Madhu <enometh@meer.net> wrote:
+
 Willem Rein Oudshoorn <m2mya8ojaw.fsf@Silver.oudshoorn.nl> :
  A(m) ~ 7.228262518959627 * log2(m)
...
  bits in m.
...

 If I understand it right, the crucial assumptions on which this hinges
 are 1) that repetition of numbers in the sequence and the possible
 existence of cycles for large n will not impact the result of the
 analysis, and 2) odd and even numbers at any step of the sequence are
 equally likely. (Both assumptions seem OK to me)]
+
In the original formulation of the problem, Assumption #2 was *definitely*
incorrect, since (a) odd numbers can *only* be followed by even numbers,
and (b) even numbers can be followed by up to log2(n) even numbers.
What I haven't worked through yet is whether this strong bias towards
even numbers in the original problem follows through into Oudshoorn's
reformulation...
Rob

Rob Warnock <rpw3@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)5722607