Apocalyptic Numbers - Numberphile

Рет қаралды 109,631

2 ай бұрын

Featuring Tony Padilla. See all three videos in this Apocalyptic Trilogy - bit.ly/ApocalypticTrilogy
More links & stuff in full description below ↓↓↓
The two sequels to this video are:
Goliath Numbers - • Goliath & Leviathan Nu...
Primes and Fibonacci with 666 digits - • Interesting 666-digit ...
Tony Padilla on Amazon - amzn.to/3U6DRSM
(Check out “Fantastic Numbers and Where to Find Them”)
See our 666 Playlist - • 666 on Numberphile
Big Numbers Playlist - • Big Numbers on Numberp...
Patreon: / numberphile
Numberphile is supported by Jane Street. Learn more about them (and exciting career opportunities) at: bit.ly/numberphile-janestreet
We're also supported by the Simons Laufer Mathematical Sciences Institute (formerly MSRI): bit.ly/MSRINumberphile
Our thanks also to the Simons Foundation: www.simonsfoundation.org
NUMBERPHILE
Website: www.numberphile.com/
Numberphile on Facebook: / numberphile
Numberphile tweets: / numberphile
Subscribe: bit.ly/Numberphile_Sub
Video by Brady Haran and Pete McPartlan
Numberphile T-Shirts and Merch: teespring.com/stores/numberphile
Brady's videos subreddit: / bradyharan
Brady's latest videos across all channels: www.bradyharanblog.com/
Sign up for (occasional) emails: eepurl.com/YdjL9

Пікірлер: 426

@numberphile Ай бұрын

See all three videos in this Apocalyptic Trilogy - bit.ly/ApocalypticTrilogy

@alanzyoutube Ай бұрын

These big number videos with Tony are the best ones, We need a video of something like Graham's number, Tree 3, Gama Zero, Arrow, Factorial & Rayo's number. G↑ x T3↑ x Γ0↑ x ↑ (number of arrows is ↑) x ! (number of Factorials is !) x R↑ + 1 = Big Daddy Number!

@Defnotyeett Ай бұрын

Hey, why do youtube views stop at 301? (ps: check the video)

@IDFpartyboi972 Ай бұрын

Much love from the IDF numberphile

@ppchan9516 Ай бұрын

geometry dash

@johnjeffreys6440 Ай бұрын

The closest explanation I have found to explain why 666 is the number of the beast, is that it's symbolic of materialism. The carbon atom has 6 protons, 6 neutrons, and 6 electrons.

@liliwheeler2204 Ай бұрын

Any time I start to think I have a grasp on exponential growth, I see something like 2^157 Planck times = a few hours and 2^192 Planck times = 10 million years, and it breaks my brain again

@jamesknapp64 Ай бұрын

Well it's 2^35 times bigger, 2^10 ~ 1000 Thus 2^35 > 32000000000 times bigger or 32 Billion times more

@THICCTHICCTHICC 25 күн бұрын

Consider it this way - 2^10 is damn near 0 compared to 2^11 and so on. In the same way that the difference between a million and a billion is pretty much just a billion.

@arcuscotangens Ай бұрын

I love hat animation. Implying that the last living creature in the universe doesn't die because of cosmic events destroying galaxies at a time, but simply because it's a bit clumsy.

@mudmug1 Ай бұрын

Stumbled just shy of reaching the peak of Mount Improbable

@babilon6097 Ай бұрын

It's math. We try things. Sometimes they're even useful.

@orang1921 Ай бұрын

"I discovered this new property of ___. Oh, it turned out to be useful in some industry? Yeah... yeah, I meant to do that."

@publiconions6313 Ай бұрын

Ill never forget watching Brady's interview with Conway - when Conway looks out the window and asks "i wish i knew whyyyyy".. in reference to the strange universe-implicating numbers in group theory.. why the monster and no more, why any of the sporadics at all... especially when we know symmetry has so much to do with fundamental physics. I love hearing Tony say "hey im nature, that's got something to do with me!"...

@jeffspaulding9834 Ай бұрын

RIP Conway. One of the few mathematicians that I've directly applied their work (Conway invented the current system for naming polygons).

@GarryDumblowski Ай бұрын

@@jeffspaulding9834 Wait, really? I'd have assumed it was way older, considering how long people have been doing math with higher order polygons like the constructions of the 17-gon and 257-gon.

@jeffspaulding9834 Ай бұрын

@@GarryDumblowski Well, it's sort of true and sort of not. People were naming polygons long before Conway, but the rules for doing so weren't consistent or well defined. Conway worked with someone named Antreas Hatzipolakis and took existing practices and codified them into one coherent system. Unfortunately, they posted it on a website that has since removed the page. I couldn't find a copy of it when I did a cursory search. Related, Conway also created the system we use for polyhedra. Wikipedia has a page for that one.

@GarryDumblowski Ай бұрын

Ahh, I guess that checks out. Reminds me a lot of how long it took pi to get a consistent symbol.

@DaveLeCompte Ай бұрын

@13:53 Will there not be a number where the expansion is all fours? 2^2 = 4 QED

@sh1sh1maru Ай бұрын

New Tony Padilla video? Count me in! Is that a goat's head on his sweater? Fitting!

@FLPhotoCatcher Ай бұрын

There was a Veritasium video that showed that the number that most people give for a random number is *37.* 6+6+6=18. 18x37=666 And 37 is the largest prime factor of 666

@martinchamberlin3359 Ай бұрын

it's the logo for AllSaints

@shortsornothing4981 Ай бұрын

No. Allen solly.

@Luper1billion Ай бұрын

I feel like all of mathematics was founded on mathematicians just playing games with numbers

@cooltaylor1015 17 сағат бұрын

Well,, before they invented numbers, they were playing games with compass and straightedge, but yeah. Basically.

@atalbrecht Ай бұрын

The animations of the creature were so adorable! Thanks for the vid Brady!

@stevefrandsen7897 Ай бұрын

I enjoy Tony's presentations. @8:00 "Maybe this is where the last creature dies... Or it might have nothing to do with anything". Love the humility. Humility is a good trait to have for learning.

@davidgould9431 Ай бұрын

Brady's comment about a power of two being all 4s was initially intriguing, but I think it's fairly easy to see why a power of 2 greater than 2 cannot be all 4s: the previous one would be all 2s and the one before that would be all 1s, which is odd and clearly not a power of 2. Edit: I should have said (instead of "a power of 2 greater than 2") something like "a power greater than 2 of 2" or, better I think, "2ⁿ, where n > 2". I appear to have caused some confusion and debate. Sorry, everyone. @hectorbector11 put it better (I summarise): 2ⁿ = 4444…4444 ⇒ 2ⁿ⁻¹ = 2222…2222 ⇒ 2ⁿ⁻² = 1111…1111 which is odd, so not 2ⁿ for any n > 2.

@rjtimmerman2861 Ай бұрын

What about 2^2 boom gotcha

@Henrix1998 Ай бұрын

22^2 isn't 444 for example, I think your logic is flawed. Btw, √444444 is 666.666. For every 2n amount of 4s the result is n.n 6s.

@hectorbector11 Ай бұрын

@@Henrix1998 By previous power of two he means 2^(n-1). When you go down one power in this way, you are dividing by the base, 2 in this case. 4444/2=2222. So the hypothetical power of 2^n = all 4s requires a 2^(n-1) = all 2s and 2^(n-2) = all 1s. This last one is clearly impossible, because there are no odd powers of 2.

@lunardoesmusic Ай бұрын

@@hectorbector11 Well, no odd powers other than the trivial 2^0, which makes 2^2 the only power of 2 whose digits are all 4s.

@davidgould9431 Ай бұрын

@@rjtimmerman2861 I said "a power of 2 greater than 2." Now (knowledge bomb coming up), 2 isn't greater than 2. What was it? Boom, gotcha. Was that it?

@harmanpreetsingh7848 Ай бұрын

Always happy to see Prof. Tony Padilla

@unvergebeneid Ай бұрын

"Apocalyptic Powers" sounds like the better video title than "Apocalyptic Numbers".

@video83046 Ай бұрын

Too clickbaity for this type of channel and it's seriousness towards the topics chosen I guess

@unvergebeneid Ай бұрын

@@video83046 why is it clickbait if it's literally the name of those numbers?

@soupisfornoobs4081 Ай бұрын

It's numberphile, not powerphile

@drenz1523 Ай бұрын

@@soupisfornoobs4081 new channel: powerphile, a channel dedicated to powers?

@FirHydrntsRFirEaters Ай бұрын

"Let's use planck times since they're fundamental to the universe and not human centric" Proceeds to discuss 666 appearing in base 10 numbers, which are very human centric lol

@kiro9291 Ай бұрын

never have I felt so much emotion upon seeing a blue three-eyed creature

@samuraisecretary Ай бұрын

"Seconds are arbitrary, let's use something fundamental" *exclusively uses base-10*

@t.kersten7695 Ай бұрын

many years ago there existed T-Shirts with funny memes aorund the "number of the beast" - with prints like "667 - the neighbour of the beast", or "333 - half evil"

@KevFrost Ай бұрын

What do you get if you dial 666 in the UK? An upside down policeman

@evangonzalez2245 Ай бұрын

668 is the neighbor of the beast, 667 is across the street 😉

@jonathandevries2828 Ай бұрын

strange optical illusion @4:18, the background changes from a pattern to flat brown when the numbers are scrolling up it

@john-vincentsaddic6335 Ай бұрын

Ah I see why! if you pause it, the numbers have a solid brown background to them!

@ShivanshSharma Ай бұрын

Come for the maths, stay for the existential dread.

@GarryDumblowski Ай бұрын

As soon as I saw the premise of the video my brain immediately jumped to "so is 0.248163264128256512102420488192... normal?", which I'd argue is a pretty good reason for doing silly math like this.

@Anon282828 Ай бұрын

"all 4s" divided by 2 is "all 2s", and "all 2s" divided by to is "all 1s" - an odd number larger than one cannot be a power of 2, so therefore there is not power of 2 that results in "all 4s" QED

@Deus_Almighty Ай бұрын

2² = 4

@rosiefay7283 Ай бұрын

2:33 Such is his obsession with repeated 6s, he is interested in the decimal expansion of 2^192 ... but passes over the 4444 in that very same expansion.

@GarryDumblowski Ай бұрын

Now you could ask the same question but with 4444 and call them Powers of Death instead (because 4 is often associated with death)

@ismailshtewi8560 Ай бұрын

i love little, arbitrary mathematical questions like this that don't have any seemingly important application or anything, it's just people playing with numbers and seeing fun things pop up and running with it. you could use this sort of thing to write stories or create mythologies.

@orterves Ай бұрын

4:26 "I don't like using seconds because seconds are a bit man made" - uses base 10

@Flinsyflonsy Ай бұрын

Proof that we should use base 3, the holy trinity, since they would have no apocalyptic numbers.

@Nerdnumberone Ай бұрын

They use powers or 2 and a base 10 number system to look for 666. That's so very arbitrary. If this was some divinely inspired number handed to humans in our number system, it could be given in any convenient units. Seconds would be unlikely, as they are a relatively recent invention (within the last 500 years). Personally, I'm an atheist, so I don't believe that an iron-age book contains particular insight into the future.

@orterves Ай бұрын

@@Flinsyflonsy and here I was thinking we should use base 7 to maximise the frequency

@Flinsyflonsy Ай бұрын

@@orterves we can use unary and use 6 as the only digit.

@Qbe_Root Ай бұрын

Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobes in shambles

@unvergebeneid Ай бұрын

5:41 you go to all these lengths to have a unit of time that's not man-made but then you apply it to something that relies on base 10. Let alone a book written by people of course.

@dianamelamet Ай бұрын

That's what I was thinking! Someone talking about numbers wants a "natural" unit. Ha!

@JT-xh9ev Ай бұрын

I think he just translated it into second. Since plank time is fixed you would know exactly how many fit in a second so it would me the same time wise just an easier number for people to understand

@patrickramos1748 Ай бұрын

Planck time isn't reliant on base 10, it's just a measure of time, the lowest measure of time. It's just equivalent te a certain number of seconds

@TimmehTRP Ай бұрын

@@patrickramos1748 But whether a power is apocalyptic is base 10 reliant. So the transformation to time is not the problem, it's the source itself. Maybe we should use base 666 :P

@unvergebeneid Ай бұрын

@@patrickramos1748 exactly. But a sequence of 6s is.

@02_aldebaranrahmanadhitya95 Ай бұрын

Excited to watch!!

@PC_Simo 3 сағат бұрын

14:00 Well, it can’t be all 4:s (other, than 4, itself, obviously); because that one will have a factor, whose expansion is all 1:s, which is an odd number; and therefore, definitely, not a power of 2 (again, except 1, itself, which is 2^0).

@LittlePunnkk Ай бұрын

legends say Brady will never stop giving certain numbers groups with cool new names, and then asking professors about them

@ulob Ай бұрын

That death of the last creature in the universe animation in the middle of the video 😂😂😂 what a gem

@ulob Ай бұрын

Whaaaaat? It didn't actually perish

@jacksonstarky8288 Ай бұрын

Speaking of Planck time... a short series on Sixty Symbols about the Planck units, giving each unit its own video, would be fun to see. Especially if Tony is up for doing the whole series with Brady.

@OmateYayami Ай бұрын

I wonder how they check if number has 666 for super large powers. I thought that there is some trick with binary conversion and modulo operations but 2^n in binary is like 10^n in decimal, so base changes a lot in the digit composition. It would be interesting in seeing some relations between number base, exponent base and exponent power.

@t.kersten7695 Ай бұрын

something like 666 to the 666th power maybe?

@BytebroUK Ай бұрын

One 6th-form teacher (whom I shall adore forever for their attitude) told me "Maths is what people think is useful, but at the same time Number Theory is what people think is interesting" :)

@elliuozaG Ай бұрын

4:30 He doesn't like seconds (based on an integer multiple of the duration of some atomic process) because they're man made, but this whole thing being base-10 centric is totally fine and not man made. Then picks Plank time, which is defined with like 2 significant digits.

@sakgiok Ай бұрын

I think you're confusing time units with duration. The duration of the second is man made to suit our life on earth. The definition of the second on these atomic processes is just to make easy for everyone to use it with precision. The Plank time duration is a cosmological constant, not depending on any of our senses, or the movement of our planet, while is still expressed in seconds.

@rudranil-c Ай бұрын

The base doesn't matter really. 10 to the power 14 can be written in octal, hexadecimal, binary or any other base, it will still remain that long duration, how you put it on paper is just the representation of that duration.

@ragnkja Ай бұрын

@@rudranil-c Having the digits “666” in the number is base-dependent, unlike the number 666 itself (that one is alphabet-dependent).

@Henrix1998 Ай бұрын

I decided to fire up Python and check what is the largest power of 2 that does not contain all N digit numbers in it. Preliminary results are the following 2^169 onwards contain numbers 0-9 2^3500 onwards contain numbers 10-99 2^53993 onwards contain numbers 100-999 (maybe) After that checking gets veery slow and I need to multithread the search properly

@sumarexl Ай бұрын

666 is the number of the Sun. 108 is the number of the Moon.

@krokkoguy Ай бұрын

There is a very natural topic to talk about that continues some of the ideas discussed in this video, in p-adic numbers, where large powers of numbers in a sense converges to a sequence of digits

@sarahmcleary4603 Ай бұрын

I love this channel but often I get about 4 mins in before it’s over my head. This one I followed the conversation all the way through! Go me! However now I’m thinking about my relative insignificance in the universe.

@mischa7406 Ай бұрын

I ran some code and checked what the highest n was for p^n where p is every prime below 100, and n = 1-100,000. No other p has a larger n than 2. The larger p gets, the smaller max n becomes. The sums with the highest n all seem to average around 8300 digits in length, so I suppose that around that number of digits the chance that any random combination of p and n will contain three 6's consecutively approaches 100%

@geekjokes8458 Ай бұрын

i didnt understand the 2nd paragraph, what do you mean by the sums? are you adding the powers of p up to a "max n"? isnt it arbitrary? and summing is not what they're doing in the video anyway... "around 8300" just seems to be the point at which your computer gave up, and i also dont se how _that_ means the number should have the string 666

@ynes6658 Ай бұрын

A power of two cannot be made only of sixes as it would be divisible by three.

@ynes6658 Ай бұрын

A number of the form aaaaaaa in base B is expressed as a×(B^n - 1)÷(B - 1), so, to be a power of two, a needs to be a power of two and B^n = 1 + 2^m × (B - 1) for some m.

@jimnewton4534 Ай бұрын

Serious (not mocking) question. In UK do you pronounce 6th as sixth or as sisth or as sikth or as siss. When the speaker says "666th" I didn't hear the siksth. Is it going out of fashion to pronounce the k in sixth?

@KevFrost Ай бұрын

Regional variation. We have someone with a mostly Liverpool accent and an ?Australian? New Zealander. I do sick-zth

@anayagrawal6550 Ай бұрын

4:56 Tony: Let's do something fundamental, something that is universal across the universe... Also Tony: *Uses base 10

@piemaster310 Ай бұрын

Maybe 2^29784 is when quantum fluctuations cause the matter in the universe self-assemble into a big bang situation

@LordElijah Ай бұрын

Today was my 666th day doing duolingo...

@jacksonstarky8288 Ай бұрын

A question for Tony: How far past the black hole era (statistically) would the universe have to go in order to experience a Poincaré recurrence (assuming that such things are possible; this would make another interesting video topic for this channel as well) in terms of these apocalyptic numbers?

@orphanedsignal Ай бұрын

thank you yet again!

@dyerseve3001 Ай бұрын

"Stand back, I have powers... apocalyptic powers!" Holds out a long strip of paper.

@martinh2783 Ай бұрын

Next morings newpaper front page: Famous mathematician Tony Padilla says: "It's Maths, who cares!"

@PhilbertDeZwart Ай бұрын

We can disprove Brady's idea about a power of 2 containing only 4's by looking at the last 2 digits. There are only a few combinations that occur in a fixed sequence and none of them are 44

@TheOwlman Ай бұрын

25.806975801127880315188420605149 the root of all evil, one of my favourites among so many 666 related jokes, though 664 the neighbour of the beast (at least generally in the UK) comes a close second.

@danielw.4876 Ай бұрын

My favorite part about 666 is that it is the 36th triangle number… 36, 3 6’s And triangles have 3 angles, 60 degrees each if it’s equilateral

@themasterofthemansion3809 Ай бұрын

Not to mention that sum of all integers up to 36 is 666.

@BernardoMartins_ Ай бұрын

They spoke of 616 as the alternative and perhaps actual number of the beast. Planck’s length, the smallest possible distance in the fabric of reality, is 1.616 x 10^(-35) m. There you have it. Everything that has a size is fundamentally apocalyptic.

@_lalapop Ай бұрын

for interesting far future shenanigans regarding the apocalypse, the last question by isaac asimov is pretty interesting

@AsterothPrime Ай бұрын

Belphegor's Prime

@numberphile Ай бұрын

Not today - but we’ve done that before - kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sNGPhJyqxLKyqps.html

@daviddoran1682 Ай бұрын

Would love to hear more about the Vacumm of space collapsing and the Higgs becoming unstable. Is there any clues as to how the universe might become "interesting" again after all the black hole shave radiated away?

@Snefens34 Ай бұрын

What about numbers in the sequence 2^n that contains n? At first they will obviously be a lot more frequent compared to when just looking for 666's. A quick check gives n=(6,10,35,36,37,44,49,51, 60,67,72,73,82,85,89,93) that is true for n666 the frequency should be lower. Would that at one point also reach a value n where all following values would contain n?

@wv1seahawks Ай бұрын

I think something similarly interesting is there’s gotta be a point where every power of 2^n after a certain value of n contains the number n in its digits. That’s the one I want to know lol

@gcewing Ай бұрын

1.3*10^8195 years later, the Saviour comes back and says "...Where is everyone?"

@rudolfglaser9664 Ай бұрын

Is there actually also a 2 to the power of n number that contains the digit '6' four or more times in a row?

@user-rh6ut1uc6s Ай бұрын

What about negative powers of 2, and looking for 666 in their decimal expansion after the decimal point?

@jamesknapp64 Ай бұрын

I was thinking if the density of powers went to 1 (the proportion of the powers that give apovolypic numbers) and it seems like something stronger is believed.

@drgetwrekt869 Ай бұрын

the best one is the golden ratio: phi = cos(666) - sin(6*6*6) or something like this. amazing

@geekjokes8458 Ай бұрын

its just sin(666°)

@drgetwrekt869 Ай бұрын

@@geekjokes8458 there are various versions. its funny as heck

@OrangeDrink Ай бұрын

Great info on history 616 or 666 depending on source! Playing math with 7 is fun too

@aodtoxic Ай бұрын

Why not calculate the probability of a random occurrence of 666 in a sequence of random numbers. It will be possible to estimate the probability of if a large sequence exists with no 666 in it.

@nadionmediagroup Ай бұрын

That final Planck number is almost irrelevant due to the vast size of the number. It’s hard to even comprehend.

@SubtleForces Ай бұрын

To get all 4s with the n-th power of 2, the n-2nd power would have to be all 1s and there can not be a 1 as the last digit in powers of two, so the answer to Brady's question is that it can't be done with 2 as a seed. But it feels like my argument could be generalized to exclude a whole lot of seeds and a whole lot of outcomes for each seed. I wonder what the Tony Padilla could be doing with that...

@cooltaylor1015 17 сағат бұрын

I conjecture that there are both infinitely many apocalyptic powers of two AND infinitely many non-apocalyptic powers of two.

@RobLarsen Ай бұрын

Everything about this one is great

@StefanReich Ай бұрын

Powers of 2 that contain "666"? That is not even math, just completely useless

@stevemonkey6666 Ай бұрын

Tony Padilla always provides a fun video 👍

@jimmyzhao2673 Ай бұрын

This would be a good video during Halloween.

@Decimaster321 4 күн бұрын

How big are these if they are Planck volumes?

@denverbraughler3948 Ай бұрын

* Revelation [singular].

@NickCombs Ай бұрын

I'd hypothesize that the prevalence of nonapocalyptic numbers only approach zero as a limit as they get larger.

@SgtSupaman Ай бұрын

You mean the prevalence of NON-apocalyptic powers of two approaches zero. The prevalence of the apocalyptic ones is clearly growing larger since it is thought all after 2^29784 might be apocalyptic.

@NickCombs Ай бұрын

@@SgtSupaman yes, thank you

@cloudbaserapture99942 21 күн бұрын

Their are 216 primary colors on your screen monitor. It's called the web safe color palette. 6x6x6 = 216 = Plato's republic.

@alanzyoutube Ай бұрын

@My-Say Ай бұрын

What about a way to determine if reality is simulated? And then we would be faced with the philosophical question, would knowing it is true, would it devalue life? A simply string of three sixes appearing in any large number is not amazing at all. And if pi never ends, there must also be a string of 666 sixes somewhere.

@noclafcz Ай бұрын

It is 200 years after the last nuclear war and we are writing the year 210 After Brady, Holy Founder of the Apocalyptic branch of mathematics!

@JavierSalcedoC Ай бұрын

Id love to see all the 1000 3 digit combination last "pure power" and see the variation

@veggiet2009 Ай бұрын

Be interesting to see 2^n where n occurs in the string of digits

@schitlipz Ай бұрын

By choosing Planck's time, wouldn't a more natural base also seem more fitting?

@TheCerebralOne Ай бұрын

you should do a video with Underwood Dudley on crank pseudomathematics

@garethdean6382 Ай бұрын

>Doesn't want to use the human-invented concept of seconds >Proceeds instead to base everything on even more recent human theories. Well ok then.

@idonotcomplyrevolution Ай бұрын

666 itself isnt an apocalyptic number on its own, but is part of a sequence, such as: 111, 555, 666, 888 etc. will always sum either 3, 6 or 9. which we call tesla numbers or sometimes referred to as God's numbers.

@AgentM124 Ай бұрын

If something so "small" as 2^⁶⁶⁶ planck times already breaks any concept of time in our universe. 2^(busy beavers n) planck times is even more absurd

@illesizs Ай бұрын

How come *seconds* aren't allowed, but *base 10* is?

@nopetuber Ай бұрын

You can't have a power 2^n made of only 6s because then 2^n-1 would be half, so made of only 3s, which would be an odd number (impossible)

@Bobby-fj8mk Ай бұрын

Does 666 occur within the decimal part of the value of Pi? Considering Pi up to 10,000 decimal integers - yes it does. The first time occurs at decimal integers 3151-3; then at integers 4435-7 and then at integers 5403-5; and there are many more times that 666 occurs beyond the first 10,000 decimal integers.

@Insanit13s 26 күн бұрын

Interesting video, but I have questions. How long would the 666th Apocalyptic number be in years? Do any of the Apocalyptic numbers, converted from Plank time to years, end up being x10^666 years long?

@Matthew-bu7fg Ай бұрын

I was in high school from 2005 to 2010 and I remember the rumours that the world would end on 6th June 2006. What memories.

@user-nj1og6yb7v Ай бұрын

The sum of the first 144 digits in the sequence of π equals 666 6^3=6×6×6=2^3×3^3=216 144/666=0.216 216 216... 216216=2^3 × 3^3 × 1001 216216216=2^3 × 3^3 × 1001001

@rickseiden1 Ай бұрын

Seeing that 2^666 contains 666 makes me wonder about 2^n containing n. 2^6=64. 2^10=1024. Then Tony says it can be any base, so that made me wonder about k^n that contains n. 3^5=243. 4^3=64. What about k^n where it contains both k and n? 3^9=19,683. 6^6=46,656.

@aarona3144 Ай бұрын

"And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain. Also it causes all, *both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark*, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name." - Revelation 13:15-17

@petrospaulos7736 Ай бұрын

I guess he should mention how far has the search gone. This would help people to continue the search...

@lionbryce10101 Ай бұрын

There's also the base. The prime you're using, the power, and the base you're in

@adb012 Ай бұрын

A power of 2 can never be all 4s. If it was, the previous power would be all 2s, and the previous one would be all 1s which is not even a multiple of 2, let alone a power of 2. In general, the powers of some bases may have a balanced distribution of digits (that means about as many 1s as there are 2s or 3s etc.) but the distribution is nonetheless random in the sense that some combinations are not allowed. For example, the powers of 7 will end in 01, 07, 49 and 43. That alone already eliminates many random combinations.

@androidlogin3065 Ай бұрын

Some say it is not 666 it is 999 since when seen in a paint the circles of the three digits are touching, so rotating around the center what is seen is a 9, not a 6; to be a six, the tips (vertex) of each 6 would be touching on a common point, but that is not the case, what are touching is the tthree circles (all three circles are tangent two by ywo), and the three circles have their centers forming an equilateral triangle.

@jonathandevries2828 Ай бұрын

i just KNOW brady is gunna ask, but are there other "apocalyptic" powers for other triplicate numbers, like 333 or 555?

@insertcreativenamehere492 Ай бұрын

theoretically you could find a power of two that contains any string of digits, if you go big enough (although this isn’t proven)

@adambyte256 Ай бұрын

Counterpoint: seconds and years are excellent unit choices, because it's almost a defining characteristic of religion to pretend that cosmic phenomenon are actually anthropocentric.