[seqfan] Re: A086953
shevelev at bgu.ac.il
Sun Aug 6 14:23:18 CEST 2017
Finally, I understood the origin of
author's error. Instead of a(n+3)=
A024495(n)/2, it should be
it's just not there put the division by 2.
The construction a(n+3)/2 for n>=0
is clear: only beginning with n=3
all terms are positive and even.
I wanted to recover the corrected text
but I ran out of my limit of 3 submissions.
From: SeqFan [seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu] on behalf of Kevin Ryde via SeqFan [seqfan at list.seqfan.eu]
Sent: 05 August 2017 11:44
To: seqfan at list.seqfan.eu
Cc: Kevin Ryde
Subject: [seqfan] Re: A086953
shevelev at bgu.ac.il (Vladimir Shevelev) writes:
> the formula: "COMMENTS a(n+3)=A024495(n)/2"
Re your a(3*k+1) = 2*A024495(3*k), just comparing sample values it looks
like that might hold for all n, ie. A086953 without initial 1 = 2*A024495.
There might also be a vaguely similar binomials A111927 = A024493 - 1 if
you were keen. A111927 already has a cross ref to A024495.
Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
More information about the SeqFan