Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

[Michel H]

...

And none of that is 42.

No, but take 42.

The first digit of this number is a 4, the prime factorization of which is 2² = 2*2 (so you get two "2" digits, one also has: 4=2+2).

The second digit of "42" is a 2, the prime factorization of which is just "2".

So one has (4,2) = (2*2,2), which is closely related to 22/2 (and I was born on a 22 February (1958), or 22/2).

This leads me to believe that 42 is closely related to my birth date. The same would not be true if I was born on a 5th of July for example (5/7).

Note that JFK was assassinated on a 22 November, and that the recent terrorist attacks in Brussels took place on 22 March (this doesn't mean I encourage terrorism of course).

 

[Dave Rogers]

This leads me to believe that 42 is closely related to my birth date. The same would not be true if I was born on a 6th of July for example (6/7).

So you haven't tried multiplying six by seven?

Dve

 

[Michel H]

So you haven't tried multiplying six by seven?

Dve

Good observation, Dave Rogers. I think I'll edit my post.

 

[DuvalHMFIC]

*Golf clap*

You sir, are very good at what you do. Very, very good.

 

[Loss Leader]

The typical experiment I usually do is this (I don't think this breaks any law of course; obviously I try to remain always discreet and polite in my behavior). I watch the (often very pretty) girl for some time ...

After 45 years I thought I'd stopped being surprised, but this post sets a new bar as the single craziest thing to which I have ever heard someone admit.

 

[ComfySlippers]

After 45 years I thought I'd stopped being surprised, but this post sets a new bar as the single craziest thing to which I have ever heard someone admit.

I thought it was just me.

I can't help imagining, however, that Michel might be sat talking to one of those animated .gifs of a woman that's designed to look like its Live.

 

[fromdownunder]

Actually, I added the Judge Judy hint only after I saw fromdownunder alluding to her. I thought it was a little relevant, and it's never a bad thing to add a judge to your hints ...

Yrs you did, because I bought it up, and suddenly you add Judge Judy to your list. If I say Natalie Portman, you will probably add her as well. Why not say what you are thinking before other posters respond?

Oh, here is my response to your latest challenge:

Hints: cam, internet, I have some pictures, Judge Judy, people who seemed to react telepathically during the experiments were not necessarily all in Australia.

Three of them were in the Antarctic, and had a complete DVD set of Season 5 of Judge Judy where you managed to mentally alter all of her decisions, and make them believe the dog was guilty because you have pictures to prove this on your Cam.

Norm

 

[ComfySlippers]

Did someone mention Natalie Portman?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Good observation, Dave Rogers. I think I'll edit my post.

To 5/7/1958?

5+7=12, 1+9=10, 5x8=40.

12-10+40=42.

Dave

 

[fromdownunder]

Hey, I can do that as well. I was born 20 September 49.

Leave out the zero, and 2 + 9 = 11
4 + 9 = 13

11 + 13 = 24.

Reverse it, 42

Michel, pretty much any set of numbers can be used to try and "prove" whatever you want it to "prove".

Norm

 

[devnull]

Yes, very much, absolutely and definitely scientific.

Then Im afraid that you know absolutely nothing about science, or the scientific method.

 

[Michel H]

To 5/7/1958?

5+7=12, 1+9=10, 5x8=40.

12-10+40=42.

Dave

Hey, I can do that as well. I was born 20 September 49.

Leave out the zero, and 2 + 9 = 11
4 + 9 = 13

11 + 13 = 24.

Reverse it, 42

Michel, pretty much any set of numbers can be used to try and "prove" whatever you want it to "prove".

Norm

Dave and Norm, it appears that you were both able to "derive" the number 42 from birth dates.

But compare the complexity of your "derivations" with mine:
42 = 2²2 is clearly related to 22/2/1958 (my birth date in day/month/year format; I could also have written 4=2*2, or 4=2+2, I even have several possibilities).

Mine is a lot simpler.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Dave and Norm, it appears that you were both able to "derive" the number 42 from birth dates.

But compare the complexity of your "derivations" with mine:
42 = 2²2 is clearly related to 22/2/1958 (my birth date in day/month/year format; I could also have written 4=2*2, or 4=2+2, I even have several possibilities).

Mine is a lot simpler.

And it would be simpler still to believe that 222 was a significant number for you, or 22 (the day of the month, which actually appears in your birth date), or 24 (month plus day), or 6 (sum of month/day digits), or 29 (sum of all digits). You've chosen only to use four of the eight relevant digits, so you've had to jettison more information, in particular any information related to the year whatsoever; plus, you've chosen to mix and match between different place values, something five-year-olds are taught that you can't do. You've chosen an arbitrary subset of digits from a larger set, then applied an arbitrary set of operations to them, and just arbitrarily claimed that yours is the "correct" derivation. There is no objectivity or logic here.

Dave

 

[Loss Leader]

Mine is a lot simpler.

What rules did you follow? Were these rules set in advance so that you didn't succumb to confirmation bias? How is simplicity defined? You used two operations (addition and multiplication) and then some rules that you appear to have made up - throwing your 4 into the tens place follows no known math.

Of the two examples given, one only uses 2 operations and one rule that follows no math, the other uses three operations but does not then cheat numbers into the desired place with some non-math tinkering.

Your derivation of 42 contains a completely made-up element (making the month the tens place of a two digit number), and since that element appears to have been designed by you special for this case and not available to anyone else. I would say that yours is the most complex and least simple answer.

As for historic events that happened on the 22nd of any given month, I note that there are only about 30 days in every month. That means that there's a 3.3% chance that any event will take place on the 22nd. You named two out of some unknown decades of human history.

Nate Silver wrote a great summary of the scientific method on FiveThirtyEight this morning:

[W]e live in an uncertain world and that both rigor and humility are needed when trying to make sense of it.

Rigor and humility. You should make this your mantra.

Another thing about the 538 blog: 5+38=43. Take away 1 because you are the 1 person he's communicating with and you get 42.

 

[Michel H]

After 45 years I thought I'd stopped being surprised, but this post sets a new bar as the single craziest thing to which I have ever heard someone admit.

Are you sure you're not watching a little too close to the screen, Loss Reader? Are you really sure this is not a little rude? Watch out, if you do, beautiful Kathryne might get a little angry, she's not kidding about these things!


NSFW - partial nudity from porn channel

Notice what was said:

"bluey_blue has tipped Kathryne 222 tokens" (notice the amont of the tip, which seems to be once again related to my birth date 22/2/...) with the message: "is it rude if I watch so close?".

Then Kathryne reaction: "haha yup" (notice that she didn't say: "what a silly idea!"). It seems unlikely she would have responded in this way after the mere suggestion she's a "Romanian vampire".

Kathryne is perhaps one of the most beautiful ladies on this planet, but she didn't seem to enjoy my experiment a lot. A little time after my arrival in her room, I heard her say: "It's raining men.". She is probably fully aware of her beauty. She was live from Sydney Sexpo when I did my pseudo-sexual-experiment with her, a few days ago.

 

[ComfySlippers]

You're probably going to feel very embarrassed in a couple of months Michel.
When you return here to announce your next guess-the-number game, you will be reminded how you shared your porn habits with us.

 

[Michel H]

You're probably going to feel very embarrassed in a couple of months Michel.
When you return here to announce your next guess-the-number game, you will be reminded how you shared your porn habits with us.

I remind you of this:

... done a "good job" (btw no nudity is indispensable in these experiments), I observe her reaction ...

By the way, ComfySlippers, why are you using these pink bunny slippers as your avatar now?

I would have expected such slippers somewhere else

 

[fromdownunder]

Kathryne is perhaps one of the most beautiful ladies on this planet, but she didn't seem to enjoy my experiment a lot.

Now this whole thread is getting downright creepy.

Norm

 

[ComfySlippers]

...
By the way, ComfySlippers, why are you using these pink bunny slippers as your avatar now?



I would have expected such slippers somewhere else

If you ever stepped outside of your Guess-A-Number-From-1-To-4 Thread you'd know.

Also, no one is interested in you adding Porn to the list of things you can't do properly. I will remind you of this in two months time, when you return with your guessing game, as if it's the first time you've done so.

 

[Michel H]

Now this whole thread is getting downright creepy.

Norm

I have edited my original image after it was deemed NSFW by a moderator (which surprised me).