[seqfan] Re: ????? ?????

[Alonso Del Arte]

Maybe (3), but I am very surprised it's not already in the OEIS. Take a
look at A090982 <http://oeis.org/A090982> and decide if (3) is different
enough or if it's somehow related.

As for (4), unless you find a theorem that specifically uses these numbers
for its proof, I would hold off on it indefinitely.

Al

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:50 AM, юрий герасимов <2stepan at rambler.ru> wrote:

>
> Dear SegFans, If 1) A006094 are poducts of 2 successive primes (6, 15, 35,
> 77, 143,,,), 2) A158611 are nonnegative non-composite numbers (0, 1, 2, 3,
> 5, 7, 11,..), then
> 3) products of 2 successive nonnegative non-composite numbers are 0, 2, 6,
> 15, 35, 77, 143,...  i.e.  k(n), 4) nonnegative non-composite numbers of
> the form k(n) + (-1)^k(n)*2^(1 - (-1)^k(n)) are 1, 3, 7, 11, 31, 73, 139,
> 433, 1759, 2017, 5179, 6553, 8629, 10399,..i.e. t(n) where t(n+4) = A092761
> are primes of form p(n)*p(n+1) - 4. Which sequence (3 or 4) will be useful
> to publish in the OEIS ? Regards, JSG
>
> ______________________________**_________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>



-- 
Alonso del Arte
Author at SmashWords.com<https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/AlonsoDelarte>
Musician at ReverbNation.com <http://www.reverbnation.com/alonsodelarte>