Jump to content

Talk:Square triangular number

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 110.32.244.175 (talk) at 01:34, 28 April 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Square triangular number

Mathematica seems to prefer the term "square triangular number" to "triangular square number". Maybe tri.sq. should be a redirect to sq.tri., but I don't want to move articles unless I'm absolutly sure its the right thing to do. Numerao 22:14, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

So do I, but Google makes it pretty even [1] and [2] at about 50 hits each. --Henrygb 14:11, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually most TSNs seem to come from wikipedia copies, so moved --Henrygb 15:03, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
square beats triangular: e.g. in the range ]1...1000] there are 43 triangulars but only 30 squares. So the right name must be square triangular number.46.115.1.200 (talk) 21:37, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pell Numbers

I added a new section to Pell numbers. I might suggest redirecting this page to that section. Comments? --Gentlemath (talk) 00:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is in great need of improvement, but it is on a different topic than Pell numbers (although they are obviously closely related) and should I think remain a separate article. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

higher dimensions

What's about an enlargement into another dimensions, e.g. "Cube tetrahedral number" (can't find any in the range <1,000,000,000) 46.115.1.200 (talk) 21:50, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is known [3] that the only binomial coefficient with (and ) that is also a power of an integer is the case ; apparently this is a result of Erdös. Since tetrahedral numbers are binomial coefficients, this means that no tetrahedral number other than one is a perfect cube, and only 1, 4, and 19600 are perfect squares. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:16, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]