[seqfan] Re: Breaking news on partition numbers.
mrob27 at gmail.com
Sun Jan 23 18:40:41 CET 2011
The only exact terms given in either article are the first 23, plus
A(100)=190569292 and A(1000)=24061467864032622473692149727991.
My print copy of Weisstein (AKA CRC Concise Encyclopedia of Maths) from 1998
has these, so they could have easily looked up the numbers there. Of course
Weisstein credits OEIS, but does not specify where each little bit of info
in the article came from.
So yeah, we don't own the numbers any more than they do. Maybe an
extraterrestrial civilization computed the sequence and Ono et al.
intercepted their transmission. (-:
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 13:01, David Wilson <davidwwilson at comcast.net>wrote:
> The basic properties and small values of partition numbers are readily
> available from any number of sources, e.g., A&S. Concerning larger
> partition values, the Folsom-Kent-Ono paper, p.3, gives initial digits of
> partition numbers larger than those found in the current A000041 b-file. In
> short, the content of the paper shows no need for the OEIS, and the
> references, probably truthfully, show no use of it.
> If these papers had been NJIS papers, or surveys of the partition numbers,
> omitting references to the OEIS would have been remiss. But these papers
> were apparently announcements of independent results obtained without aid of
> the OEIS. As much as we love the OEIS, sometimes life goes on without it.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander P-sky" <apovolot at gmail.com>
> To: "Sequence Fanatics Discussion list" <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
> Cc: <peter.luschny at googlemail.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 3:40 PM
> Subject: [seqfan] Re: Breaking news on partition numbers.
> It is pitiful that the article directly lists the terms of what is
>> A000041 in OEIS without explicitly referring to OEIS
Robert Munafo -- mrob.com
Follow me at: mrob27.wordpress.com - twitter.com/mrob_27 -
youtube.com/user/mrob143 - rilybot.blogspot.com
More information about the SeqFan