[seqfan] Re: Question from Harvey Dale about A233552

[Frank Adams-watters]

A233551 is closely related. Someone should check that sequence to see if it is also (apparently) missing numbers.

A233552

Franklin T. Adams-Watters


-----Original Message-----
From: Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com>
To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
Sent: Sun, May 26, 2019 12:31 pm
Subject: [seqfan] Question from Harvey Dale about A233552

Harvey just asked me the following question.  Can anyone help?


I may be missing something, but there seem to be many terms missing from
the above sequence. My calculations show that, up to 1000, each of 25, 49,
121, 169, 289, 361, 373, 499, 529, 613, 625, 751, 841, 919, and 961
satisfies the definition, but only 361 and 919 appear in the data. Am I
overlooking something? Also, I’m not sure how to test “all k >=1” because
that would require going up to infinity — so, is there some top limit to
the value of k that should be tested, e.g., k<=n? Or is there some other
way to do the test that doesn’t require generating lots of terms?

--
Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/