[seqfan] Re: Oh, To Offend

Jeremy Gardiner jeremy.gardiner at btinternet.com
Wed Mar 17 09:15:59 CET 2010

Checking Google for "Obscene number" shows this term is already in common
use to mean something like 'a shocking and offending large number'.

This doesn't accord with Leroy's proposed definition, although I appreciate
his humorous intent. (Is a googol an 'obscene' number??)

As an alternative definition, consider Conway and Guy's proposal of zillions
as 10 to the power 3n+3 (perhaps we can invent a related definition for
binary numbers?) and see these sequences:

A060365 Multiples of one million which are described by single words in
American English

A060366 Multiples of one million which are described by single words in
British English.


On 16/3/10 19:58, "Leroy Quet" <q1qq2qqq3qqqq at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I just submitted these two sequences:
> First, an explanation of the names, which might be inappropriate to include as
> comments to these sequences.
> The "Obscene" part of obscene numbers comes from the 1, a vertical line, that
> makes of the MIDDLE DIGIT. (A f***-you hand-gesture.)
> The "Prudish" comes from the fact that these numbers are not obscene. I didn't
> call them "non-obscene" numbers because a sequence with that name sounds like
> it also includes all positive integers with an even number of binary digits.

More information about the SeqFan mailing list