Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!ljdickey
From: ljdickey@watmath.UUCP (Lee Dickey)
Newsgroups: net.math
Subject: Re: Interesting Numbers
Message-ID: <7672@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 6-May-84 09:57:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: watmath.7672
Posted: Sun May  6 09:57:21 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 7-May-84 00:41:01 EDT
References: <1215@seismo.UUCP>, <1343@brl-vgr.ARPA>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 11

[]
Someone said:

>  But the "proof" that there is no "uninteresting" number by eliminating
>  the smallest such one at a time is invalid.

I do not understand the argument here.  Could someone who does, or
anyone who beleives that the proof is invalid, please explain?
-- 
  Lee Dickey, University of Waterloo.  (ljdickey@watmath.UUCP)
 	... {allegra, decvax} !watmath!ljdickey