[seqfan] Re: a(n-1)+a(n) = palindrome

[Douglas McNeil]

Alexander P-sky wrote:

>> I think this is a permutation of the naturals.
> Are you artificially (in my view) prepending
> 1,2,3,4
> in order to make it be permutation of the naturals ?
>
> Shouldn't the sequence really start with 5 instead ?

A 1-indexed sequence starting at 1 seems natural enough.  It'd seem
far more artificial to me to start at 5.  What's your argument in its
favour?

If you do start at 5, I get a sequence beginning

[5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 15, 18, 26, 29, 37, 40, 48, 51, 50, 16, 6, 27, 17,
38, 28, 49, 39, 60, 41, 14, 8, 25, 19, 36, 30, 47, 52, 59, 42, 13, 9,
24, 20, 35, 31, 46, 53, 58, 43, 12, 10, 23, 21, 34, 32, 45, 54, 57,
44, 11, 22, 33, 55, 56, 65, 66, 75, 76, 85, 86, 95, 96, 106, 116, 126,
136, 146, 157, 105, 97, 64, 67, 74, 77, 84, 87, 94, 108, 63, 68, 73,
78, 83, 88, 93, 98, 104, 118, 114, 128, 124, 138, 134, 148]

which at first glance doesn't seem to have any independent virtues.


Doug, on vacation back in Alberta

-- 
Department of Earth Sciences
University of Hong Kong