## What’s the shortest known Normal Number?

Well, the answer is that it has to be infinitely long, but the question is what is the most compact form of a Normal Number possible.

I was motivated to look into this from a lovely Numberphile video about all the real numbers.

Normal numbers in base 10 are those for which, in the base 10 decimal expansion, you can find every natural number.

Champernowne’s number is a very simple example of this where it is simply written as:

0.12345678910111213…etc.

I thought that it might be interesting to see if one could write a more compact Normal Number, but using a similar procedure to Champernowne. I haven’t seen this done anywhere else. For example, in the above expression, you don’t need to include the 12 explicitly as it’s already there at the beginning. You could write

0.12345678910113

So you skip the 12, and also 11 and 13 becomes 113. We will do all of this just with the list of digits, rather than the number in base 10.…

## The Recamán sequence

In case you have watched the following video about the Recamán sequence.

and want to play around with it in Mathematica. Here is my code for doing so:

nums = {0};

For[i = 1, i < 66, i++,
If[nums[[-1]] – i > 0 && Position[nums, nums[[-1]] – i] === {}, nums = Append[nums, nums[[-1]] – i],
nums = Append[nums, nums[[-1]] + i]]
]

{{#[], 0}, #[]} & /@ Partition[Riffle[Mean[#] & /@ Partition[Riffle[nums, nums[[2 ;;]]], 2],
Abs[Differences[nums]]/2], 2];

Show[Show[
Table[Graphics[Circle[%[[i, 1]], %[[i, 2]], {(i) \[Pi], (i + 1) \[Pi]}]], {i, Length[%]}], ImageSize -> 1000], Plot[0, {x, 0, 91}],
Axes -> True]

(You may have to copy this by hand rather than copy/paste.)

This produces the following rather beautiful graphic (and answers the question posed in the video): Evidence away my dear Watson…evidence away.

 How clear is this post?
• Gallery

## Graph Theory, Numberphile and Mathematica

Edit: I made a mistake with some of the language here. A comment from a true graph theorist:

“Hamiltonian” usually means there’s a hamilton/hamiltonian cycle. Graphs with a hamilton path are “traceable”. Hamiltonian implies traceable, but not conversely.

Thus, I have edited below accordingly.

——————————-

There was a nice video up on Numberphile about a problem which could easily be explained to a school student, and yet we don’t yet know the answer to it. See the videos here:

and

The game is the following: Given a sequence of consecutive integers, draw a graph where the nodes are the integers and there is an edge between each integer if their sum is a square number.

If we take the numbers from 1 to 12, then the following would be the associated graph (note that there are three disconnected pieces of it). Note that this is a disconnected, undirected graph. Looking at some of the edges.…