OEIS on vacation in December

Tue Dec 5 21:17:40 CET 2006

Beautiful is, as I've said, subjective.  It partly depends on what one does
with it. It partly depends on the depth of the mathematical theory. Even for
"base" sequences. To me, for insdtance, this is slightly pretty, although
spawned from something apparently dull and base.

Partial sums of A124167
90, 1080, 11070, 111060, 1111050, 11111040, 111111030,* *1111111020,
11111111010,
111111111000, 1111111110990,* *...

example:

**a(8) = 90 + 990 + 9990 + 99990 + 999990 + 9999990 + 99999990 +
999999990 =1111111020.

How does this generalize over bases other than 10?

-- Jonathan Vos Post

On 12/5/06, zak seidov <zakseidov at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Dear you,
>
> Are these two "beautiful" only because
> they are not "prime"?
>
> And they appeared
> while OEIS being on vacation...
> WARD, Zak
>
> %I A124167
> %S A124167
> 90,990,9990,99990,999990,9999990,99999990,999999990,9999999990,
> %T A124167
> 99999999990,999999999990,9999999999990,99999999999990,999999999999990,
> %U A124167
> 9999999999999990,99999999999999990,999999999999999990
> %N A124167 Numbers of the form 9^i 0^1.
> %p A124167 a:=n->sum (10^(n-j+2)-10^(n-j+1),j=0..n):
> seq(a(n),n=0..28);
> %K A124167 easy,nonn,new
> %O A124167 0,1
> %A A124167 Zerinvary Lajos
> (zerinvarylajos(AT)yahoo.com), Dec 02 2006
>
> %I A124166
> %S A124166
> 100,1100,11100,111100,1111100,11111100,111111100,1111111100,
> %T A124166
> 11111111100,111111111100,1111111111100,11111111111100,111111111111100,
> %U A124166
> 1111111111111100,11111111111111100,111111111111111100
> %N A124166 Numbers of the form 1^i 0^2.
> %p A124166 a:=n->sum (10^(n-j+2),j=0..n):
> seq(a(n),n=0..28);#
> %K A124166 easy,nonn,new
> %O A124166 1,1
> %A A124166 Zerinvary Lajos
> (zerinvarylajos(AT)yahoo.com), Dec 02 2006
>
> --- franktaw at netscape.net wrote:
>
> > For whatever reasons, Neil is very reluctant to
> > reject sequences.  I'm
> > not going to presume to speak for him on the reasons
> > for this.
> > However, in my opinion, this does mean that those of
> > us submitting
> > sequences should be restrained in submitting
> > sequences.  (Really,
> > that restraint would be called for, anyhow.)
> >
> > Just as an example, there are hundreds of sequences
> > in the OEIS
> > for primes with a particular digit pattern - some
> > with the primes
> > and some with their indices.
> >
> > Franklin T. Adams-Watters
> >
> > P.S. "prime author:seidov" finds 1085 matches.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: zakseidov at yahoo.com
> >
> >   Rob, seqfans!
> >
> > Most of these 1174  "prime seidov"'s
> > are not of mine, I beleive.
> >
> > And even all 25594 "prime" sequences
> > in OEIS have been submitted by me - what then?
> >
> > Why have Neil and co-editors ACCEPTED them?
> >
> > (I repeated some 1,000 times that
> > one should discriminate between RECEIVED and
> > ACCEPTED submissions).
> >
> > It is a general policy (and undisputed right)
> > of any editor board to select/reject/accept
> > submissions.
> >
> > WARD (=with all due respect),
> > Zak
> >
> > PS You may call me "prime" offender,
> > but my salary (which is zero) doesn't depend
> > on the number of "my sequences" appeared in OEIS,
> > and I don't mind if you'll remove all
> > (OK, most of) my submisions from OEIS.
> >
> > WARD,
> > Zak
> >
> >
> > --- Rob Pratt <Rob.Pratt at sas.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Zak,
> > >
> > > You are one of the "prime" offenders.  A search on
> > > "prime seidov" returns 1174 sequences.
> > >
> > > Rob
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: zak seidov [mailto:zakseidov at yahoo.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 11:11 AM
> > > To: Rob Pratt; seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr
> > > Subject: RE: OEIS on vacation in December
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Rob Pratt <Rob.Pratt at sas.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Because overzealous contributors have swamped
> > the
> > > database with
> > > > sequences that have a contrived relationship to
> > > prime numbers.
> > > >
> > > > Rob Pratt
> > >
> > > OK!
> > >
> > > But dear Rob, dear Neil, dear co-editors, and dear
> > > seqfans!!
> > >
> > > Why not simply to reject such "probably not"
> > > submissions???!!!
> > >
> > > I "have swamped the list with this Q"
> > > and have never got a reasonable explanation....
> > >
> > > WADR (=with all duty respect),
> > > Zak
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Thomas Baruchel [mailto:tbaruchel at free.fr]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 9:19 AM
> > > > To: seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr
> > > > Subject: Re: OEIS on vacation in December
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, N. J. A. Sloane wrote:
> > > > > - don't send in sequences that you made up
> > > (unless
> > > > >   they are really beautiful - and if they
> > > > >   are base dependent or involve primes
> > > > >   they are probably not)
> > > >
> > > > Just a question ; I do understand very well why
> > > base dependent
> > > > sequences aren't really beautiful, but I
> > sincerely
> > > wonder why
> > > > sequences which involve prime numbers "are
> > > probably not". Why? Aren't
> > > > they the most beautiful ones?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Thomas Baruchel
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________________
> > ___________
> > Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people
> > who know.
> > Ask your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
> ________________________________________________________________________
> > Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of
> > storage and
> > industry-leading spam and email virus protection.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Cheap talk?
> Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
> http://voice.yahoo.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.seqfan.eu/pipermail/seqfan/attachments/20061205/7e43fabf/attachment-0002.htm>