[seqfan] Re: least interesting number / correction

[Jeremy Gardiner]

Of course I meant to say, it seems the least uninteresting number is getting
larger!

On 13/11/11 18:10, "Jeremy Gardiner" <jeremy.gardiner at btinternet.com> wrote:

> Apparently in 2009 the First Uninteresting Number was 11630
> 
> http://www.nathanieljohnston.com/2009/06/11630-is-the-first-uninteresting-nu
> mber/
> 
> Now 12407 is noted for being the smallest uninteresting number
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12407_(number)
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interesting_number_paradox
> 
> It seems that the least interesting number is getting larger!
>