[seqfan] Re: A051264 == A050278 ?

[Maximilian Hasler]

Apologies in advance for adding one more message on this list.
Maybe there should be a procedure to start discussions via a first
message to the list, and then continue somewhere else (on the wiki) ?

as to the question:
"More Mathematical Morsels" by R. Honsberger
is on google books, and pp.15 ff are available:

http://books.google.com/books?id=f_pJjYnTp2EC&lpg=PA250&ots=kAU7OJOp6C&dq=%22More%20Mathematical%20Morsels%22%20by%20R.%20Honsberger&pg=PA15#v=onepage&q=%22More%20Mathematical%20Morsels%22%20by%20R.%20Honsberger&f=false

Maximilian



On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:49 PM,  <franktaw at netscape.net> wrote:
> Can anyone access the book "More Mathematical Morsels" by R. Honsberger,
> referenced in the MathWorld article? It presumably has a definition of
> n-persistent, and as the published version, we should match it. (The
> reference in the article just took me to Amazon.com.) This may also bear on
> the claim David is questioning in the MathWorld article.
>
> Note that the claim that there are no infinity-persistent numbers is
> strongly validated by A079339.
>
>
> Franklin T. Adams-Watters
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Wilson <davidwwilson at comcast.net>
>
> I think your "exactly" interpretation is the correct one, otherwise
> A051264 would coincide numerically with either A050278 or A171102 in the
> OEIS, which it does not starting at its first term. I would not expect
> such a mistake from the author.
>
> Given the "exactly" interpretation, the MathWorld claim that there
> exists a k-persistent number exists for each k becomes interesting and
> begs both a proof and an OEIS sequence of the smallest k-persistent
> number for each k.
>
> On 1/9/2012 3:22 AM, franktaw at netscape.net wrote:
>>
>> From the definitions, A051264 should be the same as A171102, not
>
> A050278.
>>
>>
>> However, it appears that n-persistent is being used in a slightly
>> different way from what the MathWorld article defines. It seems that
>> it is being used to mean that the number is n-persistent as defined
>> but not (n+1)-persistent - one could perhaps call this exactly
>> n-persistent. Based on that, A051264 is different from the other two
>> sequences.
>>
>> Certainly the definitions need to be clarified. The other sequences
>> referenced in the MathWorld article also appear to be defined in this
>> manner.
>>
>> Franklin T. Adams-Watters
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Moshe Levin <moshe.levin at mail.ru>
>>
>> Shouldn't  A051264 (1 - persistent numbers)
>> coincide with A050278 (Pandigital numbers)?
>>
>>   My friend wrote to the author (of both seqs), in vail,
>> and asked me.
>>
>> I think that A051264 == A050278 by definition.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ML
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/