Son of eugene

Hi Son of eugene, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

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:

• Table of Contents

• Department directory

Need help?

• Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
• Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.

• Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
• The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.

How you can help:

• Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.

• Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...

• Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.

• If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Good luck, and have fun. --TicketMan - Talk - contribs 07:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Smith numbers

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:

4, 728, 73615, 4463535, 15966114, 2050918644, 164736913905, … (sequence A059754 in the OEIS)

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

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)