From YT-I assume Laird and this band both got the name from the bible, Belphegor is one of the seven princes of hell, FYI. Fun fact: The palindromic prime number 1000000000000066600000000000001 is known as Belphegor's prime, due to the significance of containing the number 666, on both sides enclosed by thirteen zeroes and a one.

alternate title: The Rise and Fall of Pandora

Seems Prime numbers are inflated - they probably count all the people (like me) who have a Prime account for deliveries, and tried out the streaming video once, then realized their content selection sucked. If it wasn't included, I wouldn't pay extra for it.

What would be interesting to see for comparison is number of physical media (CD, DVD, Blu-Ray) sold in the same timeline, as well as 1-time digital purchases, such as iTunes.

74116,2,55910,0,46234,0,11430,0,33384,0,66202,0,3222,0,53548,0

(Treating the matrix as prime numbers. Who knew math could be so musical?)

>> ^Ryjkyj:


It's really just a matter of perspective though. Compare a bee with a slug. Bees are way ahead of slugs as far as visible complexity, yet to us, they're complete idiots. Even if we do rely on them.
And humans have been around for what? Maybe fifty-thousand years? Yeah, we've done A LOT in that time. But what could we do with another fifty-thousand? What about a million? (If for some reason we overcome the astronomical probability that we'll destroy ourselves) I don't really think there's any telling what we could do.
Not to mention the fact that everyone just assumes that aliens will be some sort of humanoid or even just act human or share any of our characteristics at all. Sure, here on Earth, life is carbon-based. But then why does everybody just assume that if we encounter life, it will also be carbon based? Answer: because we can't possibly understand how it could work any other way. And not because we just assume, but because we looked and it seems impossible according to the laws of chemistry. But that doesn't mean we're right just because we can't see the answer.
What about this: math is an abstract concept like you say. But the system most of us use is based on the power of ten. The digit repeats and a new one is added at the tenth place. Could that have something to do with the amount of fingers we have? Well what if the alien in question used a system that repeated at the ninth place? Their whole system would follow different rules. What if they used a system that had an individual symbol for every number up to two-hundred fifty million, seven hundred sixty-seven thousand, eight-hundred and fifty-three? What if they were so evolved that powers didn't even make a difference and they could fill a quadratic equation with numbers that were all based in different powers?
And if they were a race (another human term) whose individual bodies consisted of different, interchangeable parts, then math would be essential to their existence. It would be as natural as eating. To a species like that, we would look like childish morons playing with our own snot. Even though we use separate, distinct powers to program computers.
And that's just assuming that our aliens only understand things as far as the three dimensions we live in. What about a fourth dimensional alien that only communicates through careful waves of sulfur emission? To us, it might just be a giant blur that smelled like shit. You know what we'd do? That's right, we'd light it on fire.


I will admit that a species that has absolutely no comparable experience with us would be a problem. There's a mad, wonderful chapter in Greg Egans Diaspora that discusses the idea of complex creatures that have evolved in multi-dimensional space. I don't recall the exact maths, but they essentially live "rotated" into extra dimensions. I'll grant they will pose a challenge.

But it's not unreasonable to assume that some life forms would have evolved on a similar ecosystem to ours. We're already comfortable in working outside base 10, and there are some smart people who are working out establishing common symbol patterns based on fundamental mathematical principles. I don't care if you can interchange your head with your elbow, or you reproduce by thought, 1+1 =2. That does not change. Same for Pythagoras' theorem, prime numbers and so on.

My overall point is that something that is smart enough to figure out all the problems of going out into space will figure out how to communicate with us.

Or more likely, simply harvest the planet for resources. They're bound to be low on food and fuel by then

>> ^Barseps:

>> ^Boise_Lib:
I was looking for a video about Wow Numbers.
Such as:
1³+2³+3³+4³+5³+6³+7³+8³+9³=2025
and
(1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9)²=2025
And found this instead.

I wonder if anybody's done:-
Take any 3 figure sum & repeat it, (e.g. 326 becomes 326,326), divide it by 7, divide the result of that by 11, then divide the result of that by 13. You should be left with your original 3 figure number (326). Try it, works with any 3 figured number.


Yeah, I have seen that one before.
I'm still looking for a good video of this type of stuff--if you know of any.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

I was looking for a video about Wow Numbers.
Such as:
1³+2³+3³+4³+5³+6³+7³+8³+9³=2025
and
(1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9)²=2025
And found this instead.


I wonder if anybody's done:-

Take any 3 figure sum & repeat it, (e.g. 326 becomes 326,326), divide it by 7, divide the result of that by 11, then divide the result of that by 13. You should be left with your original 3 figure number (326). Try it, works with any 3 figured number.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

>> ^solecist:
how does this have positive upvotes?

Because it is educational... not very educational but it is kids learning... @Boise_Lib I am glad to upvote friend but math is only science when it is...


I actually started to change the channels, but this does define primes and list the prime numbers up to 100. Not a whole lot of science--but science none the less.

>> ^solecist:
how does this have positive upvotes?


Because it is educational... not very educational but it is kids learning... @Boise_Lib I am glad to upvote friend but math is only science when it is...

Leaving aside Yogi and Skeeves little tiff , the start of this video does raise an interesting question in terms of our assessment of ourselves as "intelligent". Is there a line that is crossed which marks a species as intelligent?

For me, I think our intelligence comes from our ability to both understand and communicate abstract concepts, particularly things like math. Most of the research I've seen into communication with other potential intelligences focuses on the conveyance of our understanding simple mathematical concepts like arithmetic, geometry, prime numbers and so on. I think based on that, we would be able to eventually communicate with another intelligent species, even starting with something as simple as


..
...
.....
.......
...........
.............
.................

That demonstrates we know what the first few primes are.

I don't believe there is another animal on earth that can understand and communicate these concepts

apart from mice and dolphins obviously, but they don't want to talk to us.

That said, there may be some fundamental property of primes or some other universal mathematical pattern we simply haven't recognised yet (it may only be apparent in a different base notation or when looked at n-dimensionally) that is considered the universal equivalent of 1+1=2. In which case, we'll appear remarkably dense to other intelligences.

50 isn't a prime number...

>> ^Crosswords:

I've always faltered between calling myself agnostic or an atheist. I tend to gravitate towards the latter as I have no belief in God,gods or other various superstitious religious hoodoo. But I've never liked how atheism is portrayed as a statement of knowing there is no God et. al and answers to all the important questions. The issue isn't that I don't know what I am, its the ability to correctly convey my stance to others in a single word that causes me to wonder which is the best description. Which would be both and neither for reasons pointed out by Mr. Jillette.


You sound like a weak agnostic, explicit atheist. Trying to fit something into a single inaccurate word does your belief a injustice. Atheist refers to not currently holding a theist position; you know of the idea of Gods but don't currently believe in it. And also agnostic to the position that it can be positively stated either way. Most atheists are agnostics. I am in the same category as you I think, for short hand, I just call myself an agnostic atheist, as most agnostics are weak, and most atheists are explicit.
>> ^Drachen_Jager:

Statistically speaking Gods do not and can not exist.


Says what statistic? Statistically speaking, you are closely related to a banana...you are far different from a banana. Truth isn't statistical, it's absolute. 99.999% isn't truth. Highly accurate isn't necessarily true. Undeniably certain is truth. And "cannot" claims can never be gained from statistical knowledge, ever, so I would embolden you to expand on this claim if you would be so kind. 1,1,1,1,1. What the statistical probability that 1 is the next number is high, but it isn't certain. "Cannot" can't be used via statistical analysis. It is why we still cannot predict if prime numbers are truly random or not...for now they appear to be, but appearances aren't certainties. The statistical probability that PI is irrational is completely unknown. Statistics are very useful, just not in the way you wish to use them, IMO.

There is no god = 139%
Coincidently also a prime number, so it must be true

He' absolutely right about eleven being a gay number. I know this because the street address of the nearest gay bath house is 430 and if you multiply the 4 and 3 you get 12 and subtract the zero you get eleven because as I proved in a previous comment you cannot subtract zero in gay math so you must round up to the nearest prime number.

>> ^ButterflyKisses:

First off, I'm not part of any specific party. I don't see much difference between dems and repubs in regards to issues like this. NAFTA was started during the Clinton administration and this measure was approved during the Bush administration.
Secondly, I do see a problem paying a use tax to Spain if I wish to drive on a major thoroughfare in the US. I highly doubt the founding fathers would ever approve of such a thing.
Thirdly, what the hell is all this talk about invasion from Canada, Spain or Mexico from you guys? That's just absurd and shouldn't be a point of discussion in regards to this. You're just accusing ridiculous points that were never brought up by those that oppose it.
Fourthly, there is always a terrorist threat these days and putting security in the hands of a completely separate sovereign nation with points of entry sounds ludicrous to me.
If the US owned and operated this series of highways then I wouldn't have a problem with it. The taxes would go back into our economy, not another country's. Yes, Eminent Domain occurs regularly in America. Eminent Domain for another country doesn't.
I'm not happy about this and I'm pissed at the Dems and Repubs for allowing this to happen and even more pissed that they both try to act like it's some crazy conspiracy theory up until the toll booths are in use.


Firstly - I didn't mention a party, I said conservative, which is where your arguments seem to be coming from. No shame in that.

Secondly - Your link doesn't work and wiki doesn't mention Spain, so I'd be curious to learn more about your claims. Not attacking you, defending Spain, appeasing terrorists or anything else, I've just not heard about the Spain thing. Just trying to figure out if this a legitimate concern, false information or out of context political boogeymanism.

Thirdly - The invasion stuff is just for yucks. Figured that was obvious. Didn't mean to offend. Humor can be fun.

Fifthly (I'm limiting my lys to prime numbers) - Again, the Spain thing, linky linky? Hopefully from some semi-respectable source?

(>"<) xoxo