[seqfan] Re: Offset in A001223?

[franktaw at netscape.net]

First, you should note that the definition in question is a quotation 
 from the  last reference listed in the "Links" section. This definition 
is far from universal; for example, the second link to The World of 
Mathematics (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrimeDifferenceFunction.html) 
defines d_n = p_{n+1} - p_n, which is consistent with this sequence.

Generally, the rule in the OEIS is, when there are two equally good 
possible values for the offset of a sequence, prefer to use offset 1.

It would be good to add an explicit formula to this sequence; 
specifically a(n) = prime(n+1) - prime(n).  I have submitted this 
addition.

Franklin T. Adams-Watters

P.S. When quoting offset values for a sequence, just quote the first 
value. The second one is automatically computed.

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Gribble <chris.eveswell at virgin.net>

Seqfans,

In the comment section of A001223, "Difference between consecutive 
primes",
d(p_{k}) is defined as p_{k} - p_{k-1}, so the first value of d(p_{k})
listed is d(p_{2}) = d(3) .  If the sequence is denoted by a(n), as in 
Remi
Eismann's comment, then according to the offset (1, 2), n = k-1.  
Wouldn't
it make more sense for the values of n and k to be consistent by 
setting the
offset to 2, 2?