1. Standard memberpatauro
    Patricia
    Joined
    25 Sep '06
    Moves
    14447
    13 Nov '08 01:41
    Anyone care to guess the significance of these #'s ?
    1111, 1001, 906, 609, 808, 818, 619, 916, 111
  2. Joined
    05 Jun '07
    Moves
    906
    13 Nov '08 01:46
    Such numbers are the "same" if read right-side up or up-side down.
  3. Subscriberjoe shmo
    Strange Egg
    podunk, PA
    Joined
    10 Dec '06
    Moves
    7733
    13 Nov '08 04:07
    Originally posted by twilight2007
    Such numbers are the "same" if read right-side up or up-side down.
    BOO YA
  4. Joined
    26 May '08
    Moves
    2120
    13 Nov '08 10:176 edits
    Here is a harder one (I think): Anyone care to guess the significance of these #'s ?

    1048575, 255, 1, 8191

    (the order of the numbers is irrelevant)

    There is more than one way of answering this depending on how you look at it.
  5. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    13 Nov '08 10:31
    Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
    Here is a harder one (I think): Anyone care to guess the significance of these #'s ?

    1048575, 255, 1, 8191

    (the order of the numbers is [b]ir
    relevant)

    There is more than one way of answering this depending on how you look at it.[/b]
    One off 2^n, where n is some integer?
  6. Joined
    26 May '08
    Moves
    2120
    13 Nov '08 10:392 edits
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    One off 2^n, where n is some integer?
    Correct: (2^n)-1

    Also, if you convert any of these numbers to binary numbers, they will consist of all digit 1’s with no digit 0’s.
    I find that this is on a very rare occasion useful to know when I am designing my software.
  7. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    13 Nov '08 10:50
    Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
    Correct: (2^n)-1

    Also, if you convert any of these numbers to binary numbers, they will consist of all digit 1’s with no digit 0’s.
    I find that this is on a very rare occasion useful to know when I am designing my software.
    My assembler programming background helped me a little...
  8. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    15 Nov '08 21:50
    Here's a nice one. Compute the next one in the row:

    1 4 27 3125 16777216
  9. Joined
    05 Jun '07
    Moves
    906
    16 Nov '08 00:03
    It would be 11^11, which is approx. 3.028751066x10^14.
  10. Joined
    02 Mar '06
    Moves
    17881
    16 Nov '08 07:31
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Here's a nice one. Compute the next one in the row:

    1 4 27 3125 16777216
    shouldn't it be 13^13? the elements of the sequence are (n^n) where n is a member of the fibonacci sequence: 1^1, 2^2, 3^3, 5^5, 8^8, ...
  11. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    16 Nov '08 09:061 edit
    Indeed, 13^13
  12. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    16 Nov '08 12:38
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Here's a nice one. Compute the next one in the row:

    1 4 27 3125 16777216
    1 4 27 3125 16777216 302875106592253 5842587018385982521381124421 ...
  13. Joined
    26 May '08
    Moves
    2120
    16 Nov '08 14:123 edits
    All these sequences have something simple in common -so what is it and how does each sequence continue? And can you add an example of another sequence to this list?

    4, 20…

    3, 12, 156, 24492, ….

    2, 6, 30, 930, …..

    1, 2, …..

    0.5, 0.75, 1.3125, ….

    0, 0, 0, 0, ….

    -0.5, -0.25, -0.1875, …..

    -1, 0, …..

    -2, 2, ….

    -3, 6, …..

    -4, 12….
  14. Joined
    05 Jun '07
    Moves
    906
    16 Nov '08 17:173 edits
    Wow...for some reason I thought 5 + 8 = 11...

    Anyways...this problem is difficult since I can't use subscripts, but I'll try my best (and not make a simple mistake).

    The pattern is (number)(number+1) = next number. The first numbers are decreasing by one as you go down. The next sequence (down) would be -5, 20, 420, ...

    If I'm correct, then the third line is flawed; it should be 2, 6, 42, ...
  15. Joined
    26 May '08
    Moves
    2120
    16 Nov '08 18:101 edit
    Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton

    2, 6, 30, 930, …..
    My apologies: as twilight2007 correctly pointed out, this sequence should have been:

    2, 6, 42, 1866 ...

    and NOT: 2, 6, 30, 930, …..
Back to Top