[seqfan] Re: A235466

[Harvey P. Dale]

	Zak and Ray explained the problem.  Zak's program implements the definition properly, so Zak should submit it (perhaps adding a comment of explanation too?), and if Zak does that perhaps he could also fix the 11-versus-19 error in the example?
	Thanks for the explanation.
	Best,
	Harvey
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Chandler [mailto:rayjchandler at sbcglobal.net] 
Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 5:00 PM
To: Harvey P. Dale
Subject: RE: [seqfan] Re: A235466

Sorry, too quick on the response.  Yes the example is wrong because 1011 in base 2 is 11, not 19 as you said.  

Of course the base 9 representation of the initial prime must contain only digits < 2.  Could that be why you are seeing more terms?
Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: SeqFan [mailto:seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu] On Behalf Of Ray 
> Chandler
> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 3:41 PM
> To: 'Sequence Fanatics Discussion list'
> Subject: [seqfan] Re: A235466
> 
> 739 is prime and is 1011 in base 9.  1011 in base 2 is 19 also prime.  
> So 739 is in the sequence.
> Ray
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: SeqFan [mailto:seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu] On Behalf Of 
> > Harvey P. Dale
> > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 3:19 PM
> > To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list
> > Subject: [seqfan] A235466
> >
> >           There seems to be something wrong with the above sequence.
> > When I implement the definition, I get lots of terms that don't 
> > appear in the online sequence.  In addition, even the example seems 
> > wrong, since 1011 in base 2 is 11, not 19.  Am I misunderstanding something?
> >           Best,
> >           Harvey
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/