arXiv:2602.13300v2
Abstract
The purpose of this article is two-folds. Firstly, we establish two sufficient conditions under which the sequence is non-periodic, where is an arithmetic function. As consequences, we deduce that the sequences associated with the Ramanujan tau function as well as the Fourier coefficients of certain normalized Eisenstein series modulo are non-periodic. Further, we deduce that the sequence arising from Nathanson's totient function , the classical Euler's totient function , sum of divisor function , their Dirichlet convolution , Jordan's totient function , and unitary totient function modulo , are non-periodic for certain modulo . In addition, we extend a result of Ayad and Kihel \cite{r1} on the non-periodicity of certain arithmetic function . On the other hand, we construct several transcendental numbers arising from the continued fractions attached with , , , , , , , , and .
AI-generated audit
Audit summary
Not a correctness certificate. A green “no issues found” result may include yellow suspected typos or minor formal issues that do not affect substantive soundness. It means this audit found no unresolved substantive error under the stated criteria; it does not replace expert scrutiny or formal verification.
Current report
Detailed mathematical audit
01Statements2 reported findingsNo statement issues found
The two general non-periodicity criteria apply to the listed modular-form coefficients and multiplicative arithmetic functions with the stated modulus restrictions. The decimal constructions use residues in , and the resulting irrationality hypotheses match the continued-fraction transcendence theorem. No false central statement was found.
The non-periodicity criteria cover every listed application
PDF pages 2–4 and 7–10 · Theorems 1.1, 1.3, and 1.6–1.10 · arXiv:2602.13300v2
Eventual periodicity lets the proof multiply a suitably chosen prime index by a new prime in a prescribed progression. Divisibility or square-free multiplicativity then forces a residue different from the periodic one. The Ramanujan congruences, Eisenstein coefficients, and prime-value formulas for the totient and divisor functions supply exactly the two distinct residues required; the exceptional moduli in Theorem 1.3 are precisely those that would collapse them.
The continued-fraction parameters are irrational in every stated case
PDF pages 4–5 and 10–14 · Lemmas 3.3–3.5 and proof of Theorem 1.11 · arXiv:2602.13300v2
A rational base-ten expansion has eventually periodic digits. For the larger moduli attached to and , the extra reduction modulo is shown non-periodic by a prime-progression argument; all other cases restrict the modulus so the residue itself is a decimal digit. The resulting number lies in and is irrational, so the quoted Adamczewski–Bugeaud–Davison theorem applies to the sequence .
02Proofs2 reported findingsNo proof issues found
The Dirichlet-progression contradictions, modular computations, digit non-periodicity lemmas, and final transcendence reduction were checked. The chosen prime factors are distinct, the multiplicativity hypotheses are used only on square-free products, and the modulus restrictions keep all required residues distinct. No incorrect or materially incomplete proof was found.
The prime-progression construction contradicts eventual periodicity
PDF pages 7–8 · opening of Section 3 · arXiv:2602.13300v2
Starting from a prime index beyond the eventual-periodicity threshold, the proof chooses a second prime congruent to modulo the relevant modulus and period. Their product is in the same periodic residue class as the first prime. Divisibility forces zero in Theorem 1.9, while multiplicativity forces in Theorem 1.10, contradicting the prescribed nonzero or distinct residue.
Reduction modulo ten retains enough information for the two unrestricted modulus families
PDF pages 10–12 · Lemmas 3.3–3.5 · arXiv:2602.13300v2
For , the selected prime classes make the reduced value nonzero modulo ten while a divisible composite index gives zero. For , taking finite differences and using reduces periodicity to the elementary carry lemma; the congruence restrictions on exclude both allowed carry residues. These arguments establish non-eventual periodicity of the actual decimal digit sequences used later.
03Novelty0 reported findingsNo novelty concerns found
No non-novelty findings.