[seqfan] Re: Another planetary sequence

[Alonso Del Arte]

For what it's worth, I would say no. Can you guarantee that nothing is
going to happen to the moons of the outer planets that would render these
numbers outdated?

I have much greater confidence in a sequence like A171467, which lists
transits of Venus. Even if something happens that causes the future
transits of occur on different years than predicted, we still have a good
number of documented transits since the 13th Century or earlier. Someone
searching for "1874, 1882, 2004, 2012" will not be disappointed.

Al

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com> wrote:

> my personal feeling is that that planetary sequence isn't quite interesting
> enough
> for an OEIS entry.  The terms are not integers, and they are certainly
> time-dependent.
> Of course the OEIS may not be around in a billion years, but still!
>
> Best regards
> Neil
>
> Neil J. A. Sloane, President, OEIS Foundation.
> 11 South Adelaide Avenue, Highland Park, NJ 08904, USA.
> Also Visiting Scientist, Math. Dept., Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ.
> Phone: 732 828 6098; home page: http://NeilSloane.com
> Email: njasloane at gmail.com
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Felix Fröhlich <felix.froe at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Dear sequence fans
> >
> > I thought about the following sequence:
> >
> > Ratio of radius of n-th planet (under the current IAU-definition of
> planet)
> > from the Sun to mean radius of its largest natural satellite, rounded to
> > the nearest integer, or 0 if the planet has no natural satellite.
> >
> > a(1)-a(8) are 0, 0, 4, 308, 27, 23, 32, 18
> >
> > The true ratios are of course not integer values, but the terms give an
> > idea of how large the largest moons of the planets are compared to the
> > planets themselves (i.e. these values are still useful for comparison,
> even
> > when rounded to integers in my opinion). The closer the value is to 1,
> the
> > larger the largest moon is relative to its planet. The value for Earth's
> > moon is relatively small, meaning the Moon is large relative to Earth.
> >
> > There are already a number of sequences related to the planets in the
> OEIS,
> > but I would like to hear the opinion of other contributors and/or some of
> > the editors before submitting this, mainly because I think the sequence
> > will likely be rejected.
> >
> > It is probably a "dumb" sequence, not really mathematically significant,
> > but sometimes such sequences are still enjoyable.
> >
> > Best regards
> > Felix
> >
> > --
> > Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
> >
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>



-- 
Alonso del Arte
Author at SmashWords.com
<https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/AlonsoDelarte>
Musician at ReverbNation.com <http://www.reverbnation.com/alonsodelarte>