[seqfan] A090864 == A118300
Ray Chandler
rayjchandler at sbcglobal.net
Tue Dec 13 17:32:45 CET 2011
A090864 and A118300 agree for the terms given for both sequences. I believe
them to be the same due to the comment from Perry in the related sequence
A006906 that A006906 has the same parity as A000009.
https://oeis.org/search?q=3%2C+4%2C+6%2C+8%2C+9%2C+10%2C+11%2C+13%2C+14%2C+1
6&sort=&language=english
Any objections to merging the two sequences into A090864 and "killing"
A118300?
In a related matter, the first formula entry for sequence A010815:
a(n) = (-1)^m if n is of the form m(3m+-1)/2; otherwise a(n)=0. These values
of n are the pentagonal numbers, A000326.
https://oeis.org/A010815
It is not clear to what "these values" refers in the second sentence, but
assuming the reference is to values of n such that a(n)=+-1, then the
resulting sequence would be A001318, generalized pentagonal numbers, rather
than A000326. The values of n such that a(n)=0 results in the complement of
the generalized pentagonal numbers, i.e. the surviving sequence in the
discussion above.
Ray Chandler
More information about the SeqFan
mailing list