The novel which I am reading these days is "Life of Pi". Back in Hyderabad, while I was reading the novel "Perfect" (it was perfectly boring one), Neo had asked me to try this one. And now I am reading it. So, what about it? Actually, there is nothing great till now (page 60+), but I have already liked the book. Here is one small line I actually liked very much.

"If you take two steps towards God, God runs to you". Somehow I found this line to be very strong.

I'll write more, once I finish it.

Now about the class (Fundamental Algorithms). The students are of very varying levels. Keeping them properly entertained is vey difficult task. Doing a lot of explanation will kill the interest of smart students and if I go in a good pace, the non-comp-sci students will find it difficult. How to get the proper trade-off?

What I noticed is that nobody (one or two exceptions are there) is able to think in an abstract way. Everyone wants everything with very concrete examples and stuff. I think, this is because they are not thinking enough. May be they are yet to be tuned to the wavelength/frequency of theoretical computer science.

Those who are slightly inclined towards mathematics, please try to solve the following problem. (Those who have done their bachelors in computer science are enough inclined towards mathematics)

Express g(n) in terms of some fibonacci number.

(Fibonacci series - 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, ... I dont have a F(0), it starts with F(1))

Please try, and let me know the answer. Also tell me how was your approach. And if you are not able to solve it, let me know that too.

Signing off, Sands.

PS1: I am doing this blogging from my office. I should rethink about this action.

PS2: Life is unbelievably busy now. So, just thought of putting things in blog, rather than sending some mails.

"If you take two steps towards God, God runs to you". Somehow I found this line to be very strong.

I'll write more, once I finish it.

Now about the class (Fundamental Algorithms). The students are of very varying levels. Keeping them properly entertained is vey difficult task. Doing a lot of explanation will kill the interest of smart students and if I go in a good pace, the non-comp-sci students will find it difficult. How to get the proper trade-off?

What I noticed is that nobody (one or two exceptions are there) is able to think in an abstract way. Everyone wants everything with very concrete examples and stuff. I think, this is because they are not thinking enough. May be they are yet to be tuned to the wavelength/frequency of theoretical computer science.

Those who are slightly inclined towards mathematics, please try to solve the following problem. (Those who have done their bachelors in computer science are enough inclined towards mathematics)

g(1) = 1

g(2) = 2

g(n) = g(n-1) * g(n-2) ; n > 2

g(2) = 2

g(n) = g(n-1) * g(n-2) ; n > 2

Express g(n) in terms of some fibonacci number.

(Fibonacci series - 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, ... I dont have a F(0), it starts with F(1))

Please try, and let me know the answer. Also tell me how was your approach. And if you are not able to solve it, let me know that too.

Signing off, Sands.

PS1: I am doing this blogging from my office. I should rethink about this action.

PS2: Life is unbelievably busy now. So, just thought of putting things in blog, rather than sending some mails.

## 7 comments:

I read Life of Pi... after few pages I felt like it dragged and dragged and dragged

When you said g(n) = g(n-1) + g(n-2), it's already in terms of some fibonacci no: rite? So what is the puzzle? I did not get it.

g(n) = ((F(n-1) + F(n-2))**2 - (F(n-1))**2 - (F(n-2))**2)/2

something like this...

--

Hiran

that won't work anyway though.

--

hiran

pretty simple actually .. it ends up being g(n) = 2^(F(n-1)) where F(N) is a fibonnaci no ?

Life of Pi is an interesting book.

@thanu

Thanks for visiting my page. Anyway, after I put the post, I didnt get time to read it :( (waiting for weekend)

@vimal

you didnt bother to read it properly

@hiran

Thanks buddy. But MallyBoy has given the right answer.

@Malluboy

Thanks dude, Your answer is CORRECT. How did you reach there? Do you have a proof?

Also may I know you identity?

@Karthik

Why didnt you comment?

- Sands.

i did not.

read it as + rather than *. i dunno why. opera rendered it correctly. i guess the proof can be easily given by mathematical induction. :)

Post a Comment