are a pair of cherries or what, as neither of the sequences appeal to me.
The conjecture for A108 is almost a poorly stated tautology, or more fairly a special
case of a theorem that applies to all strong enough exponential growth.
Harm.On.ica claims to have improved the proof working from a suggestion of mine:
Unfortunately I think you're making each other look bad on that one, but hey, at
least I also look bad using these methods and not checking that much.
If I had more time we would go after A2897 as well. The theorem itself doesn't look
very surprising, but the labor would be more involved.
All the best,
--Brad