Classic maths puzzle cracked at last (May lead to advances in particle physics & computer security)

NewScientist.com news service ^ | 03/21/2005 | Maggie McKee

[Joe Miner]

In googling for an answer to your joke (I first took the reciprical) I came upon this page you might enjoy.

137

[RJL]

Why do the British call it "maths" instead of "math"? What's plural about it? Generally, you're only engaging on one kind of math - algebra, geometry, calculus, trigonometry.

I am still trying to figure out why the name “Democrat” changes to “Democratic” depending on usage.

“Republican” never becomes “Republicanic”.

Any help with this one?

[bjc]

But what did he actually prove! That there is a way to generate or define a very large set of numbers subject to certain operations that we didn't know existed even though we invented the numbers and operations in the first place. It may allow us to make use of the "finding" but does it lead to a greater understanding of numbers as numbers? It is like proving in Chess that a player playing White who never makes a mistake will always win when playing against an opponent who also never makes a mistake, given the existing rules of Chess. If true, what does it say about chess, except that Chess is a game where a player playing white who never makes a mistake.... (Plot of War Games, as I recall.)

[RadioAstronomer]

:-) Whoohooo! Glad you liked it. Thanks for the link. Its been a while since I read that.

[MacDorcha]

You two are weird. That's why we love ya I guess!

[marblehead17]

ping

[rock58seg]

If you failed to appreciate the humor of the Hitchhiker series, your "joke" is an indication of why. Of course we all know it's not the joke, but how you tell it.

We plebeians trundle along, with our feet on the ground and our heads not much higher, (some Feminazi's claim our brains are about three feet lower, front or back depending on their particular gripe).

Actually it was a decent joke, just took too much brainpower on a Friday morning.

[bedolido]

I read that article about the number 137... had to go read 20 blonde jokes just to feel intelligent. Strange just how much we know and how much there is to know. Some people know more of the little a man can learn... others just read Dilbert and complain about a lack of nookie.

I wish I knew what he was talking about... but my brain hurts now. back to writing java using BEA/Weblogic getting rid of Cross-Domain and replacing it with Struts.

[js1138]

The reason it sounds dated is, like Shakespeare, it's full of cliches.

[RadioAstronomer]

Actually it was a decent joke, just took too much brainpower on a Friday morning.

LOL! Thanks.

[RadioAstronomer]

Understood. :-)

[antiRepublicrat]

But what did he actually prove!

That it applies to all prime numbers, not just those tested. We could get a supercomputer crunching on this, showing the pattern works on prime numbers thousands of digits long, but it still wouldn't prove that this works for all prime numbers.

I am most definitely not a good enough mathematician to fully understand the implications of this. However, this shows something predictable about prime numbers. Most modern cryptography related to prime numbers. Maybe this discovery will result in making it easier to factor large numbers into their primes, which could effectively break most of the cryptographic schemes used today.

[antiRepublicrat]

137

Just switch to another base and that number will go away. :^)

[monkeyshine]

LOL, exactly. It obviously wasn't created to be a mystery, it just is a mystery. Take 2 advil and post again tomorrow.