[seqfan] Re: Sliding numbers A103182
Tom Duff
eigenvectors at gmail.com
Sat Nov 26 23:39:57 CET 2022
Yeah. I'd say add those sequences, and the corresponding analogues of
A103183 (the powers of 10, k in the rhs of the defining equation) and
A103184 (the members of A103182 that are not multiples of 10).
On Sat, Nov 26, 2022 at 10:30 AM <hv at crypt.org> wrote:
> Life would have been way easier if A103182 had not contained duplicates,
> and a second sequence (if needed) had been added to show the number of
> (r,s) pairs that could generate each a(n).
>
> As it is, since it is far too late to change the content, my inclination
> would be to append "(with repetitions)" to the original name, and have
> a comment explaining what that means.
>
> Hugo van der Sanden
>
> Hugo Pfoertner <yae9911 at gmail.com> wrote:
> :I agree with any name that clearly shows that terms like 205 or 2050 can
> :occur more than once in DATA. I could not derive this statement from the
> :old name. That's why I asked for a better name.
> :
> :On Sat, Nov 26, 2022 at 6:52 PM Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com> wrote:
> :
> :> Dear Seq Fans, Eric Angelini submitted A103182 in 2005. The definition
> was
> :>
> :>
> :> Sliding numbers: numbers n of the form n = r+s where 1/r + 1/s =
> (r+s)/10^k
> :> for some k >= 1.
> :>
> :> with these examples:
> :>
> :> 1/4 + 1/25 = 0.29 --> 29 is a "sliding number"
> :>
> :> 1/8 + 1/125 = 0.133 --> 133 is a "sliding number"
> :>
> :> 1/2 + 1/5 = 0.7 --> 7 is a "sliding number"
> :>
> :> Today the definition is:
> :>
> :>
> :> a(n) occurs t times where t is the number values m can take to write k
> as
> :> (r + s) where 1/r + 1/s = (r + s)/10^m.
> :>
> :> (and there is no mention of "sliding number") It seems to me that the
> :> original definition was far better. The reason I'm posting this to the
> Seq
> :> Fans List is that a large number of editors were involved in this name
> :> change (see the History tab). So I feel I should not simply change the
> :> definition back to what it was.
> :>
> :> But the present definition is pretty awful, even if "number values" is
> :> changed to "number of values".
> :>
> :> I propose to restore the original definition, unless someone has a
> better
> :> suggestion!
> :>
> :> Best regards
> :> Neil
> :>
> :> Neil J. A. Sloane, Chairman, OEIS Foundation.
> :> Also Visiting Scientist, Math. Dept., Rutgers University,
> :> Email: njasloane at gmail.com
> :>
> :> --
> :> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
> :>
> :
> :--
> :Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
More information about the SeqFan
mailing list