Hi Son of eugene, and Welcome to Wikipedia! ![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/Wikipedia-logo.png/50px-Wikipedia-logo.png)
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/Wikipedia-logo.png/50px-Wikipedia-logo.png)
Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
Smith numbers
[edit]You reverted your post while I was writing a reply so maybe you realize this but here is what I was writing. The article said:
The starting elements of the smallest Smith n-tuple in base 10 for n=1,2,... are:[1]
- This does not claim that 4 is a Smith brother. It says that 4 is the smallest Smith number. An n-tuple is a sequence of n elements. So (4) is the smallest 1-tuple (a single Smith number). (728, 729) is the smallest 2-tuple (Smith brothers), (73615, 73616, 73617) is the smallest 3-tuple, and so on. It's also explained in the reference and OEIS:A059754. I have added an explanation to the article.[1] By the way, I discovered the smallest 7-tuple at 164736913905. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:11, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
References
- ^ Shyam Sunder Gupta. "Fascinating Smith Numbers".
- Hi @PrimeHunter
- Thanks for your message (and hope this is a reasonable way to reply!). First, you are right, and i was wrong. As soon as i had written my comment, i realized that i had made a mistake. Because, as you say, that sentence never claimed that following was a list of Smith brothers. It only claimed that it was, as you say, a list of the first n tuples. I am surprised that the Smith number sympathizers are so on top of the page that as soon as i goofed, i'd be called out on it, even before i could erase my mistake!!! :) :) :) But i'm glad you have such sharp eyes, and hope that you have a chance to make many discoveries about the Smith numbers, or primes, or whatever you are most interested in! :) :) Son of eugene (talk) 17:09, 6 February 2020 (UTC)