A378384
Saturday, December 21, 2024
A378384 Contribution to the OEIS
Wednesday, December 18, 2024
Primes that can be expressed in the form p² + 4q², where both p and q are prime numbers
In a significant advancement for number theory, mathematicians Ben Green of the University of Oxford and Mehtaab Sawhney of Columbia University have introduced a novel method for identifying specific types of prime numbers. Their work, detailed in a recent Quanta Magazine article, focuses on primes that can be expressed in the form p² + 4q², where both p and q are prime numbers.
Prime numbers, defined as numbers greater than 1 that have no positive divisors other than 1 and themselves, are fundamental to mathematics. Understanding their distribution has been a longstanding challenge. While the infinitude of primes was established by Euclid around 300 BCE, identifying primes that satisfy additional constraints has proven difficult. Green and Sawhney's achievement in proving the existence of infinitely many primes of the form p² + 4q² represents a significant breakthrough in this area.
Their approach diverged from traditional methods by incorporating tools from other mathematical disciplines, demonstrating the potential for interdisciplinary techniques to address complex problems in number theory. This innovative strategy not only resolved a specific conjecture but also opened avenues for applying similar methods to other mathematical challenges.
The implications of this discovery extend beyond the immediate result. By enhancing our understanding of prime distribution, it contributes to the broader field of analytic number theory and may influence related areas such as cryptography, where prime numbers play a crucial role.
For a more comprehensive exploration of Green and Sawhney's work and its significance, the full article is available on Quanta Magazine's website.
Unveiling the Mysteries of Sequences: A Dive into A048720, A065621, and A379129/A379130
Unveiling the Mysteries of Sequences: A Dive into A048720, A065621, and A379129/A379130
In the realm of mathematics, fascinating sequences emerge, each with unique properties and applications. Today, we'll delve into three such sequences: A048720, A065621, and the intriguing pair A379129 and A379130.
This exploration is inspired by a recent article (link:
A Glimpse into the Sequences:
- A048720: This sequence involves converting binary representations of two numbers, multiplying them as polynomials (considering the digits as coefficients), and taking the modulo 2 result.
- A065621: Here, we perform a bitwise XOR operation between
n-1
and2n-1
. - A379129 and A379130: These sequences delve deeper, utilizing concepts like sum of divisors, greatest common divisor (GCD), and potentially building upon A048720 and A065621. However, the details of their calculations differ slightly (refer to the provided link for the original PARI/GP code).
Why are these sequences interesting?
While the specific applications of these sequences might not be readily apparent, their existence and properties contribute to the vast tapestry of mathematical knowledge. Studying them can lead to new discoveries, connections between seemingly disparate areas of mathematics, and even potential applications in cryptography or computer science.
Further Exploration:
The provided link offers the original PARI/GP code for calculating these sequences. We've also included equivalent Mathematica code within the comments of this blog post (accessible if you have access to edit the post).
Feel free to delve deeper into these sequences, explore their properties, and potentially discover fascinating relationships or applications. The world of mathematics is full of surprises waiting to be unveiled!
Tuesday, November 5, 2024
Open post to fans of Indian mathamaticians
.
Sunday, October 27, 2024
Book Review: On the Edge, The Art of Risking Everything
I just finished Nate Silver's latest book and asked Gemini to summarize the mathematical, sports gambling and poker elements of the book.
Nate Silver's On the Edge is a fascinating exploration of risk-taking, particularly through the lens of mathematics, sports gambling, and poker. Silver, renowned for his statistical analysis and predictive modeling, delves into the world of high-stakes decision-making, examining how individuals and institutions can gain an edge.
A significant portion of the book is dedicated to the world of poker, a game where skill and probability intersect. Silver dissects the intricacies of poker strategy, highlighting the importance of understanding pot odds, implied odds, and the concept of expected value. He also explores the psychological factors that influence decision-making under pressure, drawing parallels to other high-stakes endeavors.
While the book touches on various aspects of risk-taking, its focus on mathematics and probability provides a rigorous framework for understanding uncertainty. Silver's ability to translate complex statistical concepts into accessible language makes the book engaging for both seasoned data enthusiasts and casual readers.
Ultimately, On the Edge is a thought-provoking exploration of the human capacity for risk and reward. By examining the strategies and mindsets of successful risk-takers, Silver offers valuable insights for anyone seeking to make better decisions in a world full of uncertainty.
In summary, I recommend the book. As I read it, I thought that readers not familiar with poker or sports gambling might get lost in some of the analogies that Silver outlines. However, he included an expansive glossary in the book to explain the terms he uses throughout the book.
Saturday, October 26, 2024
Timeline of Systematic Data and the Development of Computable Knowledge
WolframAlpha has a nice visual summary of mathematics over the past 20,000 years: https://www.wolframalpha.com/docs/timeline.
It includes topics included in this blog, such as:
The Ishango bone, a tally stick from central Africa, dates from about 20,000 years ago. See: https://jamesmacmath.blogspot.com/2023/12/the-ishango-bone-one-of-earliest.html.
https://jamesmacmath.blogspot.com/2020/10/what-is-next-number-in-sequence.html
Wednesday, October 23, 2024
MacMahon and Ramanujan
As a proud McMahon, I claim relationship to all McMahons and MacMahons (good and bad). In this post, I outline a connection to the great mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan.
Percy Alexander MacMahon and Srinivasa Ramanujan, though separated by continents and generations, shared a profound connection through their groundbreaking work in combinatorics and number theory. Their lives and contributions intersected in unexpected ways, leaving an indelible mark on the mathematical landscape.
MacMahon, a British mathematician, was a pioneer in the field of combinatorics, the study of counting and arranging objects. His work on partitions of integers, permutations, and symmetric functions laid a solid foundation for future generations of mathematicians. He was known for his meticulous and systematic approach to problem-solving.
Ramanujan, a self-taught Indian mathematician, burst onto the mathematical scene with his extraordinary intuition and ability to produce complex formulas and identities seemingly out of thin air. His work on number theory, infinite series, and elliptic functions was revolutionary, often defying conventional mathematical thinking.
Though their paths never crossed in person, MacMahon and Ramanujan were indirectly connected through their shared interest in combinatorics. Ramanujan's work on partitions of integers, for example, was closely related to MacMahon's research. In fact, Ramanujan's formulas for the number of partitions of integers were later proved and refined by MacMahon and other mathematicians.
Ramanujan's unconventional style and unorthodox methods sometimes clashed with the more traditional approach of mathematicians like MacMahon. However, MacMahon recognized Ramanujan's extraordinary talent and supported his work. He helped to bring Ramanujan to England and provided him with the resources and intellectual stimulation he needed to thrive.
The relationship between MacMahon and Ramanujan is a testament to the power of mathematical collaboration and the importance of recognizing and nurturing exceptional talent. Their work continues to inspire and influence mathematicians today, and their legacies will endure for generations to come.
The Power of Learning, Part 2
A year ago, I posted about the power of learning. Inspired by the story behind this post, I set out a goal to write Mathematica code to produce a sequence in the On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences (OEIS: https://oeis.org/), everyday for an entire year. Today, I accomplished this mission and can confirm that committing to do something everyday for a year is a good way to learn a new skill. I'm far from being an expert in Mathematica, but I am now at a much higher level than I was year ago. My Mathematica contributions to the OEIS, as well as my integer sequences, are https://oeis.org/search?q=james+mcmahon&language=english&go=Search.
New Record-Breaking Prime Number Discovered, 2^136,279,841-1
New Record-Breaking Prime Number Discovered
Mathematicians have discovered a new record-breaking prime number, the largest known prime to date. The number, 2^136,279,841-1, is a Mersenne prime, a type of prime number that is one less than a power of two.
The discovery was made by the Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search (GIMPS), a distributed computing project that uses volunteers' computers to search for Mersenne primes. The new prime was found by a volunteer in the United States.
The previous record for the largest known prime number was held by 2^77,232,917-1, which was discovered in 2018. The new prime is more than twice as large as the previous record holder.
The discovery of new prime numbers is important for several reasons. First, they are used in cryptography, which is the science of secure communication. Second, they are used in number theory, a branch of mathematics that studies the properties of numbers. Third, they are simply interesting in their own right.
The discovery of the new prime number is a major milestone for the GIMPS project. It is also a testament to the power of distributed computing. By harnessing the power of thousands of volunteers' computers, GIMPS has been able to make significant contributions to the field of mathematics.
What is a Mersenne Prime?
A Mersenne prime is a prime number that is one less than a power of two. In other words, it is a number of the form 2^n - 1, where n is a positive integer.
Mersenne primes are named after Marin Mersenne, a French monk who lived from 1588 to 1648. Mersenne studied these numbers and made a list of all the Mersenne primes up to 2^257 - 1. However, his list was not entirely correct.
Since Mersenne's time, many more Mersenne primes have been discovered. The largest known Mersenne prime is 2136,279,841-1.
Why are Mersenne Primes Important?
Mersenne primes are important for several reasons. First, they are used in cryptography. The RSA cryptosystem, which is one of the most widely used public-key cryptosystems, uses large prime numbers, including Mersenne primes.
Second, Mersenne primes are used in number theory. Number theorists study the properties of Mersenne primes and other types of prime numbers.
Third, Mersenne primes are simply interesting in their own right. They are a fascinating example of a mathematical pattern that has been studied for centuries.
Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search (GIMPS)
The Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search (GIMPS) is a distributed computing project that uses volunteers' computers to search for Mersenne primes. The project was founded in 1996 by George Woltman.
GIMPS has discovered several Mersenne primes, including the largest known Mersenne prime, 2136,279,841-1. The project is a great way for people to contribute to mathematics and science.
If you are interested in learning more about Mersenne primes or the GIMPS project, I encourage you to visit the GIMPS website at
News about this recently discovered prime:
Numberphile video: https://www.numberphile.com/videos/man-who-found-the-worlds-biggest-prime
Thursday, September 26, 2024
Happy Anniversary Rule 30
This year my wife and I are celebrating our 40th anniversary. This year Stephen Wolfram also celebrates the 40th anniversary of his favorite scientific discovery as he wrote in My All-Time Favorite Science Discovery
Also, see a prior post -https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/8711601538345502519/636715033944644578.
This discovery led to Wolfram's publication of A New Kind of Science (now available online).
Friday, September 13, 2024
A375508 Contribution to the OEIS
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A375606 Contribution to the OEIS
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wednesday, August 21, 2024
Baserunning Runs WAR Adjustment Proposal
Below is a paper presented at the 2024 Sabermetrics, Scouting, and the Science of Baseball seminar at Illinois Tech, August 24-25.
“Baserunning Runs WAR Adjustment Proposal”
Samuel Rees
Naperville North High School
August 24, 2024
Introduction and Abstract
Before the 2023 MLB season, major changes to the rules and standards of the game created a shift in base running value. With the implementation of a pitch clock, pitchers and hitters havel ess time to recover and reset between pitches and at-bats. Pitchers also have a restriction on how many times they can attempt to pick off the runner at any base. Pitchers can move to pick off a baserunner two times with no penalty, but if they try a third time and do not record an out in the attempt, the runner automatically advances a base. The standards have also changed within baserunning. Larger bases decrease the distance between each base and thus, encourage runners to steal more bases with the shorter distances. All of these changes led to shorter game times and increased run production in 2023 relative to the year prior. However, these changes have also impacted how baserunning runs contribute to a player’s produced value in baserunning. Therefore, there needs to be an adjustment in the calculation of Baserunning Runs Value in terms of the Wins Above Replacement calculation to account for these rule changes.
Starting with the 2018 season, which featured 2,474 stolen bases, and continuing through 2022 (excluding 2020), the number of stolen bases that all teams produced decreased by about 40 stolen bases per year. If this trend were to continue, then in 2023 without the rule changes, there should have been roughly 2,437 stolen bases. This pales in comparison to the actual number of stolen bases in 2023, which was 3,500 (1).
I will now present data, acquired from FanGraphs, that shows changes in stolen base production and other factors to illustrate why the calculation needs to be updated. According to FanGraphs, Weighted Stolen Bases, a component of the WAR calculation, is calculated in part by using a series of constants. These constants change year-by-year to account for different run environments and other factors. For every year since 1871, these values have changed.
However, the constant for stolen bases has remained fixed at the same value constant since the 1871 season. It has not been changed to account for the new rules, even though the rules have affected how players steal bases and how the value of modern baserunning affects the game (2).
For calculating Runs Added from Stolen Bases, I will reference the FanGraphs constant formula with two separate events, direct from their website. The purpose of the formula is to compare each player’s stolen base runs created per opportunity compared to league stolen base runs per opportunity. The constant for the formula is derived from historical league data, and the events from each time a Stolen Base or Caught Stealing event occurred.
(SB x runSB) - (CS x runCS) - (lgwSB x (1B + BB + HBP - IBB)) = Stolen Base Runs
In this formula, SB represents stolen bases, runSB represents the constant for stolen bases, CS represents caught stealing events, and runCS represents the constant for caught stealing events. This formula also contains lgwSB, which represents the league average stolen base runs created per opportunity. The calculation for lgwSB is:
lgwSB = (SB x runSB) + (CS x runSB) / (1B + BB + HBP - IBB)
SB and CS, as well as 1B, BB, HBP, and IBB, are all counting stats and league totals. With this formula, we can compare Stolen Base Runs Value for two players from two differing seasons.
2023 Francisco Lindor vs. 2019 Jarrod Dyson
2023 Francisco Lindor and 2019 Jarrod Dyson are two players with nearly identical stolen base success rates for their respective seasons (88.5% for Lindor and 88.2% for Dyson) and who played in the same league during the last 5 years (3). For these equations, we will calculate the lgwSB value first for each player/season:
2023 lgwSB: (3503 x 0.2) + (866 x -0.422) / (26,031 + 15,819 + 2112 - 474) = 0.00771
2019 lgwSB: (2280 x 0.2) + (832 x -0.435) / (25,947 + 15,895 + 1984 - 753) = 0.00211
I will then use each season value to calculate each player’s stolen base run values:
2023 Francisco Lindor: (0.2 x 31) - (0.425 x 4) - (0.00771 x (87 + 66 + 12 - 1)) = 3.2356
2019 Jarrod Dyson: (0.2 x 30) - (0.426 x 4) - (0.00211 x (72 + 47 + 1 - 0)) = 4.0428
The calculated difference of .8072 between Lindor and Dyson’s Stolen Base Run Values signifies both rule changes and additional adjustment factors like league environmental conditions.
This value demonstrates the need for a separation of players' stolen base run values into two eras: Pre-Pitch Clock and Post-Pitch Clock. As described, 2023 Lindor’s runs value created from stolen bases is less valuable than 2019 Dyson’s runs value created from steals, even though their stolen base and caught stealing metrics are nearly identical.
In my proposal, the stolen base constant for players post-2023 should be changed to a lower value, to reflect the change in run environment and to distinguish the changing difficulty in stealing bases between pre- and post-pitch clock eras.
Data Used
To make a numerical adjustment to baserunning Wins Above Replacement and how it is calculated, I needed to analyze how much of an advantage baserunners have now, given the new rule environment.
Next, we can look at the distance between bases. The size of the bases increased from 15 inches square to 18 inches square. Consequently, the distance from first to second base and second to third base decreased by 4.5 inches. The distance from third base to home plate and home to first base also decreased by 3 inches. With the bases slightly closer, a baserunner has to cover less ground in the same amount of time prior to successfully stealing a base. Additionally, the larger bases can affect and reduce over-sliding and lead to more positive baserunner outcomes.
Finally, the base size increase also makes it easier for runners to avoid a tag, as there is now more area for them to reach safely during a tag play (4).
In 2022, total pitcher pickoff attempts reached an average of 6.07 attempts per game. In 2023, that number decreased to 3.94 attempts per game (through the first 6 weeks of the season). The updated rule changes allowed runners to advance and take a base more easily, with fewer pickoff attempts allowed in addition to “timing” a steal attempt based on the pitch clock.
Finally, we can look at pitch clock analysis. Pitchers cannot look over at runners as often or as long as they were previously used to, creating a shift in the mental tactics used in pickoffs and how easily runners can fool pitchers. In 2022, the average time between pitches with runners on base was 23.1 seconds. In 2023, this number dropped to 19.0 seconds (5). The 4.1 seconds between seasons may seem insignificant, but considering that 1-2 more seconds for a pitcher could mean the difference between successfully attempting to pick off a runner or not, it must be considered. With the introduction of an 18-second pitch clock for the 2024 season, we can expect these times to decrease even further.
Explanation of Data
For these reasons outlined above, the constant for stolen base events should be updated to reflect the new rules. Due to the shorter distance between bases, the decrease in pitcher pickoff attempts, and the implementation of the pitch clock, there needs to be a change in how stolen bases are valued. Furthermore, the increase in the number of successful stolen bases shows the disparity in how stolen bases are calculated versus how they are valued in today’s game.
Explanation of Value of Outs
The value of an out on the basepaths is typically twice as impactful as a stolen base because of the implication of the out(6). Getting caught stealing removes the runner from the basepaths and an out from a team’s 27 outs available. Because of the gap between how valuable an out versus an advanced base is, teams would probably rather keep a runner on their base rather than risk an out on the basepaths. However, with the new rules, there is now less of a risk of sending the runner to steal because of all of the baserunning advantages.
Due to the changes in rules, pitchers now have fewer ways to get runners out on the basepaths and base runners have more advantages compared to before 2023. Because there are fewer ways to get runners out, there is less likelihood that the runner will get out. The value of a stolen base compared to an out after the rule and standard changes is not the same as in the years before 2023.
Special thanks to my analytics advisor Connor Binnig, MSC, University of Chicago.
(1) 2022 & 2023 Team Statistics, Baseball Reference
(2) Seasonal Constants, FanGraphs
(3) Francisco Lindor 2023 Statistics, Baseball Reference. Jarrod Dyson 2019 Statistics, Baseball Reference.
(4) Basepath measurements with new bigger bases, MLB.com
(5) Statcast Pitch Tempo Leaderboard, Baseball Savant
(6) Seasonal Constants, FanGraphs
Saturday, August 17, 2024
A375119 Contribution to the OEIS
This is my 21st published sequence in the OEIS. I have a few other sequences planned based on Kruskal counts (see post: https://jamesmacmath.blogspot.com/2024/08/kruskal-count-with-prime-omega.html).
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Look and Say Sequence, A005150
The Look and Say Sequence begins 1, 11, 21, 1211, 111221, 312211...
Each term is a description of the prior term. For example, the second term, 11, is read as one 1 and describes the previous term, 1. The fifth term, 111221, is read as one 1, one 2, two 1s and describes the prior term, 1211.
The sequence is often attributed to the mathematician, John Conway. However, according to the On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences (OEIS), the sequence's first mention dates back to the 1977 International Mathematical Olympiad in Belgrave, Yugoslavia. In the OEIS, the sequence is A005150.
Recently, Scientific America wrote about the sequence in their puzzle section: https://www.scientificamerican.com/game/math-puzzle-next-sequence/
Friday, August 16, 2024
Prime Number Magnet
In a prior post the property of all prime numbers greater than 3 can be expressed as 6n +/-1. A question that may arise from this property is whether all multiples of 6 are adjacent to a prime. The short answer is no, but one needs to review all multiples of 6 up to 120 before one finds the first multiple of 6 that is not adjacent to a prime number.
Examples:
1 x 6 = 6 is adjacent to primes 5 and 7
2 x 6 = 12 is adjacent to primes 11 and 13
3 x 6 = 13 is adjacent to primes 17 and 19
4 x 6 = 24 is adjacent to prime 23
At 20 x 6 = 120 is adjacent to 119 (composite 7 x 17) and 121 (composite 11 x 11)
As with many patterns of integers, it is always worth checking the On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences. We find that sequence {120,144,186,204,216,246,288,300...}
multiples of 6 that are not a prime number +/- 1 is sequence A259826.
Note: the first entry at 120 occurs after the first prime number gap >8 which is between 113 and 127.
Related posts on prime numbers:
https://jamesmacmath.blogspot.com/2020/05/prime-number-gap-conjectures.html
https://jamesmacmath.blogspot.com/2020/05/prime-number-gaps.html
https://jamesmacmath.blogspot.com/2020/05/prime-numbers-property-rediscovered.html
https://jamesmacmath.blogspot.com/2020/05/twin-prime-sandwich.html
Saturday, August 10, 2024
The Mystery Calculator
Below is a link to the "mystery calculator." The user is asked to choose between four and seven cards. Each card displays several different numbers. Next the user is asked to pick a secret number that is on any of the cards. Finally, the user is asked to select all the cards that display that number. The "calculator" then determines the number chosen by the user.
https://eddmann.com/mystery-calculator-clojurescript/
How does this work? Consider the option in which five cards are displayed. The numbers 1 through 31 are shown on the five cards. Most of the numbers appear on more than one card. When the user selects the cards showing their number, each card is either yes-it has my number or no-it doesn't have my number. For five cards there are 2^5 = 32 possible arrangements of yes/no combinations. Therefore there is a unique combination for each of the numbers displayed on the cards. For example the number 1 is only shown on the first card, while 31 is shown on all five cards.
Sunday, August 4, 2024
Kruskal Count with Prime Omega
A Kruskal count (or a Dynkin-Kruskal count) is a sequence of entries in which each entry is based on a property of the prior term. For examples of a Kruskal count, see the post about magic
tricks that are based on this concept. Also see Wikipedia: Dynkin-Kruskal Count.
For this post, a series of Kruskal counts will be developed
using the prime omega function of the prior entry. Prime omega, sometimes
referred to as Big Omega, is the number of prime factors a number has, with
multiplicity. Prime omega of 2 is 1 since it has one prime factor. Prime omega
of 12 is 3 since it has the prime factors 2*2*3.
For this series of sequences, the first term is designated
by a(1)=m, and the formula for each subsequent term is a(n)=a(n-1)+primeomega(a(n-1)).
The base sequence of the series has m=2 and the sequence is: {2,3,4,6,8,11,12,15,17,18,21,23,24,28,31,32,37,38,40,44,47…}.
For m=3, the sequence becomes {3,4,6,8,11,12,…}. Beginning
with first term of the m=3 sequence and the second term of the base, or m=2,
sequence, the subsequent terms of the two sequences are the same. Likewise for the
m=4 sequence, the terms are the same beginning with its first term.
For m=5, the sequence becomes {5,6,8,11,12…}. In this case
the terms are same as the base sequence beginning with its second term (6).
Since for all m (conjectured - at least up to 30,000 have
been tested), sequences will match up with the base sequence, to document the
entire series of sequences, all terms of the sequences do not have to be
listed. One just needs to note at which point an m>2-sequence begins to
match up with the base sequence. For example, at m=29,052, the matching of
terms doesn’t occur until the 32nd term of the sequence. This happens to the
maximum of all the sequences up to m=30,000. To fully document the m=29,052-sequence,
one would just need to list the first 31 terms. To know subsequent terms, one could
then refer to the base sequence.
These matching points can be listed as a new sequence and
its first 86 terms are:
{1,1,1,2,1,2,1,2,2,1,1,5,4,1,3,1,1,3,2,1,2,1,1,6,2,5,1,5,4,1,1,3,3,2,2,1,1,5,1,4,3,2,1,2,2,1,1,3,2,2,5,1,1,4,2,3,1,2,1,3,2,7,1,7,6,6,5,5,1,4,3,1,1,4,1,2,3,1,1,2,9,9,8,1,8,1}.
Note that the first three terms of the base sequence is 2, 3, 4, so the
sequence above begins 1, 1, 1 because for m=2, m=3, and m=4, their first terms are
found in the base sequence. For other
starting numbers, one needs to explore higher before matching occurs. For example,
with m=13, the point at which the sequence begins to match up with the base
sequence is the 5th term.
The Mathematica program to produce the base sequence is
(producing 9,999 terms):
pseq1=NestList[#+PrimeOmega[#]&,2,10000]
This sequence is found in the On-Line Encyclopedia of
Integer Sequences (OEIS): A160649.
The Mathematica program to produce the sequence indicating
the first term at which the sequences for m=2(the base sequence itself) and
higher m’s match up with the base sequence is:
pseq={}; Do[ i=1; s=n; While[!MemberQ[pseq1, s],
s=s+PrimeOmega[s]; i++]; AppendTo[pseq, i], {n,2, 30000}];pseq
The histogram of the distribution of the terms of this sequence is:
This program produces the first 29,999 terms (note: it’s first entry starts with n=2). As noted above, the sequence begins with: {1,1,1,2,1,2,1,2,2,1,1,5,4,1,3…} and is not found in the OEIS. However, the author plans to submit it as a proposed sequence.
An Open Message to the Blog's Fans in Singapore
(Image: Free 12 singapore icons - Iconfinder ) This past week, more views of this blog were made from Singapore than other country. To ackn...
Popular in last 30 days
-
New Record-Breaking Prime Number Discovered Mathematicians have discovered a new record-breaking prime number, the largest known prime to ...
-
This post is in memory of my high school algebra teacher, Larry Freeman, of Morgan Park High School, Chicago. Once he handed out a worksheet...
-
Summary This lesson is about an interesting property of all even numbers greater than 2. Every even number greater than 2 is the sum o...