[seqfan] Re: A problem of OEIS

Charles Greathouse charles.greathouse at case.edu
Tue Dec 17 21:18:53 CET 2013


It depends. Sometimes it's best to add a comment on an existing sequence,
especially if the conjecture is sufficiently certain. (We don't have a
sequence of even perfect numbers for this reason -- it's probably just
A000396.) But sometimes not-yet-proved-to-be=duplicates may be appropriate.
What do you have in mind?

Charles Greathouse
Analyst/Programmer
Case Western Reserve University


On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Vladimir Shevelev <shevelev at bgu.ac.il>wrote:

> Dear SeqFans,
>
> Suppose you submitted an interesting sequence in topic A, but it's turn
> out to be known that at least part of your sequence already exists in
> accetable limits, but in topic B. We can say that the sequences coincide if
> and only if anyone will get a proof. It is best known that a process of
> proving sometimes takes years... What to do in such a case? I think that
> OEIS could accept the "second version" up to the appearance of a proof.
>
> Best regards,
> Vladimir
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>


More information about the SeqFan mailing list