Anonymous user
Talk:Hofstadter Figure-Figure sequences: Difference between revisions
Talk:Hofstadter Figure-Figure sequences (view source)
Revision as of 18:31, 22 October 2011
, 12 years ago→S(n): It seems to be how it is usually defined.
(→S(n)) |
(→S(n): It seems to be how it is usually defined.) |
||
Line 15:
::In the general case, yes, we might use S(n) to refer to a sequence. However, for this to be accurate, n needs to be an unbound value. And in that particular sentence, we are talking about n having a specific value (which is used in R(n)). Anyways, from my point of view the phrasing is confusing (and opens up questions like: is it possible for S(n) to contain values for some value of n which are not present in later values of n? And rather than delve into the issues that I would need to tackle to determine whether or not this could be a relevant topic, I would rather the notation be self consistent). --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 17:56, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
:::Not really, this aspect of the definition is present in the references too. I suspect that it may be a part of the original description cited as: D. Hofstadter, "Goedel, Escher, Bach", p. 73, but I don't have it to hand at the moment to check. When I first saw their definition I found it confusing at first too, but that is what made it interesting when trying to code it.
::: When I had finished the Python version I checked it with tables of the first 1000 values refered to from Sloane: [http://oeis.org/A005228/b005228.txt here] for R and [http://oeis.org/A005228/b005228.txt here] for S, although the table for S has an off-by-one error. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 18:31, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
| |||