Skip to Content
MathematicsMathematics
  • Editor’s Choice
  • Article
  • Open Access

21 April 2020

7 Pages

Fibonacci Numbers with a Prescribed Block of Digits

Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, University of Hradec Králové, 500 03 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Abstract

In this paper, we prove that F 22 = 17711 is the largest Fibonacci number whose decimal expansion is of the form a b … b c … c . The proof uses lower bounds for linear forms in three logarithms of algebraic numbers and some tools from Diophantine approximation.
MSC:
primary 11A63, 11B39; secondary 11J86

1. Introduction

Let ( F n ) n ≥ 0 be the Fibonacci sequence given by second-order recurrence F n + 2 = F n + 1 + F n , for n ≥ 0 , with initial conditions F 0 = 0 and F 1 = 1 . A few terms of this sequence are
0 , 1 , 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 8 , 13 , 21 , 34 , 55 , 89 , 144 , 233 , 377 , 610 , 987 , 1597 , 2584 , 4181 , 6765 , 10946 , 17711 , … .
In the last decades, many results on Diophantine properties of Fibonacci numbers have been proved with the use of refined tools in number theory. For instance, Bugeaud, Mignotte, and Siksek [1] settled the problem of Fibonacci perfect power numbers (i.e., the equation F n = y t , for t > 1 ) by combing the powerful Baker’s theory with the Modular method (used by Wiles in the proof of the Fermat Last Theorem). See a generalization of their result in [2].
We remark that digital problems involving Fibonacci numbers have received much attention in the literature. A first result in this direction was proved, in 2000, by F. Luca [3] who showed that the largest Fibonacci number with only one distinct digit is F 10 = 55 . After this, many authors worked on repdigits (i.e., integers having only one distinct digit in its decimal expansion) as expressions related to sum, product of terms of binary recurrences (see [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13] and references therein). However, the related problem of finding all Fibonacci numbers with only two distinct digits remains open.
The aim of this paper is to continue this program. In fact, our main result searches for all Fibonacci numbers of the form a b … b c … c , which provides a generalization for Luca’s result ( a = b = c ). More precisely, our main result is the following:
Theorem 1.
Let a ∈ [ 1 , 9 ] and b , c ∈ [ 0 , 9 ] . The largest solution of the Diophantine equation
F n = a b … b ︸ m c … c ︸ ℓ = a · 10 m + ℓ + b · 10 m − 1 9 10 ℓ + c · 10 ℓ − 1 9 ,
in positive integers m , n , and ℓ, with 2 ≤ ℓ ≤ m , is n = 22 . Explicitly, F 22 = 17711 .
Our proof combines two deep techniques in number theory, namely, the Baker’s theory on linear forms in logarithms and some tools from Diophantine approximation (a reduction method due to Baker and Davenport).

2. Auxiliary Results

In this section, we shall present some results which will be useful in the proofs.
Let α = ( 1 + 5 ) / 2 and β = − 1 / α . The Binet’s formula asserts that F n = ( α n − β n ) / 5 . From this formula, it is possible to deduce that the estimates
α n − 2 ≤ F n ≤ α n − 1 ,
hold for all n ≥ 1 . In addition, this Binet’s formula allows us to manipulate our Diophantine equation to obtain upper bounds for some linear forms in three logarithms. Thus, in order to obtain lower bounds for these forms, we shall use the celebrated Baker’s theory. Among these lower bounds, we decided to use one which was proved in ([1], Theorem 9.4).
Lemma 1.
Let γ 1 , … , γ t be real algebraic numbers and let b 1 , … , b t be nonzero rational integer numbers. Let D be the degree of the number field Q ( γ 1 , … , γ t ) over Q and let A j be a positive real number satisfying
A j ≥ max { D h ( γ j ) , | log γ j | , 0.16 } ,
where j = 1 , … , t . Assume that
B ≥ max { | b 1 | , … , | b t | } .
If γ 1 b 1 ⋯ γ t b t ≠ 1 , then
| γ 1 b 1 ⋯ γ t b t − 1 | ≥ exp ( − 1.4 · 30 t + 3 · t 4.5 · D 2 ( 1 + log D ) ( 1 + log B ) A 1 ⋯ A t ) .
Here, the logarithmic height of an n-degree algebraic number α is defined as
h ( α ) = 1 n log | a | + ∑ j = 1 n log max { 1 , | α ( j ) | } ,
where a is the leading coefficient of the minimal primitive polynomial of α (over Z ) and ( α ( j ) ) 1 ≤ j ≤ n are the (algebraic) conjugates of α .
With these lower and upper bounds, we shall obtain an upper bound for n which is, in general, very large and then the next step is to reduce it. For that, we shall use a reduction method which is originated from Diophantine approximation. Here, we shall use a result due to Dujella and Pethö [14] (which is a variant of a famous method due to Baker–Davenport). For a real number x we use ‖ x ‖ = min { | x − n | : n ∈ Z } for the distance from x to the nearest integer (the so-called Nint function).
Lemma 2.
Let M > 0 be an integer and let γ , μ be real numbers, such that γ ∉ Q . Let p / q be a convergent of the continued fraction expansion of γ such that q > 6 M and ϵ : = ‖ μ q ‖ − M ‖ γ q ‖ > 0. Then there is no solution to the Diophantine inequality
0 < m γ − n + μ < A · B − m
in positive integers m , n with
log ( A q / ϵ ) log B ≤ m < M .
After presetting these tools, we can now prove our main result.

3. The Proof of The Theorem

3.1. Finding a Bound on N

By the Binet’s formula and the identity in Equation (1), we have
α n 5 − a + b 9 10 m + ℓ = c − b 9 10 ℓ + β n 5 − c 9 .
Thus,
α n 5 − a + b 9 10 m + ℓ < 2 · 10 ℓ .
On dividing through by ( a + b / 9 ) 10 m + ℓ , we obtain
a + b 9 − 1 α n 5 10 − ( m + ℓ ) − 1 < 2 10 m ,
where we used the fact that a + b / 9 ≥ 1 . Now, we are in a position to apply Lemma 1, but first we must prove that | ( 5 ( a + b / 9 ) ) − 1 10 − ( m + ℓ ) α n − 1 | ≠ 0 . Indeed, in the contrary case, we would get that α 2 n ∈ Q which is an absurd. Thus, let us take
γ 1 : = 5 ( a + b / 9 ) , γ 2 : = α , γ 3 : = 10 , b 1 : = − 1 , b 2 : = n , b 3 : = − ( m + ℓ ) .
Note that Q ( γ 1 , γ 2 , γ 3 ) = Q ( 5 ) and then D = 2 . The conjugates of γ 1 , γ 2 , and γ 3 are γ 1 ′ = − γ 1 , γ 2 ′ = β , γ 3 ′ = γ 3 , respectively. Surely, γ 2 and γ 3 are algebraic integers, while the minimal polynomial of γ 1 is ( X − γ 1 ) ( X − γ 1 ′ ) = X 2 − 5 ( a + b / 9 ) 2 which is a divisor of 81 X 2 − 5 ( 9 a + b ) 2 . Therefore,
h ( γ 1 ) ≤ 1 2 log 81 + 2 log 10 5 < 5.4 .
(A more relaxed upper bound for h ( γ 1 ) could be found by using the well-known property that h ( x + y z ) ≤ h ( x ) + h ( y ) + h ( z ) + log 2 ). In addition, h ( γ 2 ) = ( log α ) / 2 < 0.75 and h ( γ 3 ) = log 10 < 2.31 . Let us take A 1 : = 10.9 , A 2 = 1.5 , and A 3 = 4.7 . Of course, we can assume that n > 14 . Thus,
a + b 9 − 1 α n 5 10 − ( m + ℓ ) − 1 > exp − 7.6 · 10 13 ( 1 + log B ) ,
where B ≥ max { n , m + ℓ }
By combining the estimates in Equations (4) and (5), we get
m < 3.4 · 10 13 ( 1 + log B ) .
Now, we have that F n has m + ℓ + 1 digits and so
m + ℓ + 1 = log F n log 10 + 1 .
Since m ≥ ℓ and ⌊ x ⌋ + 1 > x , we have
2 m + 1 > log F n log 10 ≥ ( n − 2 ) log α log 10 > 0.2 ( n − 2 )
so 10 m + 6 ≥ n . Thus, we can take B : = 10 m + 6 , which yields to
m < 3.4 · 10 13 ( 1 + log ( 10 m + 6 ) )
and therefore m ≤ 1.3 · 10 15 .

3.2. Reducing the Bound

Now, let us write Λ : = n log α − ( m + ℓ ) log 10 + log ( ( a + b / 9 ) − 1 ( 5 ) − 1 ) . We know that e x − 1 > x , for all x ∈ R + . By supposing that Λ > 0 (the other case is completely similar, where we used the fact that | e x − 1 | = 1 − e − | x | , if x < 0 ), we can rewrite Equation (4) as
0 < n log α − ( m + ℓ ) log 10 + log ( a + b / 9 ) − 1 ( 5 ) − 1 < 1.8 · 10 − m .
Since m > ( 0.1 ) n − 0.7 (because 2 m + 1 > 0.2 ( n − 2 ) ), we can divide the previous inequality by log 10 , to obtain
0 < n γ − ( m + ℓ ) + μ < 4 · ( 1.2 ) − n ,
where γ : = log α / log 10 and μ : = log ( ( a + b / 9 ) − 1 ( 5 ) − 1 ) / log 10 .
Clearly γ is an irrational number (because α k is irrational for any non-zero integer k). Let us denote p n / q n as the nth convergent of its continued fraction.
In order to reduce our bound on m, we shall use Lemma 2. Now, since n ≤ 10 m + 6 < 1.4 · 10 16 , we choose M = 1.4 · 10 16 . Thus,
p 38 q 38 = 1426134855866370784 6824015306170795931 ,
then q 38 ≥ 6824015306170795931 > 8.4 · 10 16 = 6 M . Furthermore, we have M ‖ q 38 γ ‖ < 0.0013 . On the other hand, by computing ‖ q 38 μ ‖ , for a ∈ [ 1 , 9 ] and b ∈ [ 0 , 9 ] , we have that the minimal value of this expression is obtained when a = 8 , b = 2 and is > 0.0028 . Hence,
ϵ = ‖ q 38 μ ‖ − M ‖ q 38 γ ‖ > 0.0015 .
We notice the all the hypotheses of the Lemma 2 are fulfilled, where A = 4 and B = 1.2 , so, by that lemma, there is no solution of the inequality in Equation (7) (and then for the Diophantine Equation (1)) for n in the range
[ log ( A q 38 / ϵ ) / log B + 1 , M ] = [ 281 , 1.4 · 10 16 ] .
Since n < M , we get n ≤ 280 . By using Equation (6), we deduce that
m + ℓ ≤ ( n − 1 ) log α log 10 − 1 < 58.4
and so m + ℓ ≤ 58 . Since m + ℓ + 1 ≥ 5 , it is seen that F n has at least 5 digits yielding n ≥ 21 . A simple search in the list of the Fibonacci numbers F n in the range n ∈ [ 21 , 280 ] (see Table A1 in Appendix A), returns only F 22 = 17711 with the required properties. This completes the proof. □

4. Conclusions

In this paper we have been interested in finding all Fibonacci numbers which are special concatenation of digits. In particular, we show that F 22 = 17711 is the largest Fibonacci number whose decimal expansion is of the form a b … b c … c , where a , b , and c are decimal digits. Our approach to the proof is based on the combination of lower bounds for linear forms in logarithms (due to Baker) with reduction methods (due to Dujella–Pethö).

Funding

The author was supported by Project of Excelence PrF UHK No. 2215/2020, University of Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.

Acknowledgments

The author is very grateful to the referees for their very constructive suggestions that helped to improve the quality of this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Values of F ( n ) for n from 21 to 280.

References

  1. Bugeaud, Y.; Mignotte, M.; Siksek, S. Classical and modular approaches to exponential Diophantine equations I. Fibonacci and Lucas powers. Ann. Math. 2006, 163, 969–1018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  2. Marques, D.; Togbé, A. Perfect powers among Fibonomial coefficients. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 2010, 348, 717–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  3. Luca, F. Fibonacci and Lucas numbers with only one distinct digit. Port. Math. 2000, 57, 243–254. [Google Scholar]
  4. Adegbindin, C.; Luca, F.; Togbé, A. Lucas numbers as sums of two repdigits. Lith. Math. J. 2019, 59, 295–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  5. Luca, F. Repdigits as sums of three Fibonacci numbers. Math. Commun. 2012, 17, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  6. Marques, D.; Togbe, A. Fibonacci and Lucas numbers of the form 2a + 3b + 5c. Proc. Jpn. Acad. Ser. A Math. Sci. 2013, 89, 47–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  7. Qu, Y.; Zeng, J.; Cao, Y. Fibonacci and Lucas Numbers of the Form 2a + 3b + 5c + 7d. Symmetry 2018, 10, 509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  8. Erduvan, F.; Keskin, R. Fibonacci and Lucas numbers as products of two repdigits. Turk. J. Math. 2019, 43, 2142–2153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  9. Alvarado, S.D.; Luca, F. Fibonacci numbers which are sums of two repdigits. In Proceedings of the XIVth International Conference on Fibonacci Numbers and Their Applications, Morelia, Mexico, 1–7 July 2011; pp. 97–108. [Google Scholar]
  10. Siar, Z.; Erduvan, F.; Keskin, R. Repdigits as product of two Pell or Pell-Lucas numbers. Acta Math. Univ. Comenian. 2019, 88, 247–256. [Google Scholar]
  11. Ddamulira, M. Repdigits as sums of three Padovan number. Boletín De La Soc. Matemática Mex. 2020, 26, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  12. Alahmadi, A.; Altassan, A.; Luca, F.; Shoaib, H. Fibonacci numbers which are concatenations of two repdigits. Quaest. Math. 2020, 43, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  13. Trojovský, P. On Terms of Generalized Fibonacci Sequences which are Powers of their Indexes. Mathematics 2019, 7, 700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  14. Dujella, A.; Pethö, A. A generalization of a theorem of Baker and Davenport. Quart. J. Math. Oxf. Ser. 1998, 49, 291–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.