[seqfan] Re: A327135 vs A026317, sines and cosines at integer arguments

[Neil Sloane]

So we can merge A327135 into A026317, and then recycle A327135.  Could
someone please take care of that?

I'll update the Deleted Sequences page

Best regards
Neil

Neil J. A. Sloane, President, OEIS Foundation.
11 South Adelaide Avenue, Highland Park, NJ 08904, USA.
Also Visiting Scientist, Math. Dept., Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ.
Phone: 732 828 6098; home page: http://NeilSloane.com
Email: njasloane at gmail.com



On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 9:27 AM David Seal <david.j.seal at gwynmop.com> wrote:

> I observe that the "(up to offset)" is basically just due to a difference
> of unstated assumptions between the two sequences' descriptions - A026317's
> would need to be prefixed with "Numbers n >= 0 such that " and A327135's
> amended to "Numbers k > 0 such that ..." to state those assumptions
> explicitly. Assuming that the fact that the two sequences are essentially
> identical results in some edits being made to them, it might be worth
> tightening up the descriptions in the process.
>
> David
>
>
> > On 13 November 2019 at 09:13 "Richard J. Mathar" <mathar at mpia-hd.mpg.de>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > A327135 and A026317 consider sign changes of the sine and cosine
> > sampled at integer arguments. Is there some proof that they
> > are essentially (up to offset) the same?
> >
> > RJM
> >
> > --
> > Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>