|
02 Feb 12 - 08:47 AM (#3300785) Subject: 5 From: GUEST,6 Come in number 5, your time is up !!! |
|
02 Feb 12 - 08:49 AM (#3300787) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,6 Today's Mudcat is brought to you by the number 6. |
|
02 Feb 12 - 08:52 AM (#3300788) Subject: RE: 5 From: Richard Bridge Number 6 is un-mutual (but not the existing member number 6) |
|
02 Feb 12 - 08:58 AM (#3300793) Subject: RE: 5 From: Nigel Parsons BS? |
|
02 Feb 12 - 08:58 AM (#3300794) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,7 7 is the lucky number. |
|
02 Feb 12 - 09:20 AM (#3300801) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,8 & 9 8 for a wish: 9 for a kiss.. |
|
02 Feb 12 - 09:24 AM (#3300807) Subject: RE: 5 From: John P My five favorite fives: V pentacle quitting time at work Bonny Lass of Five-e-o padushka |
|
02 Feb 12 - 09:32 AM (#3300810) Subject: RE: 5 From: Johnny J How about Georg(ina), Anne, Dick, Julian, and Timmy the dog? Not on my Aunt Fanny, I hear you say? |
|
02 Feb 12 - 09:42 AM (#3300817) Subject: RE: 5 From: theleveller Five for silver |
|
02 Feb 12 - 09:48 AM (#3300825) Subject: RE: 5 From: number 6 Guest,6 ..... I'd like to inform you that I am the real, and the only number 6 .... you Guest,6 are a complete fraud .... so scram, beat it,or more bluntly get the hell out of here. biLL .... the real number 6 |
|
02 Feb 12 - 09:52 AM (#3300828) Subject: RE: 5 From: number 6 Yes Richard .... this fraudulent Guest,6 is unmutual .... I have a suspicion number 2 is setting me up for something here in the Madcat. biLL |
|
02 Feb 12 - 09:52 AM (#3300829) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,-6 Ok, forgive a poor number a simple mistake. Not a deliberate attempt at identity misappropriation. Compromise, from now on while this thread remains bizarrely active, I will from now on be known as -6 |
|
02 Feb 12 - 10:50 AM (#3300865) Subject: RE: 5 From: Singing Referee Number 5 is alive! |
|
02 Feb 12 - 11:39 AM (#3300898) Subject: RE: 5 From: MGM·Lion ... and well and living in the Pentagon |
|
02 Feb 12 - 11:45 AM (#3300903) Subject: RE: 5 From: theleveller The five deadly sins. |
|
02 Feb 12 - 11:50 AM (#3300905) Subject: RE: 5 From: number 6 Guest,-6 .... minus 6 ..... ok, fine by me. biLL |
|
02 Feb 12 - 11:52 AM (#3300906) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,-6 "Five" featuring Brian May http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dBpbW5kS-w |
|
02 Feb 12 - 11:53 AM (#3300907) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,-6 "Five" featuring Brian May http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dBpbW5kS-w |
|
02 Feb 12 - 11:54 AM (#3300908) Subject: RE: 5 From: Wolfhound person Do not disassemble number 5 |
|
02 Feb 12 - 12:18 PM (#3300927) Subject: RE: 5 From: Don Firth 42 Don Firth |
|
02 Feb 12 - 12:27 PM (#3300932) Subject: RE: 5 From: gnu 2-4 hic |
|
02 Feb 12 - 12:46 PM (#3300946) Subject: RE: 5 From: Becca72 Just followed the You Tube link from Guest -6....oh the horrors!! That was painful! MUCH better Brian May choice... |
|
02 Feb 12 - 12:55 PM (#3300953) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,olddude I love prime numbers ... its the math thing I guess |
|
02 Feb 12 - 01:35 PM (#3300966) Subject: RE: 5 From: MGM·Lion I love Goldbach's Conjecture of 1742 ~~ every even number is expressible as THE SUM OF TWO PRIMES. |
|
02 Feb 12 - 01:39 PM (#3300970) Subject: RE: 5 From: Rapparee I hope and pray that number 6 and -6 never meet or they'll both vanish. |
|
02 Feb 12 - 01:44 PM (#3300979) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,olddude That's why I do my shopping at the 7-11 service mart :-) |
|
02 Feb 12 - 01:58 PM (#3300988) Subject: RE: 5 From: Pete Jennings My old boss used to say, when looking at spreadsheets "I hope there aren't any sevens in it, I hate sevens". Naturally we all made sure there were loads of them. |
|
02 Feb 12 - 02:23 PM (#3301009) Subject: RE: 5 From: Ed T 6 and 9 can be fun, if persued together. |
|
02 Feb 12 - 02:47 PM (#3301022) Subject: RE: 5 From: Will Fly There's three of me - 666 - mwaaahaaaaah!!!!!!! |
|
02 Feb 12 - 02:53 PM (#3301024) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,olddude we are all still in our prime regardless of what our doc says |
|
02 Feb 12 - 05:57 PM (#3301173) Subject: RE: 5 From: Bobert Never been much into five even (no pun intended) thou I do tend to be an odd numbers kinda guy... I think it's because 5 is one half of 10 and 10 is boring... Just my opinon... B~ |
|
02 Feb 12 - 06:55 PM (#3301203) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,999 Prime time for Dan. 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 101, 103, 107, 109, 113, 127, 131, 137, 139, 149, 151, 157, 163, 167, 173, 179, 181, 191, 193, 197, 199, 211, 223, 227, 229, 233, 239, 241, 251, 257, 263, 269, 271, 277, 281, 283, 293, 307, 311, 313, 317, 331, 337, 347, 349, 353, 359, 367, 373, 379, 383, 389, 397, 401, 409, 419, 421, 431, 433, 439, 443, 449, 457, 461, 463, 467, 479, 487, 491, 499, 503, 509, 521, 523, 541, 547, 557, 563, 569, 571, 577, 587, 593, 599, 601, 607, 613, 617, 619, 631, 641, 643, 647, 653, 659, 661, 673, 677, 683, 691, 701, 709, 719, 727, 733, 739, 743, 751, 757, 761, 769, 773, 787, 797, 809, 811, 821, 823, 827, 829, 839, 853, 857, 859, 863, 877, 881, 883, 887, 907, 911, 919, 929, 937, 941, 947, 953, 967, 971, 977, 983, 991, 997 |
|
02 Feb 12 - 07:19 PM (#3301223) Subject: RE: 5 From: JohnInKansas k-1 - Gross discrimination!!!! 1 is also a prime. You are hereby awarded a unitary digit for your crass omission. John |
|
02 Feb 12 - 07:27 PM (#3301229) Subject: RE: 5 From: Ed T And why not 2 and 2/3? |
|
02 Feb 12 - 11:17 PM (#3301283) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,998 1/2 Feeling a bit low at the moment. Primes are described as being numbers evenly divisible only by one and themselves, and because one IS itself, it falls outside the definition. |
|
02 Feb 12 - 11:53 PM (#3301292) Subject: RE: 5 From: JohnInKansas But since one is itself one, one can be divided by itself, and comes out even as one, with no remainder, and one can also be divided by one and comes out, like all the others, with itself as the answer and with no remainder, so it fits perfectly within the definition. It just depends on whether you apply a completeness test to the definition, or if you're prejudiced and decide to exclude "some kinds" of numbers. Some have also tried to say that 0! isn't a real number, but that's just another similar case in point. John |
|
03 Feb 12 - 03:36 AM (#3301332) Subject: RE: 5 From: Dead Horse And for my next number ....... |
|
03 Feb 12 - 04:20 AM (#3301347) Subject: RE: 5 From: MGM·Lion We'd better ask Cameron, hadn't we? He is the Prime minister... |
|
03 Feb 12 - 07:20 AM (#3301406) Subject: RE: 5 From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler Can you have a negative prime number? |
|
03 Feb 12 - 07:34 AM (#3301411) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,999 Edgar asked exactly that question--well, not exactly but pretty close: (Found this on the www.) "Why Aren't There Negative Prime Numbers? Date: 12/10/1999 at 00:12:32 From: Edgar Lopez Subject: Prime Numbers Can negative numbers be prime numbers? In my math book it says that a prime number is a whole number greater than 1 that has only two factors, 1 and itself. So why can't, for example, (-5) be prime? Its factors would be -5 and 1. I don't get it. Is it because 5 and (-1) are also factors of (-5)? I say no because (-1) and (-5) would then be factors of 5, and 5 wouldn't be prime. I don't understand and neither does my teacher. We tried to figure it out, and then she told me to ask you. Date: 12/10/1999 at 19:24:14 From: Doctor Ian Subject: Re: Prime Numbers Hi Edgar, This is an excellent question, but in order to understand the answer, you have to get a feel for what mathematics is about. It's not about cranking numbers through equations and getting answers, and it's not about balancing your checkbook or figuring out how long it will take Bill and Janet to mow the lawn if they work together, and it's not about building bridges or telephones or sending spaceships to other planets. Those are all _uses_ of math, but mathematics itself is about searching for patterns. The most interesting patterns are the ones that hold for the largest classes of numbers. So something that is true for all numbers is more interesting than something that is true for just integers, or just prime numbers, or just numbers smaller than 10, or just the number 17. (Note that 'patterns' are sometimes called 'theorems,' and sometimes called 'properties'. For example, the prime number theorem, which says that any composite number can be broken into a product of primes, is one kind of pattern. The commutative property of addition, which says that you can add numbers in any order, is another kind of pattern.) Before anyone figured out the need for negative numbers, mathematicians had already discovered lots of patterns involving prime numbers. So when negative numbers came along, making some of them prime would have caused a lot of patterns (patterns that looked like "For any prime number, blah blah blah") to stop being true. That would have been annoying without serving any real purpose, and so the definition of primes was adjusted to exclude negative numbers. This, by the way, is why zero and one aren't prime numbers either, although you can make some good arguments for why they should be. If they were considered prime, then a lot of patterns that now look like "For any prime number, blah blah blah" would have to be changed to "For any prime number except one or zero, blah blah blah." That makes the patterns uglier, and harder to remember. ("Oh, wait - does this pattern for prime numbers also apply to zero?") Mathematics turns out to have so many practical uses that it's easy to forget that the mathematicians who are creating it, in many cases, really don't care whether the patterns they are finding have any more uses than a song, or a painting. I hope this helps. Thanks for asking an interesting question. Be sure to write back if you have others. - Doctor Ian, The Math Forum http://mathforum.org/dr.math/ " |
|
03 Feb 12 - 07:34 AM (#3301412) Subject: RE: 5 From: DMcG Can you have a negative prime number? When Ada-80 was being designed, part of a quiz was ask what 'div' (integer division) and 'mod' (remainder of an integer division) sums were for: 7 div 3 -7 div 3 7 div -3 -7 div -3 7 mod 3 -7mod 3 7 mod -3 -7 mod -3 And also to ask which of several identities were true, such as x = (x div y)*y + (x mod y) (-x) div (-y) = x div y and so on. It became quite clear that almost no-one has a good intuitive grasp of div and mod outside strictly positive nmbers. |
|
03 Feb 12 - 07:39 AM (#3301413) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,-6 "We'd better ask Cameron, hadn't we? He is the Prime minister..." Well as many here would respond, he's certainly a Prime Prick !!! |
|
03 Feb 12 - 08:49 AM (#3301433) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,999 What I don't get is why some folks say they're past their prime. Which prime? I just passed sixty-one three years ago, so I'll be back in my prime in another three years. I mean like looking at the prime numbers between 0 and 100 they are 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97. Ya have a 1 in 4 chance of being in your prime assuming you live to be 97. So I had it all made clear to me in this three minute video from black and white days. Here y'are. The conclusion I draw from those numbers is this: yer odds of being in your prime don't look so good for even-numbered years. It ain't happened yet for me. But I keep hoping . . . |
|
03 Feb 12 - 10:17 AM (#3301456) Subject: RE: 5 From: Becca72 One IS the loneliest number... |
|
03 Feb 12 - 10:49 AM (#3301473) Subject: RE: 5 From: olddude anyone for Fibonacci? |
|
03 Feb 12 - 10:53 AM (#3301474) Subject: RE: 5 From: theleveller "anyone for Fibonacci?" Now you're talking. With puttanesca sauce and a couple of glasses of nice Chianti. |
|
03 Feb 12 - 02:13 PM (#3301571) Subject: RE: 5 From: olddude LOL, what kind of salad? |
|
03 Feb 12 - 03:49 PM (#3301642) Subject: RE: 5 From: theleveller 1 head of lettuce, 1 stick celery, two salad onions, three radishes, five tomatoes, eight olives, thirteen capers...... |
|
03 Feb 12 - 03:54 PM (#3301648) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,999 That was a prime lookin' salad until the olives . . . |
|
03 Feb 12 - 05:44 PM (#3301713) Subject: RE: 5 From: Don(Wyziwyg)T "Come in Number 99, your time is up" "'Ere boss, we ain't got no Number 99" "OH!.............Number 66, is everything all right?" Don T |
|
03 Feb 12 - 06:03 PM (#3301723) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,olddude 42 its the answer to everything |
|
03 Feb 12 - 06:40 PM (#3301739) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,-6 5 favourite fifth chords ? |
|
03 Feb 12 - 06:47 PM (#3301742) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,olddude kinda like a fifth of bourbon? |
|
03 Feb 12 - 06:48 PM (#3301743) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,olddude make mine Jack Daniels |
|
03 Feb 12 - 07:07 PM (#3301758) Subject: RE: 5 From: GUEST,-6 5" - come on guys, be honest, nothing to be ashamed of... |
|
04 Feb 12 - 03:43 AM (#3301894) Subject: RE: 5 From: open mike Jimmy Buffett - It's Five O' Clock Somewhere with Alan Jackson http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_7wdpGvTms |
|
04 Feb 12 - 09:04 AM (#3301982) Subject: RE: 5 From: Ed T Did these five ideas die in 2011? If so, I missed the funeral. Did they die? |
