I analyzed 100,000 Collatz trajectories to measure the “Arithmetic Pressure” preventing cycles. The result is a perfect linear barrier (Slope 2.60) [OC]
Sorry but your github entry reads as if it was generated by AI.
Also, you don’t define anything properly. Maybe your height function, but you write it’s arithmetic pressure minus geometric drift, and you don’t define either of those properly. If I had to guess you define geometric drift as just the absolute value of the starting number, and the arithmetic drift as either the log base 2 of the number, or it’s 2-adic valuation (I really can’t tell what you mean by what is written.) Edit: or maybe its 2-adic valuation minus its 3-adic valuation? I really can’t tell.
Next time, just write what you did in your own words. That often times explains it best. Don’t use AI. It has a high tendency to just throw random words around without properly explaining what it means. You can maybe use AI to rewrite what you have already written, but then you still need to check it again to see if it is still correct.
GandalfPC on
This is not meaningful Collatz analysis.
It invents physics-style language and maps it onto arithmetic without justification. It doesn’t touch the real difficulty: controlling 2-adic valuations along actual Collatz trajectories.
![I analyzed 100,000 Collatz trajectories to measure the "Arithmetic Pressure" preventing cycles. The result is a perfect linear barrier (Slope 2.60) [OC]](https://www.byteseu.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/3wb1pesbws2g1-1024x683.png "I analyzed 100,000 Collatz trajectories to measure the “Arithmetic Pressure” preventing cycles. The result is a perfect linear barrier (Slope 2.60) [OC]")
4 Comments
Idk what this means but beautiful graph
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collatz_conjecture
Sorry but your github entry reads as if it was generated by AI.
Also, you don’t define anything properly. Maybe your height function, but you write it’s arithmetic pressure minus geometric drift, and you don’t define either of those properly. If I had to guess you define geometric drift as just the absolute value of the starting number, and the arithmetic drift as either the log base 2 of the number, or it’s 2-adic valuation (I really can’t tell what you mean by what is written.) Edit: or maybe its 2-adic valuation minus its 3-adic valuation? I really can’t tell.
Next time, just write what you did in your own words. That often times explains it best. Don’t use AI. It has a high tendency to just throw random words around without properly explaining what it means. You can maybe use AI to rewrite what you have already written, but then you still need to check it again to see if it is still correct.
This is not meaningful Collatz analysis.
It invents physics-style language and maps it onto arithmetic without justification. It doesn’t touch the real difficulty: controlling 2-adic valuations along actual Collatz trajectories.