Jud McCranie judmccr at bellsouth.net
Mon Apr 14 00:04:48 CEST 2003

A80435 seems ambiguous or incorrect.  I wrote to the author asking for a 
clarification 4 days ago, but I haven't gotten a reply.

First, why isn't 7 in the sequence?  Is it because it doesn't yield any new 
primes when summed with the previous terms?  If that is correct, then why 
isn't 14 in the sequence, since it yields 14+3=17?

More information about the SeqFan mailing list