20037Re: 2^m+3^n and 2^n+3^m
- Apr 9, 2009--- In email@example.com,
"Mark Underwood" <mark.underwood@...> wrote:
> that 1679,1743, .. sequence, it is not only hard computing,"Des goûts et des couleurs, on ne discute pas."
> but psychologically difficult as well,
> to find a *lack* of primes.
> Actually finding primes (especially unique ones)
> is so much more fun!
[About tastes and colours, one does not argue.]
However, I remark that my sequence of blanks is *easier*
to generate, up to a given size of n, than is your
preferred sequence of unique hits, since for the former
we may "step to next n" after the first hit, but for the
latter only after the second.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>