[seqfan] Re: A036322

[Frank Adams-Watters]

Please read the definition again.

Franklin T. Adams-Watters

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert G. Wilson v <rgwv at rgwv.com>
To: 'Sequence Fanatics Discussion list' <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
Sent: Wed, Jun 25, 2014 3:06 pm
Subject: [seqfan] Re: A036322


SeqFans,

	Shouldn't 6 also be a term?

Bob.

-----Original Message-----
 From: SeqFan [mailto:seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu] On Behalf Of Harvey 
P. Dale
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:32 PM
To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list
Subject: [seqfan] A036322

	There is something I don't understand about the above sequence.  
According to
the definition, the prime factors of its terms can have digits of 
either 6 or 7.
But the first term is 49, i.e., 7*7, rather than 36, i.e., 6*6.  And 42 
is also
missing, i.e., 6*7.  For the first 50 terms of the sequence, I get the 
following
(which is drastically different than what is provided in the current 
OEIS
version): 36, 42, 49, 216, 252, 294, 343, 396, 402, 456, 462, 469, 532, 
539,
1296, 1512, 1764, 2058, 2376, 2401, 2412, 2736, 2772, 2814, 3192, 3234, 
3283,
3724, 3773, 3996, 4002, 4056, 4062, 4356, 4422, 4489, 4596, 4602, 4656, 
4662,
4669, 4732, 4739, 5016, 5082, 5092, 5159, 5362, 5369, 5432.  I used the
following Mma program to generate these terms:
With[{ss=Flatten[Table[FromDigits/@Tuples[{6,7},n],{n,4}]]},Take[Union[Fl
atten[Table[Times@@@Tuples[ss,n],{n,2,4}]]],90]]
Am I misunderstanding something?
	Best,
	Harvey


_______________________________________________

Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/


_______________________________________________

Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/