Probably a repost-but what the heck. . . .whats special about that number (geeks only)

[episodic]

http://www.stetson.edu/~efriedma/numbers.html

 

[Farang]

dear god

 

[finite automaton]

I think you mean nerds only

 

[Flammable]

wtf

 

[SoulAssassin]

[brain asplodes]

 

[Ika]

534 - ???

lol.

EDIT: guess there are a bunch of ???s.

Also - 7672 = 777 + 6666 + 7 + 222.
7679 = 7 + 6666 + 7 + 999.
9872 = 8 + 88 + 888 + 8888.

though that last one is pretty cool, actually.

EDIT 2: last one...

42 is the 5th Catalan number.

lame.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

3 is the number of spatial dimensions we live in.

FalE

10 is the base of our number system.

10 is the base of one of our numbering systems... fixed

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
3 is the number of spatial dimensions we live in.

FalE

How so?

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Should be 'What's Special About This Integer?' really. I StmubleUpon'd this site a while ago, pretty neat.

1003 has a base 2 representation that ends with its base 3 representation.
neat.

1676 = 11 + 62 + 73 + 64.
Funny how things work out like that.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
3 is the number of spatial dimensions we live in.

FalE

How so?

Because we don't live in three dimensional space? Three is merely what we can perceive...

and you are forgetting fouth dimension

747 ???

A jumbo jet?

 

[SlitheryDee]

8902 is the number of possibilities for the first 1.5 moves in Chess.

How do you make a half move in chess?

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
3 is the number of spatial dimensions we live in.

FalE

How so?

Because we don't live in three dimensional space? Three is merely what we can perceive...

and you are forgetting fouth dimension

There is no large fourth spacial dimension. That page you linked to shows the mathematical concept behind a fourth dimension, but clearly there is no observable fourth dimension. Of course many bleeding-edge physics theories propose four or more spacial dimensions but if they exist they are compactified so small that they will probably forever be unobservable. It's fair to say we live in three spacial dimensions, unless you can show otherwise.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
3 is the number of spatial dimensions we live in.

FalE

How so?

Because we don't live in three dimensional space? Three is merely what we can perceive...

and you are forgetting fouth dimension

There is no large fourth spacial dimension. That page you linked to shows the mathematical concept behind a fourth dimension, but clearly there is no observable fourth dimension. Of course many bleeding-edge physics theories propose four or more spacial dimensions but if they exist they are compactified so small that they will probably forever be unobservable. It's fair to say we live in three spacial dimensions, unless you can show otherwise.

That's what I was going to say... D:

 

[darkxshade]

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
3 is the number of spatial dimensions we live in.

FalE

How so?

Because we don't live in three dimensional space? Three is merely what we can perceive...

and you are forgetting fouth dimension

There is no large fourth spacial dimension. That page you linked to shows the mathematical concept behind a fourth dimension, but clearly there is no observable fourth dimension. Of course many bleeding-edge physics theories propose four or more spacial dimensions but if they exist they are compactified so small that they will probably forever be unobservable. It's fair to say we live in three spacial dimensions, unless you can show otherwise.

That's what I was going to say... D:

ATOT could be considered a 4th spacial dimension... it contains so much crap such that if it were all in print, there would not be enough space in your house to fit them all.

 

[rocadelpunk]

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee
8902 is the number of possibilities for the first 1.5 moves in Chess.

How do you make a half move in chess?

1.) white's move | Black's Move
2.) white's move | _________

 

[Freshgeardude]

thats awsome

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
3 is the number of spatial dimensions we live in.

FalE

How so?

Because we don't live in three dimensional space? Three is merely what we can perceive...

and you are forgetting fouth dimension

There is no large fourth spacial dimension. That page you linked to shows the mathematical concept behind a fourth dimension, but clearly there is no observable fourth dimension. Of course many bleeding-edge physics theories propose four or more spacial dimensions but if they exist they are compactified so small that they will probably forever be unobservable. It's fair to say we live in three spacial dimensions, unless you can show otherwise.

I was of course being pedantic and referencing that because of Einstein, we often call time the fourth dimension. Special relativity shows that time behaves surprisingly like the three spatial dimensions.

 

[Ika]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
1676 = 1^1 + 6^2 + 7^3 + 6^4.
Funny how things work out like that.

Fixed

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
3 is the number of spatial dimensions we live in.

FalE

How so?

Because we don't live in three dimensional space? Three is merely what we can perceive...

and you are forgetting fouth dimension

There is no large fourth spacial dimension. That page you linked to shows the mathematical concept behind a fourth dimension, but clearly there is no observable fourth dimension. Of course many bleeding-edge physics theories propose four or more spacial dimensions but if they exist they are compactified so small that they will probably forever be unobservable. It's fair to say we live in three spacial dimensions, unless you can show otherwise.

I was of course being pedantic and referencing that because of Einstein, we often call time the fourth dimension. Special relativity shows that time behaves surprisingly like the three spatial dimensions.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spatial
Actually the difference between a fourth spatial dimension and a time dimension are very important. (3+1)-space (Minkowski space) has a (+++-) metric signature as opposed to a (+++) metric signature of 4-dimensional Euclidean space. This results in some important invariant properties regarding events in space-time.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: Aflac

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
1676 = 1^1 + 6^2 + 7^3 + 6^4.
Funny how things work out like that.

Fixed

Eek, didn't notice.

 

[Jeff7]

1 is also the loneliest number.