[seqfan] Re: constants of nature in the OEIS

[Alonso Del Arte]

I agree, it is outside the scope of the OEIS. And not to get into a silly
slippery slope argument, but I don't like the idea of all the deadwood that
would be created trying to guess constants in nature.

With the dead sequences that are already in the OEIS, at least we can
usually say that Ax is an erroneous version of Ay. But with constants in
nature we'd say Ax is an erroneous version of Ay buy Ay might later turn
out to be itself erroneous?

Al

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 6:29 AM, Joerg Arndt <arndt at jjj.de> wrote:

> * Brad Klee <bradklee at gmail.com> [Jun 25. 2017 08:46]:
> > Hi Andrey,
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > One possibility is to set a limit at the usual three standard deviations,
> > and mark a sequence dead when three sigma ranges do not intersect. If
> OEIS
> > put some time into this and expanded coverage, in the future it may be
> > possible to generate a plot such as above just from the version control
> > data.
>
> This is outside the scope of the OEIS.
>
> About
> > If OEIS put some time into this...
> Who?
>
> Best regards,   Joerg
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brad
> >
> > [...]
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>



-- 
Alonso del Arte
Author at SmashWords.com
<https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/AlonsoDelarte>
Musician at ReverbNation.com <http://www.reverbnation.com/alonsodelarte>