3 ms·
For n = 7, their formula gives 5901 and yours gives 5907. How feasible would it be to verify which one's correct? Exhaust every 5901-long sequence? Or is there
by Arnavion 8y ago
For n = 7, their formula gives 5901 and yours gives 5907. How feasible would it be to verify which one's correct? Exhaust every 5901-long sequence? Or is there some smarter way?
- robinhouston 8y agoNo one has yet managed to solve n=6 completely, so I think solving n=7 is a long way off. On the other hand, I think we will soon have an improved lower bound that is strong enough to refute this formula.