = 1 + 2 = 2
1 1 3
, 21 (11 ()) = (2) (2) (3 ( 2 ( + 1) 1) + 1) =
3+1
, (( 2+1 ( + 1) 1)) = , + 1 must be an odd

factor of 2+1, which implies 2+1 < 2 2 (1 1 ()) < ()

Suppose () () 2 (1 ())

+ = = > 0

, 2+1 < 1 2 (1 1 ()) < () and

() = () 1 2 (1 1 ()) = 2 () <
2 2

+ =


lim + so

cannot be a specific odd integer since lim 2+1 and + 1 2+1

By contradiction
() () 2 (1 ())

() () 2 (1 ()),
2 2 () = 2 () () = () 2 + 1 =
Hence, 2+1 < 1 2 (1 1 ()) = 21 (), 2+11 < 1 ()

Suppose () () 2 (1 ())

+ + = , = , > = > 0 ,

1 2 (1 1 ()) = 2 () () = ()
< 2 2 , then
2+1 < 1 2 (1 1 ()) < ()

+ + =

lim + + so

Consequently, () r since lim 2+1 = 0

() () = () () =
() +1 () = ()

Suppose () (), 1 2 (1 1 ()) ()

+ + = , = > 0, = > 0 ,

() = () 1 2 (1 1 ()) =
2 () + 2 = 2 2 ,
1 2 (1 1 ()) = 2 () () =
() 2 + 1 = 2
() = () () = () + 1 =

,
2+1 < () < ()

Suppose = , = 2 = 2
3
2 3
lim 2
= lim 2 = 0,


> = > 1
then,

=
+1

=
+1
=
1
lim = lim ( )
+1

lim = lim

2+1 < () < ()

which implies + 1 2+1

lim

Therefore,
lim 2+1

which implies + 1

By contradiction, there cannot exist any lim ()

Impossibility of Non-trivial cycle proof

(,
(), 2 (), 3 () (), ) +1 () = .

= , () <
> ,

2+1 < () < ()
which implies + 1 2+1
lim

Therefore
lim 2+1

By contradiction, there cannot exist any +1 () = 1