This reminds me of the old proof that there are no uninteresting integers. It would be fun to enter this number into a database or newsgroup that is indexed by Google & watch how fast it increments... What you may want is a non-inclusive bound on the smallest such number. The mere mention of the bound won't then increment the number. BTW, I'm sure that one of the Google employees on math-fun would be in a better position to produce this bound than any of the rest of us. At 08:43 AM 11/28/2007, James Propp wrote:
A Google search indicates that the number 184362536 (chosen more or less at random, after a half dozen failed attempts) does not occur anywhere on the Web.
What is the smallest positive integer with this property as of right now?
Jim Propp