[seqfan] Re: New sequence

[Peter Munn]

On Mon, July 23, 2018 7:24 pm, Frank Adams-watters via SeqFan wrote:
> There is a feeling among many of the editors that we have
> too many sequences of this type.

I, too, am in general no fan of such sequences. However, this one leads on
to some interesting puzzling.

So, can you get the missing intervening terms of this related sequence?

14, 21, 13, 140, 57, ??, 165, ??, 113, 13, ...

(corrections welcome, if necessary)

Best Regards,

 Peter

> That said, this one is quite clever, and IMO is worthy of inclusion.
>
> Franklin T. Adams-Watters
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hans Havermann <gladhobo at bell.net>
> Sent: Mon, Jul 23, 2018 12:22 pm
>
>> 15 13 14 21 24 72 94 74 113 115 121 171 122 150 131 142 127 147 124 129
>> 159 138 135 153 137 156 126 125 128 165
>> Are this sequences of interest to the Oeis?
>
> They are interesting to me and we have many similar sequences in the OEIS.
>