I am conducting a perfectly serious scientific/linguistic survey the purpose of which however I cannot reveal without skewing the results. Thank you for your participation

What is the most nondescript whole number between 0 and 61

1

a signature is a unique identifier, usually in the form of the written name. However, it can be something as complex as a product, i.e. a "signature line" referring to a designer.

1

It's a logical impossibility. If a number were nondescript, it would have the distinctive quality of being nondescript, and therefore wouldn't be nondescript. QED

As a mathematician I could sit and work out the various things that make a number interesting and then choose the one that has the fewest of those properties.

For example you wouldn't want primes, they're quite interesting.

Can't have 6 and 28, they have a quality that they share with 8128, 33550336 and 8589869056 - they are the sum of their factors. I automatically discount any number divisible by 3 because all of those have the property that the sum of their digits is also divisible by three...


...or I could just pluck 56 at random out of the hat.

56.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BobHale,

I have to say, I agree with Neveu. However, because you said most nondescript, I will, like Bob, take a guess. 11

I love the number 11... !

My guess will be: Number 58

1

Tinman

quote:

...or I could just pluck 56 at random out of the hat.

Can't be 56, it's a tetrahedral number.

51 is the first non-prime whole number that doesn't have an entry in Wells's Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Numbers.

This is wonderful, I love you guys

When I posed this survey on other forums they would tear me to shreds with all kinds of technicalities and literary balderdash

Keep 'em coming

eighteen


If you're an old Scots engineer, then Watt's a signature

Are we going to get an answer?

[KHC, maybe you love the number 11 because it's nondescript. ]

I love 11 because that's the day of my birthday.

I think numbers, by their very nature, are descriptive.

Cater: By coincidence so is it mine. You must be a superior person

The story is told that a mathematics professor visited an ailing colleague. He traveled by taxi and, upon arriving, commented that the number of the taxi, 1729, was a singularly uninteresting number.

"Not at all," said his ailing colleague. "1729 is the ..."

Complete this sentence. What is the interesting fact about the number 1729? (You can answer it by adding more 11 words at the end of the sentence.)

That's actually quite a famous story if you are a mathematicion. Do you really want someone who knows the answer to give it or would you rather let the non-mathematicians struggle?

There's been some work done, which shows that if you randomly pick a number and start looking for it, you realize that it occurs incredibly often. Most often, you just ignore page numbers, addresses, and other such things in your daily routine, but when you single out a number, you notice it tends to appear so often that you think it a common number indeed. It's probably a case of selection bias, where you are just ignoring all of the other data you never noticed.

Obviously, the higher number you get, the less often it will occur. We tried this with 37, and I suggest you all do the same.

Kalleh,

I loved 11, because I was born 11/11.... an Armistice Baby.

And Kay(K) is the 11th letter of the alphabet...

And James K. Polk is the 11th president...

If I played the Lottery, perhaps it would be lucky for me.

a mathematics professor...traveled by taxi ... 1729

"Actually," the mathematician was Godfrey Hardy and he was meeting a visiting mathematician for the first time - Srinivasta Ramanujan, who went on to make a distinguished name for himself...

The tale is also told in Hofstadter's Godel, Escher, Bach,, if one hasn't run across it elsewhere. (Or even if one has!)

Wikipedia's article on 1729.

quote:

Originally posted by haberdasher:
a mathematics professor...traveled by taxi ... 1729

"Actually," the mathematician was Godfrey Hardy and he was meeting a visiting mathematician for the first time - Srinivasta Ramanujan, who went on to make a distinguished name for himself...

The tale is also told in Hofstadter's Godel, Escher, Bach,, if one hasn't run across it elsewhere. (Or even if one has!)

Aha. Couldn't remember where I'd run across it. That's probably it. Truly marvelous book though maybe a bit heavy going if you don't have a maths/science background.

KH: So was I. You too must be a superior person

Gang: Please forgive me for bubbling this thread back up; I won't make a habit of it. But this survey is very important and I need as many responses as I can get--Thanks again all--Dale

Dale, let me remind you that this forum isn't nearly as large as the others you refer to. This may be it, at this point.

Kalleh: Perhaps so, but I note that one thread got eleven thousand responses, perhaps indicating the rapid growth of WC; and so I hope you will all forgive me for bubbling this one up just one last time--Thanks all

Alright, then...anyone else here?

quote:

I am conducting a perfectly serious scientific/linguistic survey the purpose of which however I cannot reveal without skewing the results.

A little advice, Dale? Posting a question on a message board is in no way scientific. People can see previous responses, and know that others can see their response. Furthermore, if the topic of your research is linguistic in nature, posting at a linguistic type forum is even worse for a survey, since our responses are not typical.

If you want such a survey, make a simple webpage and have people enter the number there. It would save you a lot of bookkeeping, and make the survey accurate.

Unless of course, you are studying how people respond to surveys on message boards, in which case, I'm terribly confused.

Sean: Thank you for the suggestion. My No. 1 Son has suggested much the same but I am far too old and decrepit to start learning how to manage a blog. By the time I had mastered it I'd be on the verge of expiration

I'm sort of confused where you got "blog" from. My suggestion had nothing to do with one.

Forum, then

Since I'm a mathematical idiot, I'll say that sixteen does nothing for me. Do I now get the dunce cap?

Don't worry Dale, I'm just having a bit of fun with you. Don't take anything I say too seriously.

Anyway, I'll go with 59, that seems pretty nondescript.

Sean, I have the same problem. Folks misunderstand my feeble attempts at humor or persiflage, often reacting with umbrage, confusion, or affront

However, "blog" was indeed the wrong word

I'd love to know if you think there is an answer to this, Dale.

kalleh: I'm sorry but answer to what

um...to what it's all about?

kalleh, Bob: I can't tell you what it's about without affecting the results

However I am dalehileman@verizon.net

The board has a private messaging function and I can pretty much guarantee that you've had about as many replies as you're likelyb to get. In spite of the numbers shown in the stats we only have about twenty or so regularly active members.

quote:

In spite of the numbers shown in the stats we only have about twenty or so regularly active members.

Bob is right about that, and even considering that, members don't always get a chance to read and/or answer all threads. While surely there are some here who haven't answered, I doubt you'll get any more answers from us. Sorry.