GingerAle

_{. . . the only number that can evenly divide the them all is one. That's what I see, what did I miss?}

You didn’t miss anything. One is common to all of these numbers. See god is number one and he’s omnipresent; this is proof of his omnipresence.  

_{I'm not a mathematician. I'm a muslim.}

No kidding?  I’m not a mathematician yet, but I’m a pastafarian. Anyway, there is no reason you cannot be both. 

Pastafarians and the FSM and are very tolerant of other’s religious beliefs, including mathematical religious beliefs.  For example, I still make oblations to the god of my ancestors, The Banana Goddess, when I make banana daiquiris.  I make a special one, with 432 imperial minims of gold rum, and offer it to her. She usually doesn’t drink it, so I oblige as a high priestess pro tempore, and drink it for her.  Sometimes I offer it to a worthy soul.  It’s a great honor.

------------

_{I'm saying this about 19 because of the mention of the number 19 by God in The Holy Qur'aan as a number of significance. (74 : 30-31).}

Ok. What does significant mean in this context?   In statistics, “significant” means the calculated event occurred more often than chance. The higher the event counts are above the expected value the more significant the statistic, and the statistician has more confidence that it didn’t happen by chance. This means there is a greater confidence that it happens for reasons other than chance. It doesn’t mean it didn’t happen by chance.  

Let’s say (hypothetically) after several statistical analyses that 19 occurs 30 times more than chance and 20 times more than any other comparable text.  What does this mean? Does it mean a deity inspired the words?  Maybe, but someone could argue the deity is evil. Here’s how:

The verses you use from the Qur’an (74:30-31) and the verses following, explains that 19 is the exact number of angels (or demons) guarding Hellfire.  Hellfire is where Allah sends unbelievers and other evil people. Allah used 19 angles because 19 is used to represent evil and when you see 19, you should know it represents evil.  Allah tricked the writer of the Qur’an to use words that would cause 19 to occur 30 times more than chance, so that the future readers would be enlightened and know the text is really a cryptic presentation of satanic verses.  Statistical analyses support this theory.  (I don’t need statistical analyses to know this hypothetical more than probably pịsses you off, along with every follower of Islam. This sometimes happens when science meets religion. The two are often in conflict.)  

_{What is the chance, that the number that Qur'aan says is of significance, has so many relations between the sentence with which virtually all chapters of Qur'aan begins (In the Name of Allaah, The Most Beneficent, The Most Merciful)?}

The chance depends on how the relationships are analyzed, what values are assigned to what letters, how often the letters are used, how often the letters are used in relation to other letters, and how often words are used in relation to other words, etc.  Any of these will bias the results towards or away from common divisors.

_{The chance of a random number being dividable by 19 with no remainder is small.}

It’s only small if 5.2631% is small.  

_{Also regardless of wether we just line up the values of the letters individually, suggesting that even swapping two random letters in the sequence, would make the sentence less compatible with the number 19.}

Swapping letters shouldn’t make a difference if you are summing the values.  Here is a numerical equivalent using ASCII decimal codes, Here, GOD = 71, 79, 68. Adding these numbers gives 218. In this context, GOD equals DOG because both equal 218. Cats are usually annoyed by this; they think GOD should equal CAT.  Dogs, of course, do not have a problem with this.

Here’s is one of my favorite numerical analysis using (appropriately enough) the ASCII code. 

The founder of Microsoft is Bill Gates III. Here’s a proof he’s in league with the devil!

By converting the letters of his current name to the ASCII values and adding his III (proof this it is not just any Bill Gates), you get the following:

B        I        L       L          G        A      T         E         S        III

66 +  73 +  76 + 76  +   71  +  65 +  84  +  69  +  83 +  3  =  666

This is the beginning of humanity’s ultimate and total enslavement.

Here’s more proof

M S  - D O S   6 . 2 1

77+83+45+68+79+83+32+54+46+50+49 = 666

W I N D O W S 95

87+73+78+68+79+87+83+57+53+1 = 666

You have to add 1 to this because it only equals 665 if you don’t. 665 is an evil number anyway, but 666 is more recognized.

--------------------------

_{It sure doesn't look to me like someone was sitting and looking at a list of numbers dividable by (up to 62 digits) and hoping to find something that would match. Rather I think, if someone would get more creative, they would find even more astonishing "lottery wins".}

Actually, someone was. That someone was moi. As explained above, I did it so you would notice that one is common to all of these numbers.  You are right about more wins if you are more creative. The look on my father’s face, when he saw the bible code results, was a big win.  That wasn’t a big of a win compared to faking a pregnancy when I was 16. That was second in drama only to my faking a suicide when I was 13. Creativity does give more astonishing lottery wins, for sure. 

-----------------

_{The refering of all these things to chance is completely fine by me, if one is one hundred percent sure, that his world view is unshakeable. The matter of the fact is, that most people's arent.}

I don’t know anyone who is one hundred percent sure of his or her worldview. I do know a few who act as if they are – at least when expressing certain opinions.  I change my opinion about ideas and concepts all the time. New information comes in to view every day. My perception changes over time. Thinking is a dynamic process; at least it is supposed to be.  My perception of the world is very different compared to when I was a child and it’s different from just a few months ago.  

_{There are plenty of flaws in the idea, that we are advanced chimps.}

For the record, I never said that.  I have said that I am a genetically enhanced chimp. We are different from humans. For one thing, we have opposable big toes. This comes in very handy when playing a piano piece written for four hands. In this case, one chimp equals two humans.  You should see us type!

_{When we say, that we have 98% in common with chimps DNA-wise, that is based on a flawed understanding of DNA. Back when this was discovered, the general idea among scientists was, that only that 1,5% of the DNA was significant. Since then we have found many tasks being governed by the other 98,5% of the DNA-string, and therefor now when we compare the DNA of a chimp and a human, we should make a comparison of the whole DNA-string, leading to a significant drop in similarity compared to only comparing that 1,5% that actually almost matches.}

That discovery was more than 35 years ago, and the range is 95% to 98% common DNA.  It seems reasonable the humans who discovered this would also figure out the details of how the assemblies function as well as the lengths of sequences. They did.  The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) )—originally thought to be “junk” DNA, controls this assembly more than the other nuclear DNA.  Even at the low end of the DNA spectrum, chimps are more closely related to humans than they are to any other animal, including gorillas.   

_{I could go on with the rest of the flaws in the theory of evolution, but I'm here for the math, and particularly the chance of such a sentence having meaning.}

I’m sure you could go on about the flaws, there are many. The germ theory has many flaws too. Girolamo Fracastoro proposed the germ theory in 1546 and it’s well older than the Darwinian theory of evolution (1858). If we fully understood it, we wouldn’t have germ-based diseases anymore. Even with these flaws, we still know there are germs, and we still know how to control them enough to prevent and cure many diseases.  

The DNA theory is a separate branch of science, and it well more corroborates rather than contradicts the veracity of Darwinian evolution theory.  To my knowledge, when there are conflicts, the Darwinian evolution theory is updated to reflect the DNA theory. 

_{Thanks for a comprehensive answer, though. I still hope, that a master of statistics would tell me how to calculate it.}

You’re welcome. I hope you find what you are looking for. 

.

How small is the chance, that the number should be divisible by 19?

Well DJ, I’ll give you my opinion, for what it’s worth.  I don’t have the skill to do advanced statistical analysis on this, but I can tell you, by starting with number one, 19 divides every nineteenth number evenly. It does so indefinitely.  So, there are infinite numbers evenly divisible by 19. That is many numbers from which to choose. 

It easy to tell that any random integer number has the odds of 1 in 19 (about 5.2631%) of being divisible by 19 (Wow! What a coincidence!)

Let’s say you took a number like the first million digits of Pi 3.14159… and multiplied it by 10^1000000 = 314159…. That means the converted Pi sequence will divide every 10^1000000 numbers evenly. With any finite amount of numbers, this Pi sequence is more rare than 19. However, if all numbers are considered, there are an infinite number of them, and because there are an infinite number of each they both have the same frequency.  Yep, a one-million-digit integer will divide the same number of numbers as 19.

To explain more clearly, consider this. Let’s say you have two boxes. In one box are all integer numbers from zero to infinity. In the other box are all odd numbers one to infinity. It seems the box with all numbers has more numbers than the box with only odd integers, but they both have the same amount. 

Assuming there is no introduced bias in the analysis or the assignment of values to letters, it might be statistically significant if 19 occurred well above chance. A Chi squared statistic is one method that will find unusual occurrences, used in conjunction with other texts, may confirm significant deviations.

One thing to keep in mind is that unusual events happen all the time.  There are lottery winners all the time. Some of these lotteries have odds approaching 1 in 300,000,000, and there are multiple winners every year. It is the nature of humans, and we genetically enhanced chimps, to see patterns in anything and everything. We see human faces and animals in the clouds, all the time. We see Jesus, the Virgin Mary, and the devil everywhere, from burnt toast to the dust on a window.   One time I saw a dog and cat in the clouds. I showed my dog and cat what I saw. They were decidedly unimpressed; probably because they see dogs and cats in the clouds all the time.

Most major religions have associated numerology, that is numbers or numerical sequences that are important to the belief are full of them.  3, 7, 8, 12 are all important numbers in Judeo-Christian religions. Don’t forget 666.

Please dont be preposterously presumptuous: you really do not know what's in my mind. It's very offensive indeed when you contend vigorously that I believe my answer is better …

Oh, my . . . This is great! We need another old gasbag! A companion for the forum’s Banker –one who articulates more, but is even less intelligible.

This one couches his precipitated blarney in unintelligible, self-absorbed self-important egotisms, presented in glorious century-old syntax, with missing apostrophes, commas, and periods, as a true testament to his “cross-checking” skills). He's hip, though, he ends his archaic writing with a modern meme: “Bye, Felicia.” (A farewell to someone considered insignificant.)

Like the banker, he is not a “has been,” rather he’s a “never were” member in a group of wannabes – mathematicians, probably. He’s practiced indignant criticism all of his life because it’s the only way he can create a contrast to measure his milestones of achievement.

I hope he stays around. We stylish, superior trolls really relish rare, refined dinning of preposterously presumptuous pretentious phrases in our smorgasbord.  We also like to listen to the villains in the old Scooby-do cartoons while we enjoy our meal.

It may take a very long time to answer this, because there really isn’t a question here. However, I can probably guess what it might be: The asker wants the Ksp

Guest #9, what is your Blŏŏdy Point? Your formula is odd.    .50x +4001 = 6,000, solve for x.  Where do you get the 4001 from --aside from Alan’s starting point?  You would not have this as the starting point for a solution without some kind of calculation.

You could do this x+ 0.5x = 6000 | x=4000 this sets X_j and X_j+1 to 4000, which is what I did.

So, what is the point of your brain-dead presentation? I am missing something? You restate Alan’s sequence in regurgitated form; add some blatantly wrong blarney to the end, then say “There are only two unique solutions. That is, with the initial weight of either 4,000 or 4,001 Kg.”

Well, No freaking duh!  

I agree there are only two solutions to this: 4000 and 4001.  (A circular reference error in my spreadsheet affected the values; giving false results indicating 4002-4007 were also valid.) You didn’t bother mentioning this; rather, you meander all over Hades, while adding more blatantly irrelevant blarney. Maybe all these elephants leaving piles of dung on this post affected your thinking process.

You should join with the Blarney Banker and call yourselves Blarney and Blarney. You two can make Blarney the old-fashioned way –by regurgitating it.

(Note to Chimp Henry: Order 50 more cases of extra-strength gnome repellent).

 _{Note to Blarney Banker: Yes, I have the gene for curse and cur. I inherited it from an ancestor we have in common. We genetically enhanced chimps learned how to suppress this gene, so it’s not active, except when blarney bags are near.  It is active in you though, just as it is in all human-pịg hybrids, procreated by miscegenation. (See what I mean by “annoying the pịg.”)}

--------------

On a brighter note, though shrouded in a fog of blarney, I found the original source for this question. It appears the examiners altered the parameters of the question to allow for an additional  or different answer –one that isn’t trivial.

Mathematical Circles: (Russian Experience) (1996) (ISBN: 0821890603)

By Sergeĭ Aleksandrovich Genkin, Dmitriĭ Vladimirovich Fomin

Here is the question:

123. Twenty-five elephants stand in a row in a circus arena, and each of them weighs an integer number of kilograms. It is known that if you add the weight of any of them (except the rightmost one) and half the weight of its neighbor to the right, then the result is 6 tons. Find the weights of the elephants.

There is no answer or hint for this question presented in the book.

In this question, it only asks for the weight of the elephants, there is no reference to the heaviest, not that it matters, it there is only one integer solution: 4000Kg. 

It is interesting that if the question presented in integer number of grams then there could be as many as 23 before any elephant exceeds 6 (metric) tons.

.

Thank you Sir Alan!

That is so cool. The box I was thinking in was too small.

I can see the solution range is 4001 to 4007 for the first elephant, and this gives positive weights to all elephants with the heaviest elephant in position 13. (Unless the examiners are as pedantic as I am about the meaning of “heaviest,” my solution wouldn’t be correct).   

I still don’t know how to solve this with a general mathematical function where there can be more (or less) elephants, and a high (or lower) weight difference. The recursive function eludes me and makes me recursively curse .

This question is on the current Sigma Camp’s Qualification Quiz for 2017

Happy Birthday Melody!!

Recently, I was visiting your riotous birthday party of 2015.  (There wasn’t a birthday party on the forum for 2016, for some reason). It seems like that party it’s still going on.

In your question, you wrote 3 days not 37 days.

The question is brain dead, anyway. It’s inconsistent with the IRS tax laws.

A penalty assessed by the IRS is not a per diem adjusted annual interest rate. 

Who wrote this brain-dead question? Does a retired Blarney Banker teach your class?

Here’s an overview of the IRS regulations.

 If you owe tax and don’t file on time, according to IRS regulations, penalties are assessed and added to your bill. Penalties are in addition to BOTH the tax due and the interest on the past due tax. The total late–filing penalty is usually 5% of the tax owed for each month, or part of a month, that your return is late up to five months (25%). If your return is over 60 days late, the minimum penalty for late filing is the smaller of $100 or 100 percent of the tax owed.

Generally, interest is charged on any unpaid tax from the original due date of the return until the date of payment. The interest rate on unpaid Federal tax is determined and posted every three months. It is the federal short–term interest rate plus 3 percent. The interest is compounded daily.

Jan. 1, 2011 — Mar. 31, 2016            3%

Apr. 1, 2016 — Jan. 31, 2017             3.7%

Feb. 1, 2017 — Present                      4.04%

--------------

Mr. Blarney Banker this is a major oversight, a failure to notice, on your part.

It seems reasonable an investment banker would know basic tax law application. Of late, you’re a little out of the loop, but here are questions you may know the answer to:

 Does the IRS tax Ramen Noodles?

 Does the IRS allow you to deduct blarney as a casualty to embezzled income?