home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.math
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!hellgate.utah.edu!lanl!beta.lanl.gov!ttw
- From: ttw@beta.lanl.gov (Tony Warnock)
- Subject: Re: Some BIG and SMALL sets of integers.
- Message-ID: <1992Sep12.232024.16308@newshost.lanl.gov>
- Sender: news@newshost.lanl.gov
- Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
-
-
- How does the "smallness" of sets lacking 3-digit distribution
- compare with Besicovich's proof that almost all integers
- are n-epsilon normal. That is, digit strings of length
- n occur with correct frequence to within epsilon if large enough
- numbers are considered.
-
- This result seems to be almost (but not quite) contradictory
- to that of the sums of reciprocals.
-
- Or maybe I've missed the whole issue.
-
- Tony Warnock
-
-
- It's a bug - it's not a feature;
- Its an ugly little creature.
- Every time that I improve it,
- Code-rewriting to remove it;
- It just metamorphosizes
- In another of its guises.
- Yet again disgruntled users
- Deem me one of their abusers.
- Loathe to sit around and fidget
- I create another digit;
- Tack it on the public version;
- Then for marketing coercion:
- I announce another UPGRADE!
- References: <1992Sep11.171806.778@csc.canterbury.ac.nz>
- Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 23:20:24 GMT
- Lines: 0
-
-