Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by techonup 4005 days ago
The point is that it didn't work, so exponentiation was out the window.
1 comments

My point was that 1,1,1 is 1^1,1^2,1^3 and actually fits the pattern :).
Right - by fitting the pattern but failing the actual criterion, it disproves the consecutive exponents hypothesis.