A063769 (and others)

[Gabriel Cunningham]

You are indeed true that I did not intend that implication. I'll submit a
clarification to my comment.

Gabe

On 8/4/06, franktaw at netscape.net <franktaw at netscape.net> wrote:

> Looking at this, I noticed that the comment in A080907 implies that no
> number can have an aliquot sequence that terminates in a cycle of more
> than one element unless it is part of that cycle.  I suspect the author
> did not intend that implication; I would be very surprised if it was
> true.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.seqfan.eu/pipermail/seqfan/attachments/20060808/57eb8f45/attachment-0003.htm>