[seqfan] Re: A071030 == A118109 (Wolfram C.A. Rule 54)
njasloane at gmail.com
Tue Oct 20 16:36:30 CEST 2015
Sorry, there was a nasty typo. The last sentences should have said:
We have two identical sequence, A071039 and A118111.
Could one of you kindly change one of them into the binary-string version,
and add the "convert to base 10" sequence?
(The number of ON cells at state n is essentially A032766)
Neil J. A. Sloane, President, OEIS Foundation.
11 South Adelaide Avenue, Highland Park, NJ 08904, USA.
Also Visiting Scientist, Math. Dept., Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ.
Phone: 732 828 6098; home page: http://NeilSloane.com
Email: njasloane at gmail.com
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com> wrote:
> Mostly to Michael and Kevin:
> Rule 94:
> I took care of the three sequences that describe the Rule 94 CA, namely
> A071033, A118101, and A118102.
> These give the states as binary strings, individual bits, decimal numbers.
> Rule 150:
> Likewise, for Rule 150, there were 4 seqs, A038184, A071036, A118110,
> I merged the last two, so now there are 3.
> Rule 190:
> We have two identical sequence, A071039 and A118111.
> Could one of you kindly change one of them into the binary-string version,
> and all the "convert to base 10" sequence?
> (The number of ON cells at state n is essentially A032766)
> Best regards
> Neil J. A. Sloane, President, OEIS Foundation.
> 11 South Adelaide Avenue, Highland Park, NJ 08904, USA.
> Also Visiting Scientist, Math. Dept., Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ.
> Phone: 732 828 6098; home page: http://NeilSloane.com
> Email: njasloane at gmail.com
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Kevin Ryde <user42_kevin at yahoo.com.au>
>> njasloane at gmail.com (Neil Sloane) writes:
>> > Michael, Thanks for noticing that! I have followed your advice and
>> > A118109 with what it
>> > should have been. We now have 3 versions of the sequence, A071030,
>> > and A118109.
>> > I think the change is consistent with what Eric Weisstein would want.
>> I see there's several other pairs by Eric W of decimal and bits 0,1, eg.
>> rule=94 rule=188
>> A118101 decimal A118173 decimal
>> A118102 bits A118174 bits
>> I wonder maybe A118109 is intended to be 0,1 but the duplication of
>> earlier A071030 is accidental. Other duplications I notice (not
>> including rule=158 A071037 = A118172 already been merged),
>> rule=94 A071033 = A118102
>> rule=150 A071036 = A118110
>> rule=190 A071039 = A118111
>> I wonder perhaps leave the values of A118109 as their existing 0,1 but
>> do what de-duplicate merging of the 4 duplications then possible new
>> sequences for whole row values 10101... (if don't exist already).
>> Not all of A118...s are duplicates, eg. rule=188 A118174 isn't as far as
>> I can tell.
>> The only confusing thing is that the corresponding mathworld pages show
>> binary 1, 111, 10001, 1110111. But I think that's meant to be
>> understood as individual bits 0,1 because all the A118... sequences
>> referred to there are 0,1 so it doesn't seem a mistake in just one, say.
>> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
More information about the SeqFan