[seqfan] Re: definition of pandigital numbers & related issues

[T. D. Noe]

At 2:57 AM +0800 5/28/10, Douglas McNeil wrote:
>> A140532                  a(n) = number of n-digit pandigital primes.
>> seems to use still another definition of "pandigital" ---
>> another term should be found for this, it (probably(?)) refers to
>> A029743                  Primes with distinct digits.
>
>I can't reproduce A140532 beyond the first two terms if the author's
>using "pandigital" for "distinct digits".
>I think it's even more restricted, namely "distinct digits with no 0".
>
>And even with that, I can't reproduce the last nonzero term, which I
>find as 23082, not 55440:
>
>h: [4, 20, 83, 395, 1610, 5045, 12850, 55440]
>m: [4, 20, 83, 395, 1610, 5045, 12850, 23082, 0]
>
>Might be worth checking yourself; my insomniac-mode programming is
>notoriously unreliable.

I agree that it should say "distinct digits with no 0" and that a(8)=23082.
Note that a(9)=0 because 3 divides all 9-digit numbers containing only 1..9.

Tony