arxiv: v1 [math.nt] 4 Mar 2014

Transcription

1 ON SIMULTANEOUS PALINDROMES arxiv: v1 [mat.nt] 4 Mar 2014 ATTILA BÉRCZES AND VOLKER ZIEGLER Abstract. A palindrome in base g is an integer N tat remains te same wen its digit expansion in base g is reversed. Let g and be given distinct integers > 1. In tis paper we discuss ow many integers are palindromes in base g and simultaneously palindromes in base. 1. Introduction Let a,g Z wit a 0 and g 2. If a as a symmetric digit expansion in base g, i.e. a read from left to rigt is te same as read from rigt to left, ten we call a a palindrome in base g. In particular, we will use te following definition Definition 1. Let a be a positive integer wit g-adic digit expansion k a = a i g i, wit a i {0,1,...,g 1}, and a k 0 ten we write (a g = k a i g k i for te digit reversed companion to a. We call a a palindrome in base g, if we ave a = (a g. Tere is a ric literature on integers tat are as well palindromes for some fixed base g as well ave some oter property like beeing a square [8], a k-t power [7, 4], almost a k-t power [13, 11], member of a recurrence sequnce [10] or some oter sequences (in case of aritmetic sequence see [5], a prime [2] and many oter properties. Also some auters considered te case of palindromes tat are palindromes in two or more bases simultaneously. In particular, Goins [6] proved tat tere are only finitely many palindromes in base 10 wit d 2 digits and N is at te same time a palindrome wit Key words and prases. Palindromes, Simultaneous palindromes. Te researc was supported in part by te University of Debrecen, and by grants K and NK of te Hungarian National Foundation for Scientific Researc. Tis work was partially supported by te European Union and te European Social Fund troug project Supercomputer, te national virtual lab (grant no.: TAMOP C- 11/1/KONV Te second autor was supported by te Austrian Science Fund (FWF under te project P N26. 1

2 2 A. BÉRCZES AND V. ZIEGLER d digits in a base b 10 (for a similar result see also [3]. On te oter and Luca and Togbé [11] prove tat tere are only finitely many binary Palindromes wic are decimal Palindromes of te form 10 n ±1. In tis paper we consider te following problem Problem 1. For wic pairs of bases (g, Z 2 wit 2 < g are tere only finitely many positive integers tat are simultaneously palindromes in base g and. Note tat te answer to tis problem is negative if g = k for some k 2, since all integers of te form g n ±1 are palindromes in base g as well as in base. Terefore we consider Problem 1 only for bases g, suc tat g is not a perfect power of. Unfortunately we cannot give an answer to tis problem yet, but using ideas form Luca and Togbé [11], wo proved te finiteness of binary palindromes of te form 10 n ±1, we were able to prove te following teorem. Teorem 1. Let 2 < g be integers and assume tat g and tat and g are multiplicatively independent. If N = ag n + (a g is a palindrome in base, ten { a n max, (log(ag2 (log2 3, loga(logloga 3, log(ag(log(log(ag 2}. Note tat te result of Luca and Togbé [11] can be derived form our Teorem 1 togeter wit an extensive computer searc. In particular, if we put = 2,g = 10 and a some integer smaller tan 10 6 ten Teorem 1 implies tat N = a10 n + (a 10 can be a binary palindrome only if n Our second result is: Teorem 2. Let 2 < g be fixed integers and assume tat g and tat and g are multiplicatively independent. For all ǫ > 0 tere are at least Ω ǫ,g, (x 1/2 ǫ palindromes N x in base g tat are not palindromes in base. Moreover te constants involved in te Ω-term are explicitly computable. Tis teorem means tat for g most numbers wic are palindromes in base g are not palindromes in base. Te above Teorems 1 and 2 can bot be deduced from te following lemma Lemma 1. Let 2 < g be integers and assume g and and g are multiplicatively independent. Moreover, let N be a palindrome in bases g of te form n m 1 ag n + a i g i, a i {0,1,...,g 1},

3 SIMULTANEOUS PALINDROMES 3 were n m + 1 and a = (a n m 1...a 0 g is an (n m-digit number in base g. Tis means tat N is a palindrome in base g starting wit te digits of a (in base g followed by m zeros. If { a m > C(a,g,,n := max, (log(ag2 (log2 3, } 142(logn 2, log(aglogn ten N cannot be a palindrome in base. More precisely assume tat m > a and write α = a ((a g. If g, and α are multiplicatively independent ten N can be a palindrome in base only if (1 logα k+n < 11 9 m. If α r = g s t for some integers r,s,t not all zero, ten N is a palindrome in base only if (2 (n+s (k +t < 11r 9 m. Note tat for proving Teorems 1 and 2 only te first part of te lemma is essential. However te second part of te lemma is useful if one wants to find all simultaneous palindromes of a special form, e.g. finding all binary palindromes of te form a10 n +(a 10 for some fixed a. In te next section we will give a proof of te fundamental Lemma 1 and in Section 3 we deduce Teorems 1 and 2 from tat lemma. In Section 4 we present some numeric results on simultaneous palindromes in bases 2 and 10. In te last section we present some numeric results for oter bases. 2. Proof of te main lemma Te purpose of tis section is to prove Lemma 1. Terefore assume tat N is a palindrome in base g as well as in base. Let n a = +1 be te loga number of digits of a in base g. Since N is a palindrome in bases g as well as in base and since g we ave N (a g mod m+na. Terefore we know te last m + n a digits of N in base, provided tat (a g < m+na. Lemma 2. (a g < m+na if m > a. Proof. Note tat a and (a g ave te same number of g-adic digits, i.e. (a g < ag. Using te formula for n a we see tat (a g < m+na if ga < m loga/+1, ence a loga a 1 < < m

4 4 A. BÉRCZES AND V. ZIEGLER implies (a g < n+na. Terefore we assume from now on m > a. Because N is a palindrome in base we also know now te first m + n a digits of N in base. In particular, we ave N = ((a g k + k m 1 b i i, were m = m+n a ñ a wit ñ a denoting te number of digits of ((a g in base, and were logn log ((a g k =. Since we ave log ((a g m+n a = m+ m = m+ log(a g +1 log ((a g. Tis yields te following inequality for N: ((a g k + k m > N > ((a g Dividing tis inequality troug ((a g k yields (3 On te oter and m ((a g m = ag n 1 ((a g k log(ag + log ((ag < m ((a g k. log ((ag m 1 4 provided m 2. Writing α := a and using tat te inequality log 1 ((a g x 11x 9 olds, provided x 1 4, wic can easily be proved by a Taylor expansion wit Caucy s remainder term from equation (3 we obtain (4 logα k+n 11 9 m,

5 SIMULTANEOUS PALINDROMES 5 wic is inequality (1 in Lemma 1. Inequality (2 is deduced from (4 by multiplying it by r and noting tat rlogα = s t. We distinguis now between two cases. Te first case is tat α is multiplicatively independent of g and and te second is tat α is multiplicatively dependent of g and. Te first case requires lower bounds for linear forms in tree logaritms (we will use a result due to Matveev [12] and in te second case our inequality will reduce to an inequality in linear forms in two logaritms, were sarper bounds are known (we will use a result due to Laurent et. al. [9]. Unfortunately using tis result will involve te prime decompositions of g, and α. We start wit te first case. Let us state Matveev s teorem [12]: Teorem 3. Denote by α 1,...,α n algebraic numbers, not 0 nor 1, by logα 1,..., logα n determinations of teir logaritms, by D te degree over Q of te number field K = Q(α 1,...,α n, and by b 1,...,b n rational integers. Furtermore let κ = 1 if K is real and κ = 2 oterwise. Coose A i max{d(α i, logα i } (1 i n, were (α denotes te absolute logaritmic Weil eigt of α and B = max{1,max{ b j A j /A n : 1 j n}}. Assume b n 0 and logα 1,...,logα n are linearly independent over Z; ten wit log b 1 logα 1 + +b n logα n C(nC 0 W 0 D 2 Ω, Ω = A 1 A n, C(n = C(n,κ = 16 n!κ en (2n+1+2κ(n+2(4(n+1 n+1 ( 1 κ 2 en, C 0 = log ( e 4.4n+7 n 5.5 D 2 log(ed, W 0 = log(1.5ebdlog(ed. We will apply Teorem 3 directly to (4. Obviously κ = 1 and D = 1, and we may coose A 1 = log(ag since a, ((a g < ag, A 2 = and A 3 =. Next we ave to estimate B: Lemma 3. B < 2n if m 2 > +1. Proof. First note tat 2n > logα = b 1 A 1 A 3, since m 1 > + 2 > logα 2 and n m.

6 6 A. BÉRCZES AND V. ZIEGLER Furtermore, we ave te inequality 2logN 2loga 2n = logn log ((a g > +logn loga = k +n 1 > k = b 2 A 2. A 3 Terefore we obtain W = 1.152logn provided n > m Now Teorem 3 togeter wit inequality (4 yields (logaglogn > m, wicprovestefirstcase. Notetattebound (logaglogn contains te bound m 10 6 in any case. Now we consider te second case. Since by assumption α,g and are multiplicatively dependent, but g and are multiplicatively independent tus tere exist integers r, s, t wit greatest common divisor 1 suc tat α r = g s t wit r 0. Lemma 4. r (logag (log2 3, s (logag2 (log2 3, t (logag2 (log2 3 Proof. Now let p 1,p 2 be primes tat divide g, let e β,i = v pi (β for i = 1,2 and β {g,,α}. Here v p (x denotes te p-adic valuation of x. Furter, assume tat te vectors (e g,1,e,1 and (e g,2,e,2 are linearly independent overz 2. Notetattispairofprimesexistssinceg andaremultiplicatively independent. A tecnical but easy computation sows tat s =(e,1 e α,2 e,2 e α,1 e α2 ; t =(e g,1 e α,2 e g,2 e α,1 e α2 ; r =(e g,2 e,1 e g,1 e,2 e α2 is a solution and since (e g,1,e,1 and (e g,2,e,2 are linearly independent r 0. Te statement of te lemma now follows from te simple estimates for i = 1,2. e,i log2 ; e g,i log2 ; We multiply inequality (4 by r and obtain e α,i log(ag log2 ; (5 (n+s (k +t < r11 9 m Tis time we apply te following result due to Laurent et. al. [9]:

7 SIMULTANEOUS PALINDROMES 7 Teorem 4. Let α 1 and α 2 be two positive, real, multiplicatively independent elements in a number field of degree D over Q. For i = 1,2, let logα i be any determination of te logaritm of α i, and let A i > 1 be a real number satisfying loga i max{(α i, logα i /D,1/D}. Furter, let b 1 and b 2 be two positive integers. Define b = Ten b 1 DlogA 2 + b 2 DlogA 1 and logb = max { logb +0.14,21/D, 1 }. 2 b 2 logα 2 b 1 logα 1 exp ( 24.34D 4 (logb 2 loga 1 loga 2. We coose α 1 = g and α 2 =, tus we ave D = 1. Put loga 1 = and loga 2 = log2 1 and start wit estimating b : b = (n+slog2 + k+t < 2n < 2n +6.3(logag2 < 4n < 6n slog2 + t ({}} { 1 (log (log2 3 (logag 2 provided tat n > m > 3.15(logag 2. Note tat te first inequality is true because of logn log ((a g k = < loga+(n+1 loga+ + Te inequality for b now implies tat we may coose logb = 2logn > max{logn+log6+0.14,21} = n provided tat n > m > Now Teorem 4 yields ( (logag 141(logn 2 2 < m+log(9/11 log (log2 3. Let us assume n > m > (logag2 (log2 3 and since we also assume n > m > tis last inequality turns into 142(logn 2 > m. Terefore we ave completely proved Lemma 1. Note tat all our assumptions on m made during te proof togeter wit te bounds for m cumulate in te lower bound of Lemma 1.

8 8 A. BÉRCZES AND V. ZIEGLER 3. Proof of Teorems 1 and 2 We start wit te proof of Teorem 1. In tis case N = ag n +(a g and terefore loga m = n > n loga 1. In view of Lemma 1 tis implies: If n > C(a,g,,n + loga + 1, ten N is not a palindrome in base. Let us consider te two inequalities n > 142(logn 2 + loga and n > log(aglogn + loga. We note tat te largest solution to n = Alogn + B is smaller tan te largest n solution to logn = A+ B loga and te largest solution to n logn = C is smaller tan x(logx 2 provided x > e 2. Now let A = log(ag and B = loga +1, ten A+ B loga loga = log(ag log(log g log(ag < log(ag. Terefore te inequality n > log(aglogn + loga + 1 is fulfilled wenever n > log(ag(log(log(ag 2. Similarly te largest solution to n = A(logn 2 + B is smaller tan te n largest solution to = A+ B n and te largest solution to = (logn 2 (loga 2 (logn 2 C is smaller tan x(logx 3 provided x > 62. Tis time we put A = 142 and B = loga +1 and A+ B (loga 2 < 142+ loga If a 2, ten te lower bound for n will be wic is absorbed by te muc larger bound found in te paragrap above. Terefore we may assume tat a 3 and obtain A+ B (loga 2 = 142+ loga < 130loga and terefore te inequality n > 142(logn 2 + loga n > loga(logloga 3. is fulfilled if Terefore te proof of Teorem 1 is complete. We turn now to te proof of Teorem 2. We consider palindromes described in Lemma 1 wit a < g and m = (logn 3. Ten by Lemma 1 we know tat for some constant C g, depending only on g and we ave m > C(a,g,,n (see Lemma 1 for all n > C g,, i.e. tese palindromes cannot be palindromes in base if n > C g,. On te oter and tere are

9 SIMULTANEOUS PALINDROMES 9 x 1/2 ǫ palindromes of te described form provided 1 (logn 3 > ǫ, wic proves Teorem Numerical Considerations Te purpose of tis section is to consider te case g = 10 and = 2 more closely and tink of it as a model case. Te aim is to find decimal palindromes tat are also binary palindromes, owever we did not find many suc palindromes. Proposition 1. Let N < be a palindrome in base 10 wic is also a binary palindrome, ten N is one of te following 53 palindromes: 1,3,5,7,9,33,99,313,585,717,7447,9009,15351,32223,39993,53235, 53835, 73737, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Proof. For all a < we construct decimal palindromes N < wit an even number of digits by reversing te digits of a and appending te reversed string of digits at te string of digits of a, i.e. if a = n a i10 i we compute te palindrome N = n a i 10 n+1+i + n a n i 10 i. Similarly we construct for all a < palindromes N < wit an odd number of digits by N = n n 1 a i 10 n+i + a n i 10 i. Wit tis procedure we ave a complete list of all decimal palindromes N < Now we test for eac decimal palindrome N weter it is a binary palindrome by te following algoritm. First we compute te number of binary digits logn k = +1. log2

10 10 A. BÉRCZES AND V. ZIEGLER Let us put n k = n 0 = N and compute subsequently for all 0 i k/2 te i-t igest and i-t lowest binary digits of N nk i d k i = 2 k i, d i = n i mod 2 and n k i 1 = n k i 2 k i d k i 2. If d k i d i for some i ten N is not a binary palindrome. If d k i = d i for all 0 i k/2 ten N is also a binary palindrome. Note tat if N is not a binary palindrome we do not ave to compute all binary digits of N and in many cases after computing a few digits of N will yield a result. Indeed implementing tis algoritm in sage [14] and running it on a Silicon Grapics International SGI Altix ICE8400EX supercomputer wit Intel Xeon X5680 (Westmere EP processors (eac containing 6 cores, n i+1 = n i d i 2 we used about 5821 ours of CPU time. In principle we used 240 cores simultaneously during about 60 ours of wall-clock time. Proposition 2. Let N = a10 n +(a 10 be a binary palindrome wit 10 a and a < min{10 6,10 n }, ten it is already contained in te list of palindromes in Proposition 1. In order to prove tis proposition we ave to consider te Diopantine inequalities (4 and (5. An upper bound for m is given by Lemma 1 but tis bound is very uge. Terefore we will use continued fractions in case of (2 and a metod due to Baker and Davenport [1] to reduce te upper bound in case of (1. Let us state a variant of tis reduction metod: Lemma 5. Given a Diopantine inequality of te form (6 n 1 +n 2 ǫ+δ < c 1 exp( n 2 c 2 Assume n 2 < X and assume tat tere is a real number κ > 1 and also assume tere exists a convergent p/q to ǫ wit X q < 1 2κ suc tat qǫ < 1 2κX and qδ > 1 κ, qδ > 1 κ, were denotes te distance to te nearest integer. Ten we ave n 2 log(2κqc 1. c 2 Proof. We consider equation (6 and we multiply it by q. Ten under our assumptions we obtain c 1 qexp( n 2 c 2 > qn 1 +n 2 qǫ+qδ n 2 qǫ qδ > 1 2κ. Telastinequalityoldssincep/q isaconvergent toǫandterefore ǫq p < 1 q. Solving tis inequality for n 2 we obtain te lemma.

11 SIMULTANEOUS PALINDROMES 11 Proof of Proposition 2. Now let us apply te second part of Lemma 1 to te present situation. Since we assume a < 10 6 we ave m n loga log10 > n 6. And terefore eiter n > 30 or one of te two inequalities (1 and (2 are fulfilled wit n := X - since te upper bound for n obtained in Teorem 1. We ave to distinguis between te two cases α r = 10 s 2 t or α, 2 and 10 are multiplicatively independent. In te second case we divide by log2 and obtain inequality (6, wit n 1 = k, n 2 = n, ǫ = log10 log2, δ = logα log2, c 1 = log2 and c 2 = log2. Wit tis coice we apply Lemma 5. Since ǫ is independent of a we can precompute suitable pairs (q, κ wic may be applied to our situation. Terefore we compute te first 50 convergents to log10 log2. For eac convergent p/q wit q > we form te pair (q,κwit κ := 2X/q and get a list of 16 potential pairs applicable to Lemma 5. Now let us fix a. We subsequently test weter in our list is a pair (q,κ suc tat qδ > 1 κ, ence by Lemma 5 we get a new boundtat sould be rater small and indeed in all cases our new bound yields n 81. Furter we want to empasize tat it is igly improbable tat for a given a no pair of our list of candidates yields an application of Lemma 5 and terefore no new upper bound for n. Terefore we are left to test all remaining n for our fixed a, wic can be done by a quick computer searc. In case of α r = 10 s 2 t for some integers r,s,t wit r 2 + s 2 + t 2 0 we know tat we can coose r = 1. Indeed te free Z-Module generated by {log10,log2} is te same as te free Z-Module generated by {log5,log2} and logα is contained in te later one and terefore also in te first Z- Module. Now we obtain by Lemma 1 and in particular by inequality (2 log10 log2 k+t n+s < n (n+slog2. Note tat terefore k+t n+s as to be a convergent to log10 log2 1 2(n+s 2 < n (n+slog2. unless n 30 or Let us note tat tis inequality does not old for large n, in particular in all cases tat we consider we can coose te bound n 30. Terefore we know tat n+s as to be a multiple of q, were p/q is a convergent to log10 log2, i.e. n = kq s for some positive integer k. But, already for rater small k and fixed convergent p/q tis coice will contradict te inequality (7 log10 log2 p q < kq s (kqlog2. We claim tat inequality (7 is never fullfilled for n 30. Since Lemma 4 we know s 34 and terefore we may assume q < In particular we ave to prove inequality (7 for 32 convergents. If we replace in (7 te quantities kq s = n and kq = n+s by 30 - we may do so since we assume

12 12 A. BÉRCZES AND V. ZIEGLER n 30 - ten inequality (7 is never satisfied by te first 8 convergents. For te remaining 24 cases we replace in (7 kq s = n by q 34 and kq by q. If tis new inequality still olds also (7 olds. A quick computation using a computer algebra system like sage [14] resolves tis case. Terefore we also ave in tis case a very efficient metod to find all simultaneous palindromes, i.e. we only ave to test all n 30. We implemented te idea above in sage [14] and computed for all 2 < a < 10 6 wit 10 a and (a 10 is odd all n wit a < min{10 6,10 n } suc tat N = a10 n + (a 10 is a binary palindrome. Note tat in case of (a 10 is even ten te last binary digit of N would be 0 and N would not be a binary palindrome. Te computer searc took on a single PC about 80 minutes. 5. Oter bases In tis section we want to discuss Problem 1 for furter base pairs (,g. In case of (,g = (2,10 te preceeding sections sow tat tere are only few integers tat are simultaneously palindromes in bases 2 and 10. Looking at our results we even guess tat tere are only finitely many simultaneous palindromes for te bases 2 and 10. In tis last section we want to present sortly our numeric considerationes for oter base pairs. In particular, we considered te pairs (2,3, (6,15, (5,7, (11,13 and (7,29 and counted te number N of simultaneous palindromes smaller tan some bound B. Our results are listed in Table 1 below. Te algoritms were implemented in sage [14] and except te case (,g = (2,3 were run on a single PC. Te case (,g = (2,3 required more tan 4648 days CPU time on a Silicon Grapics International SGI Altix ICE8400EX supercomputer wit Intel Xeon X5680 (Westmere EP processors (eac containing 6 cores. In principle we used cores simultaneously, depending on availability, and so te computation as been finised in less tan 18 days. Table 1. Number of simultaneous palindromes g B N Time d 10 55m d 0 49m d 22 27m m d 21 29m d 13 9m Looking at Table 1 te number of simultaneous palindromes to te bases 2 and 3 is very small and indeed we are led by our numeric computations to te following conjecture Conjecture 1. Te only positive integers tat are a palindrome in bases 2 and 3 simultaneously are 1, 6643, , and

13 SIMULTANEOUS PALINDROMES 13 References [1] A. Baker and H. Davenport. Te equations 3x 2 2 = y 2 and 8x 2 7 = z 2. Quart. J. Mat. Oxford Ser. (2, 20: , [2] W. D. Banks, D. N. Hart, and M. Sakata. Almost all palindromes are composite. Mat. Res. Lett., 11(5-6: , [3] B. Bašić. On d-digit palindromes in different bases: te number of bases is unbounded. Int. J. Number Teory, 8(6: , [4] J. Cilleruelo, F. Luca, and I. E. Sparlinski. Power values of palindromes. J. Comb. Number Teory, 1(2: , [5] S. Col. Palindromes dans les progressions aritmétiques. Acta Arit., 137(1:1 41, [6] E. H. Goins. Palindromes in different bases: A conjecture of J. Ernest Wilkins. Integers, 9:A55, , [7] S. Hernández Hernández and F. Luca. Palindromic powers. Rev. Colombiana Mat., 40(2:81 86, [8] I. Korec. Palindromic squares for various number system bases. Mat. Slovaca, 41(3: , [9] M. Laurent, M. Mignotte, and Y. Nesterenko. Formes linéaires en deux logaritmes et déterminants d interpolation. J. Number Teory, 55(2: , [10] F. Luca. Palindromes in Lucas sequences. Monats. Mat., 138(3: , [11] F. Luca and A. Togbé. On binary palindromes of te form 10 n ±1. C. R. Mat. Acad. Sci. Paris, 346(9-10: , [12] E. M. Matveev. An explicit lower bound for a omogeneous rational linear form in logaritms of algebraic numbers. II. Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Ser. Mat., 64(6: , [13] G. J. Simmons. On palindromic squares of non-palindromic numbers. J. Recreational Mat., 5(1:11 19, [14] W. Stein et al. Sage Matematics Software (Version Te Sage Development Team, ttp:// A. Bérczes Institute of Matematics, University of Debrecen H-4010 Debrecen, P.O. Box 12, Hungary address: berczesa@science.unideb.u V. Ziegler Joann Radon Institute for Computational and Applied Matematics Austrian Academy of Sciences Altenbergerstr. 69 A-4040 Linz, Austria address: volker.ziegler@ricam.oeaw.ac.at