I just came up with this while teaching my son about numbers. Let's
see how quickly somebody figures this out.
If you had a 64 bit number written down in hex, how could you quickly
tell without the aid of any computational device, including pencil or
paper if it is divisible by 15?
How about 17?
Sasha Pachev wrote:
I just came up with this while teaching my son about numbers. Let's
see how quickly somebody figures this out.
If you had a 64 bit number written down in hex, how could you quickly
tell without the aid of any computational device, including pencil or
paper if it is
Sasha Pachev wrote:
I just came up with this while teaching my son about numbers. Let's
see how quickly somebody figures this out.
If you had a 64 bit number written down in hex, how could you quickly
tell without the aid of any computational device, including pencil or
paper if it is
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 13:06, Sasha Pachev sa...@asksasha.com wrote:
If you had a 64 bit number written down in hex, how could you quickly
tell without the aid of any computational device, including pencil or
paper if it is divisible by 15?
How about 17?
By 15 do you mean 15 or F?
By 17 do
Excellent point Alan.
It just goes to show that there is no such thing as base 10.
Rather, what is commonly termed base 10 is actually base A.
Think about it...
-adam
Alan Young alansyoung...@gmail.com 11/20/2009 1:18 PM
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 13:06, Sasha Pachev sa...@asksasha.com
Adam Jerome wrote:
Excellent point Alan.
It just goes to show that there is no such thing as base 10.
Rather, what is commonly termed base 10 is actually base A.
Think about it...
Enlightened people use base e. I have about 102.12 fingers.
Shane
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Sasha Pachev sa...@asksasha.com wrote:
I just came up with this while teaching my son about numbers. Let's
see how quickly somebody figures this out.
If you had a 64 bit number written down in hex, how could you quickly
tell without the aid of any
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Sasha Pachev wrote:
How about 17?
Ok, I bothered to search for an 11s rule. It obviously applies to 0x11
just as well.
http://www.jimloy.com/number/divis.htm
Shane
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
On Fri, November 20, 2009 2:02 pm, Scott Edwards wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Sasha Pachev sa...@asksasha.com wrote:
I just came up with this while teaching my son about numbers. Let's
see how quickly somebody figures this out.
If you had a 64 bit number written down in hex, how
Aren't other people a computational device? That'd be cheating too.
It can be debated whether or not a person's brain is a computational device; in
my study of analog robotics, it's more likely a non-linear dynamic that can,
with great pains, be used to execute algorithms.
I suppose if you
As for the base, why not base 1? In base 1, I have X fingers, and
my daughter was born with XI (or rather X and I/II).
Come to think of it, using base 1 helps to remove ambiguity, so long as the
numbers are larger that IV. Perhaps that's why INTERCAL uses them!
Sincerely,
Alphy.
Recently I have received forwarded emails with embedded images in the
email. When I have tried to forward the
email using Thunderbird I see that the images are not copied into the
new email.
I have specifically noticed this especially with email from yahoo.com.
I use gmail.com with IMAP to
Alec Shaw wrote:
Recently I have received forwarded emails with embedded images in the
email. When I have tried to forward the
email using Thunderbird I see that the images are not copied into the
new email.
I have specifically noticed this especially with email from yahoo.com.
I use
13 matches
Mail list logo
