[seqfan] Re: Another surprising omission from OEIS

[Christopher Gribble]

The sequence appears to be the set of natural numbers excluding
{1, 4, 7, 11, 14, 17, 20, 24, 27, 30, 33, 37, 40, 43, 46, 50, ...}
with adjacent member differences
3, 3, 4, 3, 3, 3, 4, 3, 3, 3, 4, 3, 3, 3, 4, ...
So I suppose that if one were interested in functions that generate
such patterns then there may be some merit in its inclusion.

Chris Gribble

-----Original Message-----
From: seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu [mailto:seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu]
On Behalf Of Maximilian Hasler
Sent: 13 November 2009 14:10
To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list
Subject: [seqfan] Re: Another surprising omission from OEIS

> in some vague sense from 3 to 1).  A167389 is a real example of this:
> though not base-dependent, it seems to be an entirely arbitrary
> function
>
(argument(exp(-(ln(2)+W(n,-(1/2)*ln(2)))/ln(2)))*ln(2)+Im(W(n,-(1/2)*ln(2)))
)/(2*Pi*ln(2))

anyway, if I see

(..(exp(-ln(2)+...)/ln(2)))*ln(2)+...

then I already have some prejudice...

"argument(...)/2pi"  does not improve anything ...

IMO that's complete nonsense, but of course I might be wrong...

Whatsoever, I think it is insulting to "submit" such a thing and let
tens or hundreds of people try their best in making a sense of it.

Maximilian


_______________________________________________

Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/