[seqfan] Re: Is 0001 a 4-digit base 10 number ?
mrob27 at gmail.com
Fri Aug 19 23:30:57 CEST 2011
This kind of problem is evident in the Kaprekar numbers (for example 45*45 =
2025 and 20+25=45).
The naive approach to Kaprekar numbers would allow parts that start with 0,
like 99*99=9801 and 98+01=99. This in turn leads to claims that for example
"04879" is a Kaprekar number because 04879*04879=0023804641 and
00238+04641=04879. This is a use of leading zeros that appears in A006886,
whose definition avoids the problem by not making reference to "the number
of digits". Compare to A045913 (which also doesn't mention "digits").
I wrote more about this on my Kaprekar page,
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:18, Giovanni Resta <giovanni.resta at iit.cnr.it>wrote:
> My question arises from the description of A126364
> ( http://oeis.org/A126364 ) :
> Number of base 10 n-digit numbers with adjacent digits differing by one or
> 1, 10, 28, 80, 230, 664,...
> It seems clear, from a(2)=28, that the author counts 00 and 01 among
> the 2-digit base 10 numbers.
> It seems to me a little unusual, but I may be wrong.
> What's your opinion ?
Robert Munafo -- mrob.com
Follow me at: gplus.to/mrob - fb.com/mrob27 - twitter.com/mrob_27 -
mrob27.wordpress.com - youtube.com/user/mrob143 - rilybot.blogspot.com
More information about the SeqFan