Timeline for Density of extended Mersenne numbers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 24 at 10:38 | history | edited | mick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Jun 23 at 19:25 | history | edited | mick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 180 characters in body
|
| Jun 23 at 19:18 | history | edited | mick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2068 characters in body
|
| Mar 12, 2023 at 21:21 | comment | added | mick | I wonder what happens if we do not start at 1 but another value ... | |
| Feb 15, 2023 at 22:52 | comment | added | mick | No I am sick :/ | |
| Feb 14, 2023 at 22:00 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | Have you made any effort to get the Bruck paper in the Albert book, mick? | |
| Feb 14, 2023 at 11:44 | comment | added | Joachim König | @mick Your "added" observation means that no number all of whose prime factors are 1 mod 4 can be in the set. However, the set of all such integers is still a density zero set. I'm increasingly tempted to believe that the set itself is actually density 1 inside the odd integers. | |
| Feb 14, 2023 at 6:30 | answer | added | Joachim König | timeline score: 4 | |
| Feb 14, 2023 at 4:37 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | Previously posted to mathstack, math.stackexchange.com/questions/4637438/… – mick, you really should have linked each question to the other! | |
| Feb 14, 2023 at 1:50 | comment | added | mick | Check out the update About mod 4 !! | |
| Feb 14, 2023 at 1:48 | history | edited | mick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 592 characters in body
|
| Feb 12, 2023 at 23:17 | comment | added | JoshuaZ | It is volunteer run. You can make an account and submit it. | |
| Feb 12, 2023 at 23:15 | comment | added | mick | @JoshuaZ I do not have that power. | |
| Feb 12, 2023 at 23:12 | comment | added | JoshuaZ | I suggest then adding this sequence to OEIS. It certainly looks natural enough to go there. | |
| Feb 12, 2023 at 23:11 | comment | added | JoshuaZ | Ah, so it was. My apologies. | |
| Feb 12, 2023 at 23:10 | comment | added | mick | @JoshuaZ 219 is a counterexample, it was mentioned in the OP btw. | |
| Feb 12, 2023 at 23:09 | comment | added | mick | @JoshuaZ no that is not the same sequence. But the same sequence was mentioned in the comments there : The set S in Bruck is slightly different because it does not include 1 and it includes a property "if n is in S, so is 2n + 1" which is a special case of the last property (iii) where m=1 since we allow 1 in S. REFERENCES R. H. Bruck, What is a loop?, pp. 59-99 in A. A. Albert, ed., Studies in Modern Algebra, Vol. 2, Mathematical Association of America, 1963, see p. 67. | |
| Feb 12, 2023 at 23:07 | comment | added | JoshuaZ | oeis.org/A197625 is almost but not quite your sequence. Actually they may be the same. I am not sure there is an example where the more general version of rule B ever matters. | |
| Feb 12, 2023 at 22:56 | history | asked | mick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |