<html><head><meta name="color-scheme" content="light dark"></head><body><pre style="word-wrap: break-word; white-space: pre-wrap;">\documentclass[12pt,reqno]{article}

\usepackage[usenames]{color}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{amscd}

\usepackage[colorlinks=true,
linkcolor=webgreen,
filecolor=webbrown,
citecolor=webgreen]{hyperref}

\definecolor{webgreen}{rgb}{0,.5,0}
\definecolor{webbrown}{rgb}{.6,0,0}

\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{float}

\usepackage{psfig}
\usepackage{graphics,amsmath,amssymb}
\usepackage{amsthm}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{epsf}

\setlength{\textwidth}{6.5in}
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{.1in}
\setlength{\evensidemargin}{.1in}
\setlength{\topmargin}{-.1in}
\setlength{\textheight}{8.4in}

\newcommand{\seqnum}[1]{\href{http://oeis.org/#1}{\underline{#1}}}

\begin{document}

\begin{center}
\epsfxsize=4in
\leavevmode\epsffile{logo129.eps}
\end{center}

\theoremstyle{plain}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}

\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem{example}[theorem]{Example}
\newtheorem{conjecture}[theorem]{Conjecture}

\theoremstyle{remark}
\newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}

\begin{center}
\vskip 1cm{\LARGE\bf 
Powers of Two as Sums of \\
\vskip .1in
Two Lucas Numbers
}
\vskip 1cm
\large
Jhon J.~Bravo\\
Mathematics Department \\
University of Cauca \\
Street 5 No.~4-70 \\
Popay\'an, Cauca \\
Colombia \\
\href{mailto:jbravo@unicauca.edu.co}{\tt jbravo@unicauca.edu.co} \\
\ \\
Florian Luca\\
School of Mathematics\\
University of the Witwatersrand\\
P.~O.~Box Wits 2050 \\
South Africa\\
and \\
Mathematical Institute \\
UNAM Juriquilla \\
Santiago de Quer\'etaro 76230\\
Quer\'etaro de Arteaga\\ 
Mexico \\
\href{mailto:fluca@matmor.unam.mx}{\tt fluca@matmor.unam.mx} \\
\end{center}

\vskip .2 in

\begin{abstract}
Let $(L_n)_{n\geq 0}$ be the Lucas sequence given by $L_0=2$, $L_1=1$
and $L_{n+2}=L_{n+1}+L_{n}$ for $n\geq 0$. In this paper, we are
interested in finding all powers of two which are sums of two Lucas
numbers, i.e., we study the Diophantine equation $L_{n}+L_{m}=2^a$ in
nonnegative integers $n$, $m$, and $a$. The proof of our main theorem uses
lower bounds for linear forms in logarithms, properties of continued
fractions, and a version of the Baker-Davenport reduction method in
diophantine approximation. This paper continues our previous work where
we obtained a similar result for the Fibonacci numbers.
\end{abstract}


\section{Introduction}

Let $(F_n)_{n\geq 0}$ be the \emph{Fibonacci sequence} given by $F_0=0$, $F_1=1$ and $F_{n+2}=F_{n+1}+F_{n}$ for all $n\geq 0$. The Fibonacci numbers are famous for possessing wonderful and amazing properties. They are accompanied by the sequence of \emph{Lucas numbers}, which is as important as the Fibonacci sequence. The Lucas sequence $(L_n)_{n\geq 0}$ follows the same recursive pattern as the Fibonacci numbers, but with initial conditions $L_0=2$ and $L_1=1$. 

The study of properties of the terms of such sequences, or more
generally, linear recurrence sequences, has a very long history and has
generated a huge literature. For the beauty and rich applications of
these numbers and their relatives, one can see Koshy's book \cite{Kos01}.

For example, a remarkable property of the Fibonacci sequence is that 1,
2 and 8 are the only Fibonacci numbers which are powers of 2. One proof
of this fact follows from Carmichael's primitive divisor theorem
\cite{Car}, which states that for $n$ greater than 12, the $n$th
Fibonacci number $F_n$ has at least one prime factor that is not a
factor of any previous Fibonacci number (see the paper of Bilu, Hanrot,
and Voutier \cite{Bilu} for the most general version of the above
statement). Similarly, it is well known that 1, 2 and 4 are the only
powers of 2 that appear in the Lucas sequence.

The problem of finding all perfect powers in the Fibonacci sequence and the Lucas sequence was a famous open problem finally solved in 2006 in a paper in {\it Annals of Mathematics} by Bugeaud, Mignotte, and Siksek \cite{Bug}. In their work, they applied a combination of Baker's method, the modular approach and some classical techniques to show that the only perfect powers in the Fibonacci sequence are 0, 1, 8 and 144, and the only perfect powers in the Lucas sequence are 1 and 4. A detailed account of this problem can be found in \cite[Section~10]{Bug}.

In our recent paper \cite{BL13}, we found all powers of 2 which are the sums of at most two Fibonacci numbers. Specifically, we proved the following.
\begin{theorem} \label{teo-caseFib}
The only solutions of the Diophantine equation $F_{n}+F_{m}=2^a$ in positive integers $n,m$ and $a$ with $n\geq m$ are given by
\[
2F_1=2, \quad 2F_2=2, \quad 2F_3=4, \quad 2F_6=16, 
\]
and
\[
F_2+F_1=2, \quad F_4+F_1=4, \quad F_4+F_2=4, \quad  F_5+F_4=8, \quad F_7+F_4=16.   
\]
\end{theorem}

In this paper, we prove an analogue of Theorem \ref{teo-caseFib} when the sequence of Fibonacci numbers is replaced by the sequence of the Lucas numbers, i.e., we extend our previous work \cite{BL13}  and determine all the solutions of the Diophantine equation
\begin{equation}\label{eqn1}
L_{n}+L_{m}=2^a
\end{equation}
in nonnegative integers $n\ge m$ and $a$. 

Similar problems have recently been investigated. For example, repdigits which are sums of at most three Fibonacci numbers were found by Luca \cite{FL12}; Fibonacci numbers which are sums of two repdigits were obtained by D\'iaz and Luca \cite{SL11}, while factorials which are sums of at most three Fibonacci numbers were found by Luca and Siksek \cite{LS10}.   

We prove the following result. 

\begin{theorem} \label{teo1}
All solutions of the Diophantine equation \eqref{eqn1} in nonnegative integers $n\ge m$ and $a$, are
\[
2L_0=4, \quad 2L_1=2, \quad 2L_3=8, \quad L_2+L_1=4, \quad  L_4+L_1=8 \quad \text{and} \quad  L_7+L_2=32.   
\]
\end{theorem}
\vspace{0.3cm}

Let us give a brief overview of our strategy for proving Theorem \ref{teo1}. First, we rewrite equation \eqref{eqn1} in suitable ways in order to obtain two different linear forms in logarithms which are both nonzero and small. Next, we use a lower bound on such nonzero linear forms in two logarithms due to Laurent, Mignotte, and Nesterenko as well as a general lower bound due to Matveev to find an absolute upper bound for $n$; hence, an absolute upper bound for $m$ and $a$, which we then reduce using standard facts concerning continued fractions. 

In this paper, we follow the approach and the presentation described in \cite{BL13}.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\section{Auxiliary results} 

Before proceeding further, we recall that the Binet formula 
\[
L_n=\alpha^n+\beta^n \quad \text{holds for all} \quad n\geq 0, 
\]
where
\[
\alpha:=\frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2} \quad \text{and} \quad \beta:=\frac{1-\sqrt{5}}{2}
\]
are the roots of the characteristic equation $x^2-x-1=0$ of $(L_n)_{n\geq 0}$. This will be an important ingredient in what follows. In particular, the inequality 
\begin{equation} \label{desfib}
\alpha^{n-1}\leq L_n \leq 2\alpha^{n} 
\end{equation}
holds for all $n\geq 0$. 

In order to prove Theorem \ref{teo1}, we need a result of Laurent, Mignotte, and Nesterenko \cite{LMN95} about linear forms in  two logarithms. But first, some notation.

Let $\eta$ be an algebraic number of degree $d$ with minimal polynomial 
\[
a_0x^d+a_1x^{d-1}+\cdots+a_d=a_0\prod_{i=1}^{d}(X-\eta^{(i)}),
\]
where the $a_i$'s are relatively prime integers with $a_0&gt;0$ and the $\eta^{(i)}$'s are conjugates of $\eta$. Then
\[
h(\eta)=\frac{1}{d}\left(\log a_0+\sum_{i=1}^{d}\log\left(\max\{|\eta^{(i)}|,1\}\right)\right)
\]
is called the \emph{logarithmic height} of $\eta$. In particular, if $\eta=p/q$ is a rational number with $\gcd(p,q)=1$ and $q&gt;0$, then $h(\eta)=\log \max \{|p|,q\}$. 

The following properties of the logarithmic height, which will be used in the next section without special reference, are also known:
\begin{itemize}
\item $h(\eta\pm\gamma)\leq h(\eta) + h(\gamma)+\log 2$.
\item $h(\eta\gamma^{\pm 1})\leq h(\eta)+h(\gamma)$.
\item $h(\eta^{s})=|s|h(\eta)$.
\end{itemize}

With the above notation, Laurent, Mignotte, and Nesterenko \cite[Corollary~1]{LMN95} proved the following theorem.

\begin{theorem}\label{teoLMN}
Let $\gamma_1, \gamma_2$ be two non-zero algebraic numbers, and let $\log \gamma_1$ and $\log \gamma_2$ be any determinations of their logarithms. Put $D=[\mathbb{Q}(\gamma_1,\gamma_2):\mathbb{Q}]/[\mathbb{R}(\gamma_1,\gamma_2):\mathbb{R}]$, and 
\[
\Gamma:=b_2\log \gamma_2-b_1\log \gamma_1,
\]
where $b_1$ and $b_2$ are positive integers.  Further, let $A_1, A_2$ be real numbers $&gt;1$ such that 
\[
\log A_i\geq \max\left\{h(\gamma_i),\frac{|\log \gamma_i|}{D}, \frac{1}{D}\right\}, \quad \text{$i=1,2$}.
\]
Then, assuming that $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ are multiplicatively independent, we have  
\[
\log|\Gamma|&gt;-30.9 \cdot D^4\left(\max\left\{\log b^{\prime},\frac{21}{D},\frac{1}{2} \right\} \right)^2 \log A_1 \cdot  \log A_2,
\]
where
\[
b^{\prime}=\frac{b_1}{D\log A_2}+\frac{b_2}{D\log A_1}.
\]
\end{theorem}

We shall also need the following general lower bound for linear forms in logarithms due to Matveev \cite{Matveev} (see also the paper of Bugeaud, Mignotte, and Siksek \cite[Theorem~9.4]{Bug}).

\begin{theorem}[Matveev's theorem]\label{teoMatveev}
Assume that $\gamma_1, \ldots, \gamma_t$ are positive real algebraic numbers in a real algebraic number field $\mathbb{K}$ of degree $D$, $b_1,\ldots,b_t$ are rational integers, and 
\[
\Lambda:=\gamma_1^{b_1}\cdots\gamma_t^{b_t}-1,
\]
is not zero. Then
\[
|\Lambda|&gt;\exp\left(-1.4\cdot 30^{t+3}\cdot t^{4.5}\cdot D^2(1+\log D)(1+\log B)A_1\cdots A_t\right),
\]
where
\[
B\geq \max\{|b_1|,\ldots,|b_t|\},
\]
and
\[
A_i\geq \max\{Dh(\gamma_i),|\log \gamma_i|, 0.16\}, \quad \text{for all} \quad  i=1,\ldots,t.
\] 
\end{theorem} 

In 1998, Dujella and Peth\H o in \cite[Lemma~5 (a)]{DP} gave a version of the reduction method based on the Baker-Davenport lemma \cite{Baker-Davenport}.  To conclude this section of auxiliary results, we present the following lemma from \cite{BL1}, which is an immediate variation of the result due to Dujella and Peth\H o from \cite{DP}, and will be one of the key tools used in this paper to reduce the upper bounds on the variables of the equation \eqref{eqn1}.

\begin{lemma} \label{reduce}
Let $M$ be a positive integer, let $p/q$ be a convergent of the continued fraction of the irrational $\gamma$ such that $q&gt;6M$, and let $A,B,\mu$ be some real numbers with $A&gt;0$ and $B&gt;1$. Let $\epsilon:=||\mu q||-M||\gamma q||$, where $||\cdot||$ denotes the distance from the nearest integer. If $\epsilon &gt;0$, then there is no solution to the inequality
\[
0&lt;u\gamma-v+\mu&lt;AB^{-w},
\]
in positive integers $u,v$ and $w$ with
\[
u\leq M \quad\text{and}\quad w\geq \frac{\log(Aq/\epsilon)}{\log B}.
\]
\end{lemma}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\section{The Proof of Theorem \ref{teo1}} 

Assume throughout that equation \eqref{eqn1} holds. First of all, observe that if $n=m$, then the original equation \eqref{eqn1} becomes $L_n=2^{a-1}$. But the only solutions of this latter equation are $(n,a)\in \{(0,2),(1,1),(3,3)\}$ and this fact has already been mentioned in the Introduction. So, from now on, we assume that $n&gt;m$.

If $n\leq 200$, then a brute force search with \emph{Mathematica} in the range $0\leq m &lt;n\leq 200$ gives the solutions $(n,m,a)\in \{(2,1,2),(4,1,3),(7,2,5)\}$. This took a few seconds. Thus, for the rest of the paper we assume that $n&gt;200$.

Let us now get a relation between $n$ and $a$. Combining \eqref{eqn1} with the right inequality of \eqref{desfib}, one gets that  
\[
2^{a} \leq 2\alpha^{n}+2\alpha^{m}&lt;2^{n+1}+2^{m+1}=2^{n+1}(1+2^{m-n})\leq 2^{n+1}(1+2^{-1})&lt;2^{n+2},
\]
which leads to $a\leq n+1$. This estimate is essential for our purpose. 

On the other hand, we rewrite equation \eqref{eqn1} as
\[
\alpha^n-2^a=-\beta^n-L_m.
\] 
We now take absolute values in the above relation obtaining
\[
\left|\alpha^n-2^a\right|\leq |\beta|^n+L_m&lt;\frac{1}{2}+2\alpha^m.
\]
Dividing both sides of the above expression by $\alpha^{n}$ and taking into account that $n&gt;m$, we get
\begin{equation} \label{deflambda1}
\left|1-2^{a}\cdot\alpha^{-n}\right|&lt;\frac{3}{\alpha^{n-m}}.
\end{equation}
In order to apply Theorem \ref{teoLMN}, we take $\gamma_1:=\alpha$, $\gamma_2:=2$, $b_1:=n$ and $b_2:=a$. So,
\[
\Gamma:=b_2\log\gamma_2-b_1\log\gamma_1,
\]
and therefore estimation \eqref{deflambda1} can be rewritten as 
\begin{equation} \label{deflambda1B}
\left|1-e^{\Gamma}\right|&lt;\frac{3}{\alpha^{n-m}}.
\end{equation}
The algebraic number field containing $\gamma_1,\gamma_2$ is $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{5})$, so we can take $D:=2$. By using \eqref{eqn1} and the Binet formula for the Lucas sequence, we have   
\[
\alpha^n=L_n-\beta^n&lt;L_n+1\leq L_n+L_m=2^a.
\]
Consequently, $1&lt;2^a\,\alpha^{-n}$ and so $\Gamma&gt;0$.  This, together with \eqref{deflambda1B}, gives
\begin{equation} \label{des-gamma}
0&lt;\Gamma &lt;\frac{3}{\alpha^{n-m}},
\end{equation}
where we have also used the fact that $x\leq e^x-1$ for all $x\in\mathbb{R}$. Hence, 
\begin{equation} \label{exp-gamma}
\log\Gamma &lt;\log 3-(n-m)\log\alpha.
\end{equation}
Note further that $h(\gamma_1)=(\log\alpha)/2=0.2406\cdots$ and $h(\gamma_2)=\log 2=0.6931\cdots$; thus, we can choose $\log A_1:=0.5$ and $\log A_2:=0.7$. Finally, by recalling that $a\leq n+1$, we get  
\[
b^{\prime}=\frac{n}{1.4}+a &lt; 1.71429\,n+1&lt;2n. 
\]
Since $\alpha$ and 2 are multiplicatively independent, we have, by Theorem \ref{teoLMN}, that 
\begin{align}
\log \Gamma\geq &amp; \,-30.9\cdot 2^4\cdot \left(\max\left\{\log(2n),21/2,1/2\right\} \right)^2\cdot 0.5\cdot 0.7 \notag\\
&gt;&amp; -174\cdot \left(\max\left\{\log(2n),21/2,1/2\right\} \right)^2. \label{aplicLMN}
\end{align}
We now combine \eqref{exp-gamma} and \eqref{aplicLMN} to obtain
\begin{equation} \label{res-aplic-LMN}
(n-m)\log\alpha&lt;180\cdot \left(\max\left\{\log(2n),21/2\right\} \right)^2. 
\end{equation}
Let us now get a second linear form in logarithms. To this end, we now rewrite \eqref{eqn1} as follows:
\[
\alpha^n(1+\alpha^{m-n})-2^a=-\beta^n-\beta^m.
\] 
Taking absolute values in the above relation and using the fact that $\beta=(1-\sqrt{5})/2$, we get
\[
|\alpha^n(1+\alpha^{m-n})-2^a|=|\beta|^n+|\beta|^m&lt;2 
\]
for all $n&gt;200$ and $m\geq 0$. Dividing both sides of the above inequality by the first term of the left-hand side, we obtain
\begin{equation} 	\label{deflambda2}
\left|1-2^{a}\cdot \alpha^{-n}\cdot (1+\alpha^{m-n})^{-1}\right|&lt;\frac{2}{\alpha^{n}}.
\end{equation}
We are now ready to apply Matveev's result Theorem \ref{teoMatveev}. To do this, we take the parameters $t:=3$ and
\[
\gamma_1:=2, \quad \gamma_2:=\alpha, \quad \gamma_3:=1+\alpha^{m-n}.
\]
We take $b_1:=a$, $b_2:=-n$ and $b_3:=-1$. As before, $\mathbb{K}:=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{5})$ contains $\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\gamma_3$ and has $D:=[\mathbb{K}:\mathbb{Q}]=2$. To see why the left-hand side of \eqref{deflambda2} is not zero, note that otherwise, we would get the relation
\begin{equation} \label{exp1}
2^a=\alpha^n+\alpha^m.
\end{equation}
Conjugating the above relation in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{5})$, we get
\begin{equation} \label{exp2}
2^a=\beta^n+\beta^m.
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{exp1} and \eqref{exp2}, we obtain
\[
\alpha ^n&lt;\alpha^n+\alpha^m=|\beta^n+\beta^m|\leq |\beta|^n+|\beta|^m&lt;2,
\]
which is impossible for $n&gt;200$. Hence, indeed the left-hand side of inequality \eqref{deflambda2} is nonzero.

In this application of Matveev's theorem we take $A_1:=1.4$ and $A_2:=0.5$. Since $a\leq n+1$ it follows that we can take $B:=n+1$. Let us now estimate $h(\gamma_3)$. We begin by observing that 
\[
\gamma_3=1+\alpha^{m-n}&lt;2 \quad \text{and} \quad \gamma_3^{-1}=\frac{1}{1+\alpha^{m-n}}&lt;1,
\]
so that $|\log \gamma_3|&lt;1$. Next, notice that
\[
h(\gamma_3) \leq |m-n|\left(\frac{\log \alpha}{2}\right)+\log 2=\log 2+(n-m)\left(\frac{\log \alpha}{2}\right).
\]
Hence, we can take
\[
A_3:=2+(n-m)\log \alpha &gt;\max\{2h(\gamma_3),|\log \gamma_3|,0.16\}.
\]
Now Matveev's theorem implies that a lower bound on the left-hand side of \eqref{deflambda2} is
\[
\exp\left(-C\cdot (1+\log(n+1)) \cdot 1.4 \cdot 0.5 \cdot (2+(n-m)\log \alpha \right)
\]
where $C:=1.4\cdot 30^{6}\cdot 3^{4.5}\cdot 2^2 (1+\log 2)&lt;9.7\times 10^{11}$.  So, inequality \eqref{deflambda2} yields
\begin{equation} \label{exp3}
n\log \alpha-\log 2 &lt; 1.36\times 10^{12}\log n \cdot (2+(n-m)\log \alpha),
\end{equation}
where we used the inequality $1+\log(n+1)&lt;2\log n$, which holds because $n&gt;200$.

Using now \eqref{res-aplic-LMN} in the right-most term of the above inequality \eqref{exp3} and performing the respective calculations, we arrive at 
\begin{equation} \label{exp-fin-n}
n&lt;6\times 10^{14}\log n\cdot \left(\max\left\{\log(2n),21/2\right\} \right)^2.
\end{equation}
If $\max\left\{\log(2n),21/2\right\}=21/2$, it then follows from \eqref{exp-fin-n} that $n&lt; 8\times 10^{16}\log n$ giving $n&lt;3.5\times 10^{18}$. If on the other hand we have that $\max\left\{\log(2n),21/2\right\}=\log(2n)$, then, from \eqref{exp-fin-n}, we get $n&lt; 6\times 10^{14}\log n\log^2(2n)$ and so $n&lt;5.9\times 10^{19}$.  In any case, we have that $n&lt;5.9\times 10^{19}$ always holds. We summarize what we have proved so far in the following lemma.

\begin{lemma}\label{cota_an}
If $(n,m,a)$ is a solution in positive integers of equation \eqref{eqn1} with  $n&gt;m$ and $n&gt;200$, then inequalities 
\[
a\leq n+1&lt;6\times 10^{19}
\]
hold.
\end{lemma}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\section{Reducing the bound on $n$}

After finding an upper bound on $n$ the next step is to reduce it. To do this, we first use some properties of continued fractions to obtain a suitable upper bound on $n-m$, and secondly we use Lemma \ref{reduce} to conclude that $n$ must be relatively small. Let us see. 

Turning back to inequality \eqref{des-gamma}, we obtain 
\[
0&lt;a\log 2-n\log\alpha&lt;\frac{3}{\alpha^{n-m}}.
\]
Dividing across by $\log \alpha$, we get
\begin{equation} \label{Gamma&gt;0}
0&lt;a\gamma-n&lt;\frac{7}{\alpha^{n-m}}, \quad \text{where}\quad \gamma:=\frac{\log 2}{\log \alpha}.
\end{equation}
Let $[a_0,a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4,\ldots]=[1, 2, 3, 1, 2, \ldots]$ be the continued fraction expansion of $\gamma$, and let denote $p_k/q_k$ its $k$th convergent. Recall also that $a&lt;6\times 10^{19}$ by Lemma \ref{cota_an}. 

A quick inspection using \emph{Mathematica} reveals that 
\[
54475119544877440894=q_{44}&lt;6\times 10^{19}&lt;q_{45}=67219577652603468483.
\]
Furthermore, $a_M:=\max\{a_i \mid i=0,1,\ldots,45\}=a_{17}=134$. So, from the known properties of continued fractions, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{aplic-frac-cont}
|a\gamma-n|&gt;\frac{1}{(a_M+2)a}.
\end{equation}
Comparing estimates \eqref{Gamma&gt;0} and \eqref{aplic-frac-cont}, we get right away that 
\[
\alpha^{n-m}&lt;7\cdot 136\cdot a&lt;6\times 10^{22},
\]
leading to $n-m\leq 110$. Let us now work a little bit on \eqref{deflambda2} in order to find an improved upper bound on $n$. Put 
\begin{equation} \label{def-z}
z:=a \log 2-n\log\alpha-\log \varphi(n-m),
\end{equation}
where $\varphi$ is the function given by the formula $\varphi(t):=1+\alpha^{-t}$. Therefore, \eqref{deflambda2} implies that 
\begin{equation} \label{des-z}
|1-e^{z}|&lt;\frac{2}{\alpha^{n}}.
\end{equation} 
Note that $z\neq 0$; thus, we distinguish the following cases. If $z&gt;0$, then, from \eqref{des-z}, we obtain
\[
0&lt;z\leq e^z-1&lt;\frac{2}{\alpha^{n}}.
\]
Replacing $z$ in the above inequality by its formula \eqref{def-z} and dividing both sides of the
resulting inequality by $\log \alpha$, we get
\begin{equation} \label{z&gt;0}
0&lt;a\left(\frac{\log 2}{\log\alpha}\right)-n-\frac{\log \varphi(n-m)}{\log\alpha}&lt;5\cdot\alpha^{-n}.
\end{equation}
We now put
\[
\gamma:=\frac{\log 2}{\log\alpha},\quad \mu:=-\frac{\log\varphi(n-m)}{\log\alpha}, \quad A:=5\quad \text{and}\quad B:=\alpha.
\]
Clearly $\gamma$ is an irrational number. We also put $M:=6\times 10^{19}$, which is an upper bound on $a$ by Lemma \ref{cota_an}. We therefore apply Lemma \ref{reduce} to inequality \eqref{z&gt;0} for all choices $n-m\in\{1,\ldots,110\}$ except when $n-m=1,3$ and get that
\[
n&lt;\frac{\log(Aq/\epsilon)}{\log B},
\] 
where $q&gt;6M$ is a denominator of a convergent of the continued fraction of $\gamma$ such that $\epsilon=||\mu q||-M||\gamma q||&gt;0$.  Indeed, with the help of \emph{Mathematica} we find that if $(n,m,a)$ is a possible solution of the equation \eqref{eqn1} with $z&gt;0$ and $n-m\neq 1,3$, then $n\leq 130$. This is false because our assumption that $n&gt;200$.

Suppose now that $z&lt;0$. First, note that $2/\alpha^{n}&lt;1/2$ since $n&gt;200$. Then, from \eqref{des-z}, we have that $|1-e^{z}|&lt;1/2$ and therefore $e^{|z|}&lt;2$. Since $z&lt;0$, we have
\[
0&lt;|z|\leq e^{|z|}-1=e^{|z|}|e^{z}-1|&lt;\frac{4}{\alpha^{n}}.
\]
Then, by the same arguments used for proving \eqref{z&gt;0}, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{z&lt;0}
0&lt;n\left(\frac{\log \alpha}{\log 2}\right)-a+\frac{\log\varphi(n-m)}{\log 2}&lt;6\cdot\alpha^{-n}.
\end{equation}
Here, we also take $M:=6\times 10^{19}$, which is an upper bound on $n$ by Lemma \ref{cota_an}, and we apply Lemma \ref{reduce} to inequality \eqref{z&lt;0} for each $n-m\in\{1,\ldots,110\}$ except for $n-m=1,3$. In this case, with the help of \emph{Mathematica}, we find that if $(n,m,a)$ is a possible solution of the equation \eqref{eqn1} with $z&lt;0$ and $n-m\neq 1,3$, then $n\leq 120 $, which is false. 

Finally, we deal with the cases when $n-m=1$ and 3. We cannot study these cases as before because when applying Lemma \ref{reduce} to the expressions \eqref{z&gt;0} or \eqref{z&lt;0} (according to whether $z$ is positive or negative, respectively), the corresponding parameter $\mu$ appearing in Lemma \ref{reduce} is either 
\[
-\frac{\log\varphi(t)}{\log\alpha}=
\begin{cases}
-1, &amp; \text{if } t=1; \\ 1-\frac{\log 2}{\log\alpha}, &amp; \text {if } t=3. 
\end{cases}
\quad \text{or} \quad 
\frac{\log\varphi(t)}{\log 2}=
\begin{cases}
\frac{\log\alpha}{\log 2}, &amp; \text{if } t=1; \\  1-\frac{\log \alpha}{\log 2}, &amp; \text{if } t=3.
\end{cases}
\]
But, in any case, one can see that the corresponding value of $\epsilon$ from Lemma \ref{reduce} is always negative and therefore the reduction method is not useful for reducing the bound on $n$ in these instances. For this reason we need to treat these cases differently. 

All we want to do here is solve the equations
\begin{equation} \label{eq:n-m=1,3(A)}
L_{m+1}+L_m=2^a \quad \text{and} \quad L_{m+3}+L_m=2^a
\end{equation}
in positive integers $m$ and $a$ with $m+1&gt;200$ and $m+3&gt;200$, respectively. But, by definition  $L_{m+1}+L_m=L_{m+2}$. Moreover, $L_{m+3}+L_m=2L_{m+2}$, which is easily checked. We see from the above discussion that equations \eqref{eq:n-m=1,3(A)} are transformed into the simpler equations
\begin{equation} \label{eq:n-m=1,3(B)}
L_{m+2}=2^a \quad \text{and} \quad L_{m+2}=2^{a-1}
\end{equation}
to be resolved in positive integers $m$ and $a$ with $m&gt;199$ and $m&gt;197$, respectively. But, we quickly see that the above equations \eqref{eq:n-m=1,3(B)} have no solutions for $m&gt;1$ as mentioned earlier.  This completes the analysis of the cases when $n-m=1,3$ and therefore the proof of Theorem \ref{teo1}.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Acknowledgments}

We thank the referee for suggestions which improved the quality of this
paper. J.~J.~B.~was partially supported by University of Cauca and
F.~L.~was supported in part by Project PAPIIT IN104512, UNAM, Mexico.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\begin{thebibliography}{99}

\bibitem{Baker-Davenport} A.~Baker and H.~Davenport, The equations $3x^2-2 =y^2$ and $8x^2-7=z^2$, \emph{Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser}. {\bf 20} (1969), 129--137.

\bibitem{Bilu} Yu.~Bilu, G.~Hanrot, and P.~Voutier, Existence of primitive divisors of Lucas and Lehmer numbers (with an appendix by M.~Mignotte), \emph{J. Reine Angew. Math}. {\bf 539} (2001), 75--122.

\bibitem{Bug} Y.~Bugeaud, M.~Mignotte, and S.~Siksek, Classical and modular approaches to exponential Diophantine equations. I. Fibonacci and Lucas perfect powers, \emph{Ann. of Math}. \textbf{163} (2006), 969--1018. 

\bibitem{BL1} J.~J.~Bravo and F.~Luca, On a conjecture about repdigits in $k-$generalized Fibonacci sequences, \emph{Publ. Math. Debrecen} {\bf 82} (2013), 623--639.

\bibitem{BL13} J.~J.~Bravo and F.~Luca, On the Diophantine equation $F_n+F_m=2^a$, preprint, 2014.

\bibitem{Car} R.~D.~Carmichael, On the numerical factors of the arithmetic forms $\alpha^n\pm \beta^n$, \emph{Ann. Math}. {\bf 15} (1913), 30--70.

\bibitem{SL11} S.~D\'iaz Alvarado and F.~Luca, Fibonacci numbers which are sums of two repdigits, \emph{Proceedings of the XIVth International Conference on Fibonacci numbers and their applications}, 2011,  pp.~97--111.

\bibitem{DP} A.~Dujella and A.~Peth\H o, A generalization of a theorem of Baker and Davenport, \emph{Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser}. \textbf{49} (1998), no.~195, 291--306. 

\bibitem{Kos01} T.~Koshy, \emph{Fibonacci and Lucas numbers with Applications}, Wiley-Interscience Publications, 2001.

\bibitem{LMN95} M.~Laurent, M.~Mignotte, and Y.~Nesterenko, Formes lin\'eaires en deux logarithmes et d\'eterminants d'interpolation, (French) (Linear forms in two logarithms and interpolation determinants),  \emph{J. Number Theory} {\bf 55} (1995), 285--321.

\bibitem{LS10} F.~Luca and S.~Siksek, Factorials expressible as sums of two and three Fibonacci numbers, \emph{Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc}. {\bf 53} (2010), 747--763.

\bibitem{FL12} F.~Luca, Repdigits as sums of three Fibonacci numbers, \emph{Math. Commun}. \textbf{17} (2012), 1--11. 

\bibitem{Matveev} E.~M.~Matveev, An explicit lower bound for a homogeneous rational
linear form in the logarithms of algebraic numbers, II, \emph{Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Ser. Mat}. \textbf{64} (2000), 125--180. Translation in \emph{Izv. Math}. \textbf{64} (2000), 1217--1269.

\end{thebibliography}

\bigskip
\hrule
\bigskip

\noindent 2010 {\it Mathematics Subject Classification}: Primary 11B39; Secondary 11J86. 

\noindent \emph{Keywords: } Fibonacci number, Lucas number, linear forms in logarithms, continued fraction, reduction method.

\bigskip
\hrule
\bigskip

\noindent (Concerned with sequences 
\seqnum{A000032} and
\seqnum{A000045}.)

\bigskip
\hrule
\bigskip

\vspace*{+.1in}
\noindent
Received March 17 2014;
revised versions received July 22 2014; July 30 2014.
Published in {\it Journal of Integer Sequences}, July 30 2014.

\bigskip
\hrule
\bigskip

\noindent
Return to
\htmladdnormallink{Journal of Integer Sequences home page}{http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/journals/JIS/}.
\vskip .1in


\end{document}

                                                                                

</pre></body></html>