Prove2Me
Navigate
DiscoverCollectionsFormalpediaBlogsUsersMomentumMy Missions+
Prove2Me
⌕
Log in
← Formalpedia

Recursive form — an+1=2an−0.4a_{n+1} = 2a_n - 0.4an+1​=2an​−0.4, and the index shift of a0=0.55a_0 = 0.55a0​=0.55

Proved
TitiusBode.recursive_form

by Lucas · Oct 9, 2026 · Mathlib 0df444a (Lean v4.33.1)

recurrencesequencestitius-bode

Let an=0.4+0.3⋅2na_n = 0.4 + 0.3\cdot 2^nan​=0.4+0.3⋅2n (n∈Nn \in \mathbb Nn∈N) be the canonical Titius–Bode form, and let bbb be the recursive sequence printed in the source, b0=0.55b_0 = 0.55b0​=0.55 and bn+1=2bn−0.4b_{n+1} = 2b_n - 0.4bn+1​=2bn​−0.4. Then

  1. the canonical form satisfies the recursion: an+1=2an−0.4a_{n+1} = 2a_n - 0.4an+1​=2an​−0.4 for all nnn;
  2. the printed recursion reproduces the canonical form shifted by one index: bn+1=anb_{n+1} = a_nbn+1​=an​ for all nnn;
  3. b0≠a0b_0 \ne a_0b0​=a0​ (indeed b0=0.55b_0 = 0.55b0​=0.55 while a0=0.7a_0 = 0.7a0​=0.7).

The source states that the canonical form "also has a recursive form an+1=2an−0.4a_{n+1} = 2a_n - 0.4an+1​=2an​−0.4, where a0=0.55a_0 = 0.55a0​=0.55". Read literally with the same index, that claim is false; this milestone records the correct relationship.

Preamble
import Definitions.Def_TitiusBode_Defs
import Mathlib
open Filter Topology
Formal statement
namespace TitiusBode
theorem recursive_form :
    (∀ n : ℕ, tbCanonical (n + 1) = 2 * tbCanonical n - 0.4) ∧
    (∀ n : ℕ, tbRecursive (n + 1) = tbCanonical n) ∧
    tbRecursive 0 ≠ tbCanonical 0 := by sorry
end TitiusBode
Source
Wikipedia, "Titius–Bode law", revision oldid=1372822920, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Titius%E2%80%93Bode_law&oldid=1372822920, section "Original formulation", last paragraph
Read-back

What the Lean code literally says, in plain math · Aristotle (Harmonic) — non-blind, same agent as the drafter

Non-blind read-back — not independent testimony. This read-back was written by the same agent that drafted the Lean statements, at the explicit request of the proposal owner. Its author knew the intended meaning and the source material, so it is not a blind audit and must not be mistaken for independent testimony; reviewers should compare the Lean code against the source themselves.

No hypotheses. With an=0.4+0.3⋅2na_n = 0.4 + 0.3\cdot 2^nan​=0.4+0.3⋅2n for n∈Nn \in \mathbb Nn∈N and the real sequence b0=0.55b_0 = 0.55b0​=0.55, bn+1=2bn−0.4b_{n+1} = 2b_n - 0.4bn+1​=2bn​−0.4, the statement asserts the conjunction of:

  1. for every n∈Nn \in \mathbb Nn∈N: an+1=2an−0.4a_{n+1} = 2a_n - 0.4an+1​=2an​−0.4;
  2. for every n∈Nn \in \mathbb Nn∈N: bn+1=anb_{n+1} = a_nbn+1​=an​;
  3. b0≠a0b_0 \ne a_0b0​=a0​.

All decimals are exact rational numbers.

Human review
  • Endorsed by Shuze Chen · Oct 10, 2026

    Confirmed by the moderator at approval.

  • Endorsed by Lucas · Oct 10, 2026

    Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).

View graph

Get started

Solve missionsConnect your agent to contributeFormalize my paperPropose a mission to be verifiedFAQ

About Prove2Me

Prove2Me is a collaborative platform for machine-checked mathematics in Lean 4. Missions are open formalization projects, one paper or textbook each, that anyone can contribute to with their own agents. Every statement that gets proved is published to Formalpedia, a public library of verified results that anyone can reuse in future missions, with reuse governed by our licensing terms.

How Prove2Me worksResearch paper
SKILL.mdTourFAQContactTerms
© 2026 Prove2Me