A pattern in determinants of Fibonacci numbers?
Let $F_n$ denote the $n$th Fibonacci number, adopting the convention $F_1=1$, $F_2=1$ and so on. Consider the $ntimes n$ matrix defined by
$$mathbf M_n:=begin{bmatrix}F_1&F_2&dots&F_n\F_{n+1}&F_{n+2}&dots&F_{2n}\vdots&vdots&ddots&vdots\F_{n^2-n+1}&F_{n^2-n+2}&dots&F_{n^2}end{bmatrix}.$$
I have the following conjecture:
Conjecture. For all integers $ngeq3$, $detmathbf M_n=0$.
I have used some Python code to test this conjecture for $n$ up to $9$, but I cannot go further. Note that $detmathbf M_1=detmathbf M_2=1$. Due to the elementary nature of this problem I have to assume that it has been discussed before, perhaps even on this site. But I couldn't find any reference on it, by Googling or searching here. Can someone shed light onto whether the conjecture is true, and a proof of it if so?
linear-algebra determinant fibonacci-numbers
edited Dec 3 '18 at 9:02
Martin Sleziak
44.7k7115270
asked Dec 3 '18 at 1:55
YiFan
2,5291421
add a comment |
Let $F_n$ denote the $n$th Fibonacci number, adopting the convention $F_1=1$, $F_2=1$ and so on. Consider the $ntimes n$ matrix defined by
$$mathbf M_n:=begin{bmatrix}F_1&F_2&dots&F_n\F_{n+1}&F_{n+2}&dots&F_{2n}\vdots&vdots&ddots&vdots\F_{n^2-n+1}&F_{n^2-n+2}&dots&F_{n^2}end{bmatrix}.$$
I have the following conjecture:
Conjecture. For all integers $ngeq3$, $detmathbf M_n=0$.
I have used some Python code to test this conjecture for $n$ up to $9$, but I cannot go further. Note that $detmathbf M_1=detmathbf M_2=1$. Due to the elementary nature of this problem I have to assume that it has been discussed before, perhaps even on this site. But I couldn't find any reference on it, by Googling or searching here. Can someone shed light onto whether the conjecture is true, and a proof of it if so?
linear-algebra determinant fibonacci-numbers
edited Dec 3 '18 at 9:02
Martin Sleziak
44.7k7115270
asked Dec 3 '18 at 1:55
YiFan
2,5291421
1
Fun question. Next time I teach matrix theory I might use this as an extra credit problem on a homework set involving determinants. As you know now, the solution isn't hard, but it would take a pretty clever student to spot it on their own. Thanks.
– John Coleman
Dec 3 '18 at 12:19
1
Problem A3 from the 2009 Putnam competition has a very similar statement and a very similar solution, only replacing $F_k$ by $cos k$ (in radians).
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 3 '18 at 15:46
add a comment |
Let $F_n$ denote the $n$th Fibonacci number, adopting the convention $F_1=1$, $F_2=1$ and so on. Consider the $ntimes n$ matrix defined by
$$mathbf M_n:=begin{bmatrix}F_1&F_2&dots&F_n\F_{n+1}&F_{n+2}&dots&F_{2n}\vdots&vdots&ddots&vdots\F_{n^2-n+1}&F_{n^2-n+2}&dots&F_{n^2}end{bmatrix}.$$
I have the following conjecture:
Conjecture. For all integers $ngeq3$, $detmathbf M_n=0$.
I have used some Python code to test this conjecture for $n$ up to $9$, but I cannot go further. Note that $detmathbf M_1=detmathbf M_2=1$. Due to the elementary nature of this problem I have to assume that it has been discussed before, perhaps even on this site. But I couldn't find any reference on it, by Googling or searching here. Can someone shed light onto whether the conjecture is true, and a proof of it if so?
linear-algebra determinant fibonacci-numbers
edited Dec 3 '18 at 9:02
Martin Sleziak
44.7k7115270
asked Dec 3 '18 at 1:55
YiFan
2,5291421
Let $F_n$ denote the $n$th Fibonacci number, adopting the convention $F_1=1$, $F_2=1$ and so on. Consider the $ntimes n$ matrix defined by
$$mathbf M_n:=begin{bmatrix}F_1&F_2&dots&F_n\F_{n+1}&F_{n+2}&dots&F_{2n}\vdots&vdots&ddots&vdots\F_{n^2-n+1}&F_{n^2-n+2}&dots&F_{n^2}end{bmatrix}.$$
I have the following conjecture:
Conjecture. For all integers $ngeq3$, $detmathbf M_n=0$.
I have used some Python code to test this conjecture for $n$ up to $9$, but I cannot go further. Note that $detmathbf M_1=detmathbf M_2=1$. Due to the elementary nature of this problem I have to assume that it has been discussed before, perhaps even on this site. But I couldn't find any reference on it, by Googling or searching here. Can someone shed light onto whether the conjecture is true, and a proof of it if so?
linear-algebra determinant fibonacci-numbers
linear-algebra determinant fibonacci-numbers
edited Dec 3 '18 at 9:02
Martin Sleziak
44.7k7115270
asked Dec 3 '18 at 1:55
YiFan
2,5291421
edited Dec 3 '18 at 9:02
Martin Sleziak
44.7k7115270
asked Dec 3 '18 at 1:55
YiFan
2,5291421
edited Dec 3 '18 at 9:02
Martin Sleziak
44.7k7115270
edited Dec 3 '18 at 9:02
Martin Sleziak
44.7k7115270
edited Dec 3 '18 at 9:02
Martin Sleziak
44.7k7115270
44.7k7115270
asked Dec 3 '18 at 1:55
YiFan
2,5291421
asked Dec 3 '18 at 1:55
YiFan
2,5291421
asked Dec 3 '18 at 1:55
YiFan
2,5291421
2,5291421
1
Fun question. Next time I teach matrix theory I might use this as an extra credit problem on a homework set involving determinants. As you know now, the solution isn't hard, but it would take a pretty clever student to spot it on their own. Thanks.
– John Coleman
Dec 3 '18 at 12:19
1
Problem A3 from the 2009 Putnam competition has a very similar statement and a very similar solution, only replacing $F_k$ by $cos k$ (in radians).
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 3 '18 at 15:46
add a comment |
1
Fun question. Next time I teach matrix theory I might use this as an extra credit problem on a homework set involving determinants. As you know now, the solution isn't hard, but it would take a pretty clever student to spot it on their own. Thanks.
– John Coleman
Dec 3 '18 at 12:19
1
Problem A3 from the 2009 Putnam competition has a very similar statement and a very similar solution, only replacing $F_k$ by $cos k$ (in radians).
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 3 '18 at 15:46
1
1
Fun question. Next time I teach matrix theory I might use this as an extra credit problem on a homework set involving determinants. As you know now, the solution isn't hard, but it would take a pretty clever student to spot it on their own. Thanks.
– John Coleman
Dec 3 '18 at 12:19
Fun question. Next time I teach matrix theory I might use this as an extra credit problem on a homework set involving determinants. As you know now, the solution isn't hard, but it would take a pretty clever student to spot it on their own. Thanks.
– John Coleman
Dec 3 '18 at 12:19
1
1
Problem A3 from the 2009 Putnam competition has a very similar statement and a very similar solution, only replacing $F_k$ by $cos k$ (in radians).
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 3 '18 at 15:46
Problem A3 from the 2009 Putnam competition has a very similar statement and a very similar solution, only replacing $F_k$ by $cos k$ (in radians).
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 3 '18 at 15:46
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Here's a hint: what's the relationship between $F_{k+1}+F_{k+2}$ and $F_{k+3}$? What does that say about the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd columns of this matrix?
answered Dec 3 '18 at 1:58
obscurans
808211
add a comment |
The resolution is remarkably simple (many thanks to obscurans' answer for the hint!) By the definition of the Fibonacci numbers, $F_k+F_{k+1}=F_{k+2}$ for all $k$. If $ngeq3$ then these numbers are going to be in the first three columns of every row. Hence the first three rows are linearly dependent, so the determinant is $0$. It follows from this that any such sequence following a linear recurrence (of the form $F_{n}=aF_{n-1}+bF_{n-2}$, $a,b$ are constant), with possibly different starting terms, also satisfies the stated conjecture. In fact, this shows that all such matrices have rank $2$, with the only two linearly independent columns being the first two. If the linear recurrence is of higher order, say $m$, then the determinant is $0$ when $n>m$, and the rank of the matrix will be $m$.
answered Dec 3 '18 at 2:06
YiFan
2,5291421
2
One note: the matrix will have rank $leq$ the order of the linear recurrence, which is not necessarily 2.
– obscurans
Dec 3 '18 at 2:11
@obscurans Suppose that the matrix has rank $k$. Does that not mean that the linear recurrence can be rewritten as a linear recurrence of order $k$? I was under the impression that the order of a linear recurrence was the order of its simplest form, though I realize now that that may not be the case.
– Spitemaster
Dec 3 '18 at 15:31
There are two different things: a particular linear recurrence, which is an equation with $n$ degrees of freedom of solutions, vs a particular fixed sequence of numbers generated by some linear recurrence. The matrix having rank $k$ does mean a linear recurrence of order $k$ can generate this sequence of numbers.
– obscurans
Dec 4 '18 at 2:52
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3023500%2fa-pattern-in-determinants-of-fibonacci-numbers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Here's a hint: what's the relationship between $F_{k+1}+F_{k+2}$ and $F_{k+3}$? What does that say about the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd columns of this matrix?
answered Dec 3 '18 at 1:58
obscurans
808211
add a comment |
Here's a hint: what's the relationship between $F_{k+1}+F_{k+2}$ and $F_{k+3}$? What does that say about the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd columns of this matrix?
answered Dec 3 '18 at 1:58
obscurans
808211
add a comment |
Here's a hint: what's the relationship between $F_{k+1}+F_{k+2}$ and $F_{k+3}$? What does that say about the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd columns of this matrix?
answered Dec 3 '18 at 1:58
obscurans
808211
Here's a hint: what's the relationship between $F_{k+1}+F_{k+2}$ and $F_{k+3}$? What does that say about the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd columns of this matrix?
answered Dec 3 '18 at 1:58
obscurans
808211
answered Dec 3 '18 at 1:58
obscurans
808211
answered Dec 3 '18 at 1:58
obscurans
808211
answered Dec 3 '18 at 1:58
obscurans
808211
808211
add a comment |
add a comment |
The resolution is remarkably simple (many thanks to obscurans' answer for the hint!) By the definition of the Fibonacci numbers, $F_k+F_{k+1}=F_{k+2}$ for all $k$. If $ngeq3$ then these numbers are going to be in the first three columns of every row. Hence the first three rows are linearly dependent, so the determinant is $0$. It follows from this that any such sequence following a linear recurrence (of the form $F_{n}=aF_{n-1}+bF_{n-2}$, $a,b$ are constant), with possibly different starting terms, also satisfies the stated conjecture. In fact, this shows that all such matrices have rank $2$, with the only two linearly independent columns being the first two. If the linear recurrence is of higher order, say $m$, then the determinant is $0$ when $n>m$, and the rank of the matrix will be $m$.
answered Dec 3 '18 at 2:06
YiFan
2,5291421
2
One note: the matrix will have rank $leq$ the order of the linear recurrence, which is not necessarily 2.
– obscurans
Dec 3 '18 at 2:11
@obscurans Suppose that the matrix has rank $k$. Does that not mean that the linear recurrence can be rewritten as a linear recurrence of order $k$? I was under the impression that the order of a linear recurrence was the order of its simplest form, though I realize now that that may not be the case.
– Spitemaster
Dec 3 '18 at 15:31
There are two different things: a particular linear recurrence, which is an equation with $n$ degrees of freedom of solutions, vs a particular fixed sequence of numbers generated by some linear recurrence. The matrix having rank $k$ does mean a linear recurrence of order $k$ can generate this sequence of numbers.
– obscurans
Dec 4 '18 at 2:52
add a comment |
The resolution is remarkably simple (many thanks to obscurans' answer for the hint!) By the definition of the Fibonacci numbers, $F_k+F_{k+1}=F_{k+2}$ for all $k$. If $ngeq3$ then these numbers are going to be in the first three columns of every row. Hence the first three rows are linearly dependent, so the determinant is $0$. It follows from this that any such sequence following a linear recurrence (of the form $F_{n}=aF_{n-1}+bF_{n-2}$, $a,b$ are constant), with possibly different starting terms, also satisfies the stated conjecture. In fact, this shows that all such matrices have rank $2$, with the only two linearly independent columns being the first two. If the linear recurrence is of higher order, say $m$, then the determinant is $0$ when $n>m$, and the rank of the matrix will be $m$.
answered Dec 3 '18 at 2:06
YiFan
2,5291421
2
One note: the matrix will have rank $leq$ the order of the linear recurrence, which is not necessarily 2.
– obscurans
Dec 3 '18 at 2:11
@obscurans Suppose that the matrix has rank $k$. Does that not mean that the linear recurrence can be rewritten as a linear recurrence of order $k$? I was under the impression that the order of a linear recurrence was the order of its simplest form, though I realize now that that may not be the case.
– Spitemaster
Dec 3 '18 at 15:31
There are two different things: a particular linear recurrence, which is an equation with $n$ degrees of freedom of solutions, vs a particular fixed sequence of numbers generated by some linear recurrence. The matrix having rank $k$ does mean a linear recurrence of order $k$ can generate this sequence of numbers.
– obscurans
Dec 4 '18 at 2:52
add a comment |
The resolution is remarkably simple (many thanks to obscurans' answer for the hint!) By the definition of the Fibonacci numbers, $F_k+F_{k+1}=F_{k+2}$ for all $k$. If $ngeq3$ then these numbers are going to be in the first three columns of every row. Hence the first three rows are linearly dependent, so the determinant is $0$. It follows from this that any such sequence following a linear recurrence (of the form $F_{n}=aF_{n-1}+bF_{n-2}$, $a,b$ are constant), with possibly different starting terms, also satisfies the stated conjecture. In fact, this shows that all such matrices have rank $2$, with the only two linearly independent columns being the first two. If the linear recurrence is of higher order, say $m$, then the determinant is $0$ when $n>m$, and the rank of the matrix will be $m$.
answered Dec 3 '18 at 2:06
YiFan
2,5291421
The resolution is remarkably simple (many thanks to obscurans' answer for the hint!) By the definition of the Fibonacci numbers, $F_k+F_{k+1}=F_{k+2}$ for all $k$. If $ngeq3$ then these numbers are going to be in the first three columns of every row. Hence the first three rows are linearly dependent, so the determinant is $0$. It follows from this that any such sequence following a linear recurrence (of the form $F_{n}=aF_{n-1}+bF_{n-2}$, $a,b$ are constant), with possibly different starting terms, also satisfies the stated conjecture. In fact, this shows that all such matrices have rank $2$, with the only two linearly independent columns being the first two. If the linear recurrence is of higher order, say $m$, then the determinant is $0$ when $n>m$, and the rank of the matrix will be $m$.
answered Dec 3 '18 at 2:06
YiFan
2,5291421
edited Dec 3 '18 at 2:15
answered Dec 3 '18 at 2:06
YiFan
2,5291421
answered Dec 3 '18 at 2:06
YiFan
2,5291421
answered Dec 3 '18 at 2:06
YiFan
2,5291421
2,5291421
2
One note: the matrix will have rank $leq$ the order of the linear recurrence, which is not necessarily 2.
– obscurans
Dec 3 '18 at 2:11
@obscurans Suppose that the matrix has rank $k$. Does that not mean that the linear recurrence can be rewritten as a linear recurrence of order $k$? I was under the impression that the order of a linear recurrence was the order of its simplest form, though I realize now that that may not be the case.
– Spitemaster
Dec 3 '18 at 15:31
There are two different things: a particular linear recurrence, which is an equation with $n$ degrees of freedom of solutions, vs a particular fixed sequence of numbers generated by some linear recurrence. The matrix having rank $k$ does mean a linear recurrence of order $k$ can generate this sequence of numbers.
– obscurans
Dec 4 '18 at 2:52
add a comment |
2
One note: the matrix will have rank $leq$ the order of the linear recurrence, which is not necessarily 2.
– obscurans
Dec 3 '18 at 2:11
@obscurans Suppose that the matrix has rank $k$. Does that not mean that the linear recurrence can be rewritten as a linear recurrence of order $k$? I was under the impression that the order of a linear recurrence was the order of its simplest form, though I realize now that that may not be the case.
– Spitemaster
Dec 3 '18 at 15:31
There are two different things: a particular linear recurrence, which is an equation with $n$ degrees of freedom of solutions, vs a particular fixed sequence of numbers generated by some linear recurrence. The matrix having rank $k$ does mean a linear recurrence of order $k$ can generate this sequence of numbers.
– obscurans
Dec 4 '18 at 2:52
2
2
One note: the matrix will have rank $leq$ the order of the linear recurrence, which is not necessarily 2.
– obscurans
Dec 3 '18 at 2:11
One note: the matrix will have rank $leq$ the order of the linear recurrence, which is not necessarily 2.
– obscurans
Dec 3 '18 at 2:11
@obscurans Suppose that the matrix has rank $k$. Does that not mean that the linear recurrence can be rewritten as a linear recurrence of order $k$? I was under the impression that the order of a linear recurrence was the order of its simplest form, though I realize now that that may not be the case.
– Spitemaster
Dec 3 '18 at 15:31
@obscurans Suppose that the matrix has rank $k$. Does that not mean that the linear recurrence can be rewritten as a linear recurrence of order $k$? I was under the impression that the order of a linear recurrence was the order of its simplest form, though I realize now that that may not be the case.
– Spitemaster
Dec 3 '18 at 15:31
There are two different things: a particular linear recurrence, which is an equation with $n$ degrees of freedom of solutions, vs a particular fixed sequence of numbers generated by some linear recurrence. The matrix having rank $k$ does mean a linear recurrence of order $k$ can generate this sequence of numbers.
– obscurans
Dec 4 '18 at 2:52
There are two different things: a particular linear recurrence, which is an equation with $n$ degrees of freedom of solutions, vs a particular fixed sequence of numbers generated by some linear recurrence. The matrix having rank $k$ does mean a linear recurrence of order $k$ can generate this sequence of numbers.
– obscurans
Dec 4 '18 at 2:52
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3023500%2fa-pattern-in-determinants-of-fibonacci-numbers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Fun question. Next time I teach matrix theory I might use this as an extra credit problem on a homework set involving determinants. As you know now, the solution isn't hard, but it would take a pretty clever student to spot it on their own. Thanks.
– John Coleman
Dec 3 '18 at 12:19
1
Problem A3 from the 2009 Putnam competition has a very similar statement and a very similar solution, only replacing $F_k$ by $cos k$ (in radians).
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 3 '18 at 15:46