Page 9 of 38

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 07 Sep 2013, 15:29
by RobbieM
I think we got away with it... :o

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 07 Sep 2013, 15:54
by tubeguru
Whatever.

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 07 Sep 2013, 16:23
by tractakid
678*4=/=5678

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 07 Sep 2013, 16:31
by tubeguru
Whatever.

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 07 Sep 2013, 16:45
by GuyBarry
I think tubeguru was perfectly OK with that one. He said it's three-quarters of the title, not three-quarters of the number.

Or perhaps there's some obscure Steps single called "904" that I'm unaware of :)

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 07 Sep 2013, 16:48
by tubeguru
Yeah, I'm saving that one for when we get to 904.

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 07 Sep 2013, 18:01
by GuyBarry
DrainBrain wrote:The 684th Fibonacci number is divisible by 684.
tubeguru wrote:Feel free to tell us what it actually is ...
It appears to be:

39633363350150665433335490556348985189574179795039333969368895830540407820581547578204201061028307874718885735558275776690548029037838240694288

I haven't checked for divisibility by 684 though.

EDIT: sorry, this formatting has cut the last three digits off the number. It actually ends ...694288.

EDIT[2]: this site gives prime factorizations of all the Fibonacci numbers up to the 1000th. The factorization of the 684th number begins 2^4 * 3^3 * 17 * 19^2..., and 684 = 2^2 * 3^2 * 19, so DrainBrain is definitely right. No idea where he got the information from though!

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 09 Sep 2013, 17:22
by RobbieM
Wow. Have you memorised it? I ran out of memorising Fibonnaci numbers after 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89 ... that's it; I have to add them in my head now.

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 09 Sep 2013, 17:39
by GuyBarry
RobbieM wrote:Wow. Have you memorised it?
No, of course not! You can get the values of Fibonacci numbers from the Fibonacci calculator.

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 09 Sep 2013, 17:57
by RobbieM
GuyBarry wrote:
RobbieM wrote:Wow. Have you memorised it?
No, of course not! You can get the values of Fibonacci numbers from the Fibonacci calculator.
And what you may not know is, that I was once a lodger in the house of Dr R.Knott in1994/5!

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 09 Sep 2013, 18:10
by GuyBarry
RobbieM wrote:690 - the last three digits of the STD code for Betws-y-Coed. That's a nice sounding place. I guess the digits may represent NW - North Wales, though I haven't checked.
Not according to the list I cited earlier, which gives "coNWy valley" - weird one though!

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 09 Sep 2013, 19:23
by GuyBarry
I'm not turning the thread into a list of road numbers!
Having said that, I'll be impressed if you know where the A700 is off the top of your head. I have walked its entire length, which is nothing like as impressive as it sounds...

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 09 Sep 2013, 20:20
by DrainBrain
Apologies for not providing a link re the 684th Fibonacci number. The source was OEIS which includes a sequence of nth Fibonacci numbers that are divisible by n: http://oeis.org/A023172

Because the number is over 140 decimal digits I didn't bother posting it.

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 10 Sep 2013, 07:21
by GuyBarry
Ah yes, the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences - ultimate bible for anyone interested in the properties of the natural numbers. I came across it a few years ago and was amazed to discover that such a thing existed. A couple of years ago the BBC programme QI said that 12407 was the "smallest uninteresting number" because at the time it was the smallest number that didn't appear in the OEIS. (I'm not sure what it is now - it was 13794 for a while, but I think that appears now.) Of course, the smallest uninteresting number is by definition interesting, giving rise to the well-known interesting number paradox.

Which means that the counting game should keep going for quite a while yet :)

Re: Counting - discussion thread

Posted: 13 Sep 2013, 14:34
by RobbieM
Ah yes, how long do you think it'll take us to get to 12,407?