A129755 (??!!)

[Jon Schoenfield]

Zak,

I see nothing wrong with the sequence.  I got precisely the same terms you 
listed below (i.e., precisely what's shown in the OEIS for A129755).

Zak to Neil:  <<  that you labeled A129755 with all possible "bad" tags: %K 
A129755 uned,obsc,less ?!  >>

Well, there are other possible "bad" tags (e.g., "dumb" and "probation" <g>) 
....  But I think the sequence looks perfectly correct!   :-)

Best wishes,

-- Jon

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "zak seidov" <zakseidov at yahoo.com>
To: <seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr>
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 10:28 PM
Subject: A129755 (??!!)


> Dear seqfans,
> Please anybody explain me (and Neil)
> what's wrong with this SEQ?
> My explanations were simply ignored by Neil.
> Thanks, Zak
>
>
> %I A129755
> %S A129755
> 1,3,21,91,153,171,231,253,561,741,1081,1653,1711,1891,2211,2701,3321,
> %T A129755
> 3403,4851,6441,8001,9453,9591,10153,12403,15051,16471,17391,18721,
> %U A129755
> 23653,24753,27261,30381,32131,35511,38781,39621,41041,44253,45753
> %N A129755 Triangular numbers t such that t+10 is a
> prime.
> %K A129755 nonn,new,uned,obsc,less
> %O A129755 1,2
> %A A129755 Zak Seidov (zakseidov(AT)yahoo.com), May 15
> 2007
> %E A129755 I received several confusing emails about
> this sequence. It should be rechecked. - njas, May 29
> 2007
>
> Wed, 30 May 2007 14:24:48 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "N. J. A. Sloane" <njas at research.att.com>
> To: "zak seidov" <zakseidov at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: re A129755
> Zak,  I did not understand what you said.
>
> Is the entry correct?
>
> Neil
>
> Wed, 30 May 2007 10:07:04 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "zak seidov" <zakseidov at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: re A129755
> To: njas at research.att.com
> Dear Neil,
> You didn't receive this my explanation,
> or you don't agree with it,
> that you labeled A129755
> with all possible "bad" tags:
> %K A129755 uned,obsc,less ?!
>
> Thanks, Zak
>
>
> %I A129755
> %S A129755
> 1,3,21,91,153,171,231,253,561,741,1081,1653,1711,1891,2211,2701,3321,
> %T A129755
> 3403,4851,6441,8001,9453,9591,10153,12403,15051,16471,17391,18721,
> %U A129755
> 23653,24753,27261,30381,32131,35511,38781,39621,41041,44253,45753
> %N A129755 Triangular numbers t such that t+10 is a
> prime.
> %K A129755 nonn,new,uned,obsc,less
> %O A129755 1,2
> %A A129755 Zak Seidov (zakseidov(AT)yahoo.com), May 15
> 2007
> %E A129755 I received several confusing emails about
> this sequence. It should be rechecked. - njas, May 29
> 2007
>
>
> --- zak seidov <zakseidov at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Neil:
>> T(n)-10=(n+5)(n-4)/2 which is prime only for n=5,6,
>> that is T(5)=15 and T(6)=21, right?
>> Zak
>>
>> --- "N. J. A. Sloane" <njas at research.att.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Zak,   I did not understand the email you sent!
>> >
>> > Here is what I have now:
>> >
>> > %I A129755
>> > %S A129755
>> >
>>
> 1,3,21,91,153,171,231,253,561,741,1081,1653,1711,1891,2211,2701,3321,
>> > %T A129755
>> >
>>
> 3403,4851,6441,8001,9453,9591,10153,12403,15051,16471,17391,18721,
>> > %U A129755
>> >
>>
> 23653,24753,27261,30381,32131,35511,38781,39621,41041,44253,45753
>> > %N A129755 Triangular numbers t such that t+10 is
>> a
>> > prime.
>> > %C A129755 The only triangular numbers t such that
>> > t-10 is a (positive) prime are 15 and 21.
>> > %K A129755 nonn,new
>> > %O A129755 1,2
>> > %A A129755 Zak Seidov (zakseidov(AT)yahoo.com),
>> May
>> > 15 2007
>> >
>> > Is that correct?
>> >
>> > Neil
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
> Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html
>
>