[seqfan] Re: A104851
Harvey P. Dale
hpd1 at nyu.edu
Mon Feb 6 15:11:16 CET 2012
Neil may need to clarify the rules for the sequence. As I understood them, (1) each successive prime must be longer in digit length than its predecessor and (2) each successive prime must begin with the digit immediately following the final digit of its predecessor. (The second condition means that leading zeroes vanish.) If those are correct, then 5, 3, and 11 after the 649-digit number Charles found are not proper terms; rather, the next prime after that 649-digit prime would have to begin with 5311802...
Can you clarify this Neil?
From: seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu [mailto:seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu] On Behalf Of Charles Greathouse
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 8:45 AM
To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list
Subject: [seqfan] Re: A104851
The 649-digit number 18281...0429 seems to be the next term. Then 5, then 3, then 11, then 80232878250981945581530175671, then 7, then 3, then 61, then 3, then 3, then 2, then 6981125099618188159304169035159888851934580727386673. The following term has 1872 digits: 8589...14771.
I certified the 649-digit number prime with Primo. The 1872-digit number is a bit large for that.
Case Western Reserve University
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 6:28 PM, Ignacio Larrosa Cañestro <ilarrosa at mundo-r.com> wrote:
> N. J. A. Sloane wrote:
>> (If we just require "greater", then we get 2, 7,
>> 182818284590452353602... and I don't even know the third term)
> There isn´t other term within the first 172 decinal digits of e. Checked with Alpertron:
> Ignacio Larrosa Cañestro
> A Coruña (España)
> ilarrosa at mundo-r.com
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
More information about the SeqFan