OFFSET
1,3
COMMENTS
10 is obviously the first integer not present in the sequence as 1 > 0; 11 will never show either because the result of a(n) * 11 is already in the sequence or because the said result has digits in contradiction with the definition.
It would be good to have a proof that there is an infinite sequence with the desired property. It could happen then any choice for any number of initial terms will eventually fail. - David A. Corneth and N. J. A. Sloane, Mar 07 2021
The authors agree, but are unable to give the desired proof. So it is indeed possible that this sequence is wrong from the first term on.
LINKS
Carole Dubois, Table of n, a(n) for n = 1..138 (terms calculated with a(n+1) < a(n)*1000, (backtracking when not found inside this limit)).
EXAMPLE
a(5) = 4 and a(6) = 6 have product 24: the three numbers have digits in nondecreasing order;
a(6) = 6 and a(7) = 8 have product 48: the three numbers have digits in nondecreasing order;
a(7) = 8 and a(7) = 7 have product 56: the three numbers have digits in nondecreasing order; etc.
CROSSREFS
KEYWORD
base,nonn
AUTHOR
Eric Angelini and Carole Dubois, Mar 07 2021
STATUS
approved