What number in the series is wrong and should be replaced 2 4 8 16 20 22 44 46?

already exists.

Would you like to merge this question into it?

already exists as an alternate of this question.

Would you like to make it the primary and merge this question into it?

exists and is an alternate of .

Any one of them could be wrong. Short of reading the mind of the person who posed the question, there is no way of determining which of the infinitely many solutions is the "correct" one.

For example,
2 is wrong. The rule for the sequence is:
t(n) = (-23*n^6 + 636*n^5 - 7010*n^4 + 39330*n^3 - 118247*n^2 + 181434*n - 110520)/180 and the correct value is 80; or
4 is wrong. The rule for the sequence is different and the correct value is 15.71; or
8 is wrong. The rule for the sequence is different and the correct value is 4.1; or
16 is wrong. The rule for the sequence is different and the correct value is 18.34; or
20 is wrong. The rule for the sequence is different and the correct value is 17.63; or
22 is wrong. The rule for the sequence is different and the correct value is 25.87; or
44 is wrong. The rule for the sequence is different and the correct value is 32.14; or
46 is wrong. The rule for the sequence is different and the correct value is 127.61.
Take your pick! And these are only polynomial solutions.
---
A different approach:
8 is the only number whose English name starts with a vowel - change it to 7 or 9.
---
Sequential approach:
Replace 16 with 10 to follow the alternating sequence of addition then multiplication by 2.
2+2=4 x2=8 +2=10 x2=20 +2=22 x2=44 +2=46
This was the solution presented by the original asker circa 2005.
1 person found this useful

Witch should be replace in the sequence 2 4 8 16 20 22?

Well, I just try it: 2 plus 2 is 4 4 plus 4 is 8 8 plus 8 is 16 >> +2 , +4, +8 Now it's getting less again 16 plus 4 is 20 20 plus 2 is 22 And the next wi

Are there any wrong numbers in this series 2 - 4 - 8 - 16 - 20 - 22 - 44 - 46?

That depends on the definition of the list. If the list was supposed to show a set of positive even integers in ascending order, then it's entirely correct. If it was supposed