[seqfan] Re: A058055

[Neil Sloane]

I agree that the terms don't match the definition.

When this happens, if possible we prefer to change
the definition to match the terms, rather than the other way round.

So think of it as a puzzle: what does produce the sequence?

My first guess was to require m > n, but as Harvey said,
that doesn't quite work.  Hmmm.

On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 6:05 PM, <franktaw at netscape.net> wrote:

> It looks to me like the terms are wrong.
>
> The offset is definitely wrong; it should be 1, not 0.
>
> Franklin T. Adams-Watters
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harvey P. Dale <hpd1 at nyu.edu>
>
>         There's something I don't understand about the above sequence.
> As I generate terms corresponding to the definition, they are quite
> different from those shown in the OEIS.  For example (from the example
> given), 97+2^2 = 101 which is prime, so m could be 2 rather than 2144.
> And even if we constrain m to be greater than n, 97+102^2 = 10501 which
> is prime, so m could be 102 rather than 2144.  If someone can clarify
> this for me, I'll be glad to correct either the definition or the terms
> of the sequence.
>         Thanks.
>         Best,
>         Harvey
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>



-- 
Dear Friends, I have now retired from AT&T. New coordinates:

Neil J. A. Sloane, President, OEIS Foundation
11 South Adelaide Avenue, Highland Park, NJ 08904, USA
Phone: 732 828 6098; home page: http://NeilSloane.com
Email: njasloane at gmail.com