[seqfan] Re: Proposal for "Big Numbers" paper

[Andrew Weimholt]

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:59 AM, David Wilson <davidwwilson at comcast.net>wrote:

- The less "arbitrary" a number is, the better.
>

How
about 10011202130314041505160617071808190922324252627282933435363738394454647484955657585966768697787988991
which is the smallest number whose decimal representation contains each
ordered pair of decimal digits?

It's not currently in the OEIS, but we can add a sequence, a(n) = smallest
number containing all ordered n-tuples of decimal digits, in which case
this would be a(2). Or we can add a sequence a(n) = smallest number whose
base-n representation contains all ordered pairs of base-n digits, in which
case it would be a(10). Or the array, read by anti-diagonals, of smallest
numbers whose base-n representation contains all the ordered k-tuples of
base-n digits.


> Also, if the whole idea of an "OEIS big number" submission to Numberphile
> seems off the wall, please tell me and I'll go away.
>
>
Not at all; I think it's a great idea.

Andrew