[seqfan] Re: finite a(n) for q=0 and infinite a(n) for q>0?

[M. F. Hasler]

I don't understand the corrected version.
(Euphemism. The "m = n ..." is problematic.)
Is a_q(n) no more the smallest k such that
#{ d>q : d|k and d±q both are prime} = n
?

--
Maximilian


On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, 09:37 юрий герасимов <2stepan at rambler.ru> wrote:

> Dear Allan and Maximilian, Thank you. I agree with your reasoning.
> Sequence a(n)
> for q=0 is A002110(n). Correction of a(n) for q>0: a(n) is the smallest k
> such
> that number of some divisors m of k is equal to excatly n where m = n <
> A000005(k) and m-q, m+q are both prime. JSG.
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>