Re: Random Number generation using Usenet
From: Peter Webb (webbfamily_at_DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au)
Date: 08/21/04
- Next message: Brian Smith: "Re: Question: SPACE of super-complex numbers"
- Previous message: Van Jacques: "Re: Easy number theory problem"
- In reply to: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: Random Number generation using Usenet"
- Next in thread: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: Random Number generation using Usenet"
- Reply: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: Random Number generation using Usenet"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:07:20 +1000
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:LYEVc.220989$aC7.10911806@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
>
> <mensanator@aol.com> wrote in message
news:cg614o$oic@odah37.prod.google.com...
> > Richard Henry wrote:
> > > As an experiment, please reply with a 2-decimal-digit value (00-99
> > > inclusive) without looking at other responses first.
> >
> > 666
>
> I think 42 will be more frequent.
>
> Dirk Vdm
>
>
Think of a number between 1 and 99 containing only odd numbers (but not
ones).
SPOILER - REALLY, DON"T READ, THINK OF A NUMBER.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37, right?
What did you think of?
There are 16 possible numbers, but over 50% of people pick 37. Its also I
believe the most commonly number picked at random, and indeed in episode of
The Simpsons that is the number Homer picks, when asked the same question. I
think the writer knew this fact so made it into a bit of a gag.
- Next message: Brian Smith: "Re: Question: SPACE of super-complex numbers"
- Previous message: Van Jacques: "Re: Easy number theory problem"
- In reply to: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: Random Number generation using Usenet"
- Next in thread: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: Random Number generation using Usenet"
- Reply: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: Random Number generation using Usenet"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]