A093094

[zak seidov]

The proof (of non-periodicity)
is even eazier in case there is at least one zero (for
other a(1),a(2)):
"next time" length L of the bunch of zeroes will be
(at least) L+2 etc.
Zak

--- Giovanni Resta <g.resta at iit.cnr.it> wrote:
<...>
> Generalizing, if somewhere appears a run of k>2 8's,
> then in some future position
> will appear a run of at least 4*k-7  8's (where
> since k>2,  4*k-7>k).
> 
> So the sequence will contain arbitrary long runs of
> 8's, without
> being constantly equal to 8, thus it cannot be
> periodic.
> 
> bye,
> giovanni
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com