[seqfan] Re: Another planetary sequence

Frank Adams-Watters franktaw at netscape.net
Thu Sep 15 23:14:42 CEST 2016


Speaking of elements:

1,5,6,7,8,9,10,13,14,15,16,17,18,25,26,27,28,29,3033,35,36,42,47,50,51,53,54,73,74,79,80,82,83,85,86,117,118

See below, after quoted message.

Franklin T. Adams-Watters


-----Original Message-----
From: Alonso Del Arte <alonso.delarte at gmail.com>
To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
Sent: Thu, Sep 15, 2016 3:56 pm
Subject: [seqfan] Re: Another planetary sequence

One thing I would emphasize from one of Joerg's message just a few messagesago in this thread is to not start from the point of view of wanting to addnew sequence entries.If instead you start from the assumption that every useful and/orinteresting sequence is *already* in the OEIS, you will find yourselfpleasantly surprised when a sequence with a straightforward definition isnot in the OEIS, nor any variation of it that you can think of.Also look at the sequences pertaining to chemical elements. Thanks to theperiodic table, we can readily sort chemical elements that share a certainproperty by atomic number. But as soon as we start trying to sort them byweight of lightest or heaviest isotope, we're likely to run into problemswhere we need to put a bunch of asterisks in the Data field.Asterisks are my main problem with a lot of these planetary sequences.AlOn Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Frank Adams-Watters <franktaw at netscape.net>wrote:> Well, OK - but part of its fame is from its inclusion in the books and the> OEIS.>> Franklin T. Adams-Watters>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com>> To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>> Sent: Thu, Sep 15, 2016 3:02 pm> Subject: [seqfan] Re: Another planetary sequence>> A53 is THE subway sequence, and it was one of the original sequencesin the> database in 1964.It is one of the first sequences that peopleask about> when they hear about the OEIS.It has appeared in many books,and it would of> course be accepted today.Right from the start, one of the explictly stated> goals of the OEIS was tohelp people solve IQ tests.Best regardsNeilNeil 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.comEmail: njasloane at gmail.comOn Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at> 3:57 PM, Frank Adams-Watters <franktaw at netscape.net>wrote:> One can't> always use what is in the OEIS as a guide to what will be> accepted. There> are a number of non-mathematical sequences added early on> that would not> be accepted today. A000053, as one example.>> Franklin T. Adams-Watters>>>>> --> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/>--Seqfan Mailing list -> http://list.seqfan.eu/>> --> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/>-- Alonso del ArteAuthor at SmashWords.com<https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/AlonsoDelarte>Musician at ReverbNation.com <http://www.reverbnation.com/alonsodelarte>--Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/

These are the atomic numbers of elements who name does not end in "ium". (The British version would omit 13.)

This is theoretically subject to change, but as long as the chemists keep to the current naming conventions, the next element to include would be 167. I don't think we're going to see that any time soon.



More information about the SeqFan mailing list