A062679: Something's wrong

[Robert G. Wilson v]

Or how about the sequence "Numbers n which are not prime which have the digit 9 in 
its divisors except 1. 1691 is the first such entry.

Bob.

זקיר סעידוב - ד"ר/Zakir Seidov Ph.D. wrote:
> Sorry,
> sure 9 and 81 are not OK, because they have divisors (3, 27) not 
> containing 9;
> 1691=89*19 is the least non-prime number in A062679.
> so it's OK with entries and name and examples in A062679
> (and Neil,
> I guess I may send my sequence "primes with maximal digit = 9"
> with comment: "first differs from A062679 in 1691, or smth like").
> 
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: Michele Dondi [mailto:blazar at pcteor1.mi.infn.it]
>     Sent: Fri 5/6/2005 4:51 PM
>     To: זקיר סעידוב - ד"ר/Zakir Seidov Ph.D.
>     Cc: seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr
>     Subject: Re: A062679: Something's wrong
> 
>     On Fri, 6 May 2005, [utf-8] ~Vק~Yר סע~Y~S~U~Q - ~S\"ר/Zakir
>     Seidov Ph.D. wrote:
> 
>      >       something's wrong with A062679:
>      >       enties are all "primes with maximal digit = 9"
>      >       (which I wished to submit?!),
>      >       while name and example say quite other things
>      >       (why e.g.  are 9, 81,... absent?)
> 
>     Do 9, 81,... happen to be primes?
> 
> 
>     Michele
>     --
>      >What is the current status of chaos theory? A decade ago it was
>     supposed
>      >to be The Next Big Thing.
>     Yeah, well, that kind of thing is notoriously hard to predict, longterm.
>     - Lee Rudolph in sci.math, "Re: Chaos Theory?"
>