Partition ordering

[franktaw at netscape.net]

Thanks; that is my third option.
 
The point is that sequences in the OEIS based on partitions generally do simply concatenate the list for each n, but don't describe in detail how the partitions are ordered.  So, if you don't know how the partitions are ordered, you don't know how to read a sequence you've found, you don't know how to search for a sequence, and you don't know how to submit a new sequence.  In other words, unless you standardize and people know how it is standardized, what's the point of even having them in the OEIS?
 
Franklin T. Adams-Watters
16 W. Michigan Ave.
Palatine, IL 60067
847-776-7645
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Marc LeBrun <mlb at fxpt.com>
To: franktaw at netscape.net
Cc: seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr
Sent: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:16:20 -0800
Subject: Re: Partition ordering


A&S in my 1970s vintage paperback "ninth Dover printing" (well, the back cover does say "A DOVER EDITION DESIGNED FOR YEARS OF USE!") list partitions starting on page 831 (maybe they've changed how they do it since then). 
 
They explicitly group them by length and then (it appears) lexicographically within each group. By the way, A&S notates the parts in ascending order using exponents. 
 
In this ordering, 1,4^2 comes before 2^2,5 (144 < 225). Here's the way A&S lists the 30 partitions of 9: 
 
...
 
So I guess the point of all this (assuming there is one beyond excess caffeination) is to ask: what difference does it make which partition convention any given instance adopts? Or am I completely missing the point? 
 
___________________________________________________
Try the New Netscape Mail Today!
Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List
http://mail.netscape.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.seqfan.eu/pipermail/seqfan/attachments/20060112/7c243ddc/attachment-0001.htm>