4 ms·
Well haha still seems like a lot of brain was put into it. Also, there's a simpler pattern to the sequence that is easily observable without even opening OEIS.
by mankeysee 7y ago
Well haha still seems like a lot of brain was put into it.
Also, there's a simpler pattern to the sequence that is easily observable without even opening OEIS.
- gjm11 7y agoUnfortunately, if you spot that pattern then you will not guess the correct generalization. It seems that this may be a puzzle that's easier to solve if you aren't good at spotting easy things.
- mankeysee 7y agoWell tbh, it seems 2^k-1 does actually match the sequence as far as it is shown. Perhaps there is a proof that n=2^k-1 for the numbers where 2^n is divisible by (n+1). I'll have to see.
- oisdk 7y agoWhat's the simpler pattern?
- paideic 7y agoPresumably multiplying by two and adding one? That's the pattern that jumped out to me, unless they're talking about something more subtle.