[go: up one dir, main page]

login

Year-end appeal: Please make a donation to the OEIS Foundation to support ongoing development and maintenance of the OEIS. We are now in our 61st year, we have over 378,000 sequences, and we’ve reached 11,000 citations (which often say “discovered thanks to the OEIS”).

Revision History for A191621 (Bold, blue-underlined text is an addition; faded, red-underlined text is a deletion.)

Showing entries 1-10 | older changes
a(n) = ((n+1)^n-(n-1)^n)/2+1.
(history; published version)
#21 by Wesley Ivan Hurt at Mon Apr 26 14:54:03 EDT 2021
STATUS

editing

approved

#20 by Wesley Ivan Hurt at Mon Apr 26 14:53:53 EDT 2021
NAME

a(n) = ((n+1)^n-(n-1)^n)/2+1.

STATUS

approved

editing

#19 by Harvey P. Dale at Sun Oct 27 11:22:12 EDT 2019
STATUS

editing

approved

#18 by Harvey P. Dale at Sun Oct 27 11:22:08 EDT 2019
MATHEMATICA

Table[((n+1)^n-(n-1)^n)/2+1, {n, 20}] (* Harvey P. Dale, Oct 27 2019 *)

STATUS

approved

editing

#17 by Russ Cox at Fri Mar 30 18:52:45 EDT 2012
AUTHOR

_Juri-Stepan Gerasimov (2stepan(AT)rambler.ru), _, Jun 14 2011

Discussion
Fri Mar 30
18:52
OEIS Server: https://oeis.org/edit/global/257
#16 by M. F. Hasler at Tue Jun 21 17:49:36 EDT 2011
STATUS

proposed

approved

#15 by M. F. Hasler at Tue Jun 21 17:49:19 EDT 2011
CROSSREFS

Cf. A000040.

#14 by M. F. Hasler at Tue Jun 21 17:48:40 EDT 2011
COMMENTS

The next prime in the sequence , after 2, 5 and 29, has at least 888 digits (n >= 349).

#13 by Klaus Brockhaus at Tue Jun 21 17:24:01 EDT 2011
COMMENTS

The next prime in the sequence has at least 888 digits (n >= 349).

#12 by Joerg Arndt at Wed Jun 15 12:35:24 EDT 2011
DATA

2, 5, 29, 273, 3377, 51013, 1048577, 908609, 18640961, 432891137, 10000000001, 11225320101, 321504185345, 100498283728818, 10079828372881, 343360783937537, 12627774819845669, 498676704524517377, 21046391759976988929, 945381827279671853057, 45032132922921758270917

Discussion
Wed Jun 15
12:36
Joerg Arndt: A motivation would certainly be welcome as this looks a bit like a "random" formula.
But I dare say this is at least well-defined and not overly contrived.
Tue Jun 21
17:22
Klaus Brockhaus: Well, not *overly* contrived, but stll unmotivated. I vote for rejecting.