5

Given the triangular number,

$$T_k = \frac{k(k+1)}{2}$$

and remembering that,

$$\binom{n}{m}=\binom{n}{n-m}$$

Excluding $a_0=1$, we then have the six-fold (at least) equalities,

$$\begin{aligned} a_1&=\binom{a_1}{1}=\binom{16}{2}=\binom{10}{3}=T_{15}=120\\[1.5mm] a_2&=\binom{a_2}{1}=\binom{21}{2}=\binom{10}{4}=T_{20}=210\\[1.5mm] a_3&=\binom{a_3}{1}=\binom{56}{2}=\binom{22}{3}=T_{55}=1540\\[1.5mm] \color{blue}{a_4}&=\binom{a_4}{1}=\binom{78}{2}=\binom{15}{5}=\binom{14}{6}=T_{77}=\color{blue}{3003}\\[1.5mm] a_5&=\binom{a_5}{1}=\binom{120}{2}=\binom{36}{3}=T_{119}=7140\\[1.5mm] a_6&=\binom{a_6}{1}=\binom{153}{2}=\binom{19}{5}=T_{152}=11628\\[1.5mm] a_7&=\binom{a_7}{1}=\binom{221}{2}=\binom{17}{8}=T_{220}=24310\\[1.5mm] \color{blue}{a_8}&=\binom{a_8}{1}=\binom{104}{39}=\binom{103}{40}\neq T_k\, \approx\, 6.12\times10^{28}\\[1.5mm] \color{blue}{a_9}&\overset{\color{red}?}{=}\binom{a_9}{1}=\binom{714}{272}=\binom{713}{273}\neq T_k\, \approx\, 3.53\times10^{204}\\ \end{aligned}$$

(Assuming Weger and Noe's results are conclusive, then there is no other $T_k$ with $k<3.49\times 10^{14}$ in this list.)

Questions:

  1. The first eight $a_i$ is A003015. Since $a_9$ is so big, is it really the ninth, or is there a smaller term?
  2. The terms $a_4, a_8, a_9$ belong to an infinite family involving Fibonacci numbers, $$a_i = B(m)=\binom{F_{2m} F_{2m+1}}{F_{2m-1}F_{2m}-1}$$ Other than $a_4=3003$, is there another triangular number in this family? (I checked that $B(5) \approx 4.59\times10^{1411}$ is not triangular, but $B(6)$ seemed already too big for my computer.)
  • Where is Weger and Noe's result? – Elaqqad Jul 26 '15 at 12:45
  • @Elaqqad: Kindly see Noe's comment (2004) in the OEIS link above. – Tito Piezas III Jul 26 '15 at 12:51
  • Wolfie was about to determine that $B(6)$ is not a triangular number as well. That leaves an infinite more to check. :) – Tito Piezas III Jul 26 '15 at 12:53
  • Do you know Singmaster's conjecture? – Elaqqad Jul 26 '15 at 12:53
  • @Elaqqad: I do now. Singmaster's conjecture. Thanks. – Tito Piezas III Jul 26 '15 at 12:56
  • Actually, any triangular number is a binomial number of the form: $${k+1 \choose 2} =T_k=\frac{k(k+1)}{2} $$ so I see what you're asking as two options: the first one is : a number occurs $8$ times (and once in the third row) which gives $3003$ and it's the smallest one known and we don't know if there is another one or not (according to the Conjecture). The second option is occurring only six times and being a triangular number but we don't know a formula for the numbers occuring $6$ times this is equivalent of solving the equation $${n\choose m}={k+1 \choose 2} $$ I see it very difficult – Elaqqad Jul 26 '15 at 13:00
  • @Elaqqad: Yes, you are correct. The fact that there are only seven solvable $k$ with $k<3\times10^{14}$ makes the possibility that $B(m)$ is also triangular as very, very slim. Since Noe's result of a decade ago, with today's fast computers, I thought it wouldn't hurt to check small $m$, just in case. – Tito Piezas III Jul 26 '15 at 13:09
  • I suggesting regarding that, if you want to check if $B_6$ is a triangular number it's better to check if $$8B_6+1 $$ is a square, and here don't compute the square root because it takes huge time to do it, the best way is to test the first residues modulo the powers of $2$ this will be very fast. (at some point you will either find that it's not or continue computation) see: http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/11/17/fast-way-to-test-whether-a-number-is-a-square/ – Elaqqad Jul 26 '15 at 13:24
  • 1
    This seems tied to the fact that $1001, 2002, 3003$ are consecutive values in the $14$ row of Pascal's triangle, at positions $4,5,6.$ This means that $5$ is close to the point of inflection in the appropriate inflated Gaussian normal curve. I expect there are three term arithmetic progressions later, but not necessarily consecutive, and not necessarily of the very restrictive form $A,2A,3A.$ – Will Jagy Jul 26 '15 at 18:57
  • I see, milder condition, in the 713 row we get positions 271 + 272 = 273, and the 103 row we get positions 38 + 39 = 40. If that is all that turns up, reinforces the idea that the 14 row is the only such rigid occurrence – Will Jagy Jul 26 '15 at 19:03

0 Answers0