Erdős Problem #349
No proof or disproof is known, and it isn't known whether a finite computation could settle it.
What the community database records, not our verdict. erdosproblems.com no longer shows statuses (why).
This defines the core property of the problem: For what values of \(t,\alpha \in (0,\infty)\) is the sequence \(\lfloor t\alpha^n\rfloor\) complete?
Attempts
submit one →Read our full write-up →
Round 5 — the capstone. The 0-indexed entirely-complete boundary has a closed form, t0(α) = min over k≥0 of (2^k+1)/α^k, now triply confirmed (our exact-rational compute, a same-family skeptic, and a cross-family GPT-5 Pro proof whose key move is Graham's 1964 Lemma 4 in disguise). The honest payoff is provenance: under the reindex u=t/α the 0-indexed sequence IS the literature's sequence, so for t<α we sit inside Graham's 1964 unit square (Acta Arithmetica 10, primary-verified — Lemma 1 the greedy criterion, Theorem 5 the powers-of-two obstruction, Theorem 6 the regions whose pullback is exactly our fragmented complete set, Theorem 3 complete iff entirely complete there) and for t≥α inside van Doorn 2026. So the set, its ≈85% area, and its region structure are Graham's; the 1-indexed closed thresholds are van Doorn's. What is genuinely new is the independent cold re-derivation plus the one-line min-formula boundary of Graham's set in 0-indexed coordinates (explicit shelf + least-minimizer) — a unification not previously written — not a new theorem. We think that is the better, truer story.
LIVE