----- Original Message ----- From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 7:52 PM Subject: Re: numerology
> Dan Minette wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Miller, Jeffrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 7:00 PM > > Subject: RE: poll > > > > > 42 > > > > is not a good number, but it is better than my number, which was 6. I was > > born in late '53, which should clarify matters. > > How can you say that the representation of 54 in base 13 isn't a good > number? Sheesh! > Because, if your Dan were as old as I am, then he'd be plenty nervous if that was his number. Now, as the representative of 54 in base 13, its a better number than it is in base 10. As the representative of 162 in base 40, its a still better number...in fact its a good number. It cannot be the representative of 402 in base 100. (and here's another clue for you all, the Walrus was Paul). Dan M.
