Should Pell be extended by one term?

[Jack Brennen]

The Pell sequence should not, IMHO, be extended.  As the Pell is normally
defined, with P(0)=0, P(1)=1, there are relationships between the index
and the Pell number.

In particular, I'm thinking of the Pell primality test:

   If N is an odd prime, then P(N)-kronecker(2,N) is divisible by N.

In addition, "most" composite numbers fail this test, so it makes a
useful pseudoprimality test.  The first few odd composite numbers which
are Pell pseudoprimes (that pass the above test) are:

   169,385,741,961,...

A sequence which amazingly enough is not in the OEIS.  :)
I'll probably submit it later tonight.

   Jack