A053878

[Jud McCranie]

At 09:44 PM 6/9/2005, you wrote:
>At 06:43 PM 6/9/2005, David Wilson wrote:
>>Can we extend A053878 out far enough to show it is not multiplicative?
>
>
>a(52) = 2 (the ratio is 17/15), but a(4)=1 and a(13)=1, so it is not 
>multiplicative.
>
>The first few non-zero terms are #25, 52, 53, 54, 64, which are 7, 2, 3, 
>5, 4 (resp),

Actually I failed to notice that the offset in A53878 is 2.

So the first terms that aren't 1 are #26, 53, 54, 55, 65 so a(26)= 
a(2*13)=7 shows that it isn't multiplicative.  At any rate, depending on 
how you define the offset, one of these terms shows that it isn't "mult".