Something Rotten : www.jasperfforde.com

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

**Re: Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.**

For posts regarding TN-4

Nextian Number Theory question/ er theory.

Posted by: **RookeeAlding** (---.hsd1.sc.comcast.net)

Date: April 13, 2007 02:47AM

From Something Rotten: (for those who have forgotten)

"Nextian Number Theory works in an inverse fashion from ordinary maths-it allows you to discover the precise question from a stated answer." (Pg. 226, US edition, viking)

So, in theory you could use the Nextian Number Theory to "solve" Douglas Adams answer "42", and get the answer to life the universe and everything?

using one book to solve another. wouldn't that be neat?

*************************4044845****************

by the way...I've been convicted of Gramatical Homicide, and charged 18 years to life, so don't bother telling me about all the spelling mistakes. It's already on my record.

"Nextian Number Theory works in an inverse fashion from ordinary maths-it allows you to discover the precise question from a stated answer." (Pg. 226, US edition, viking)

So, in theory you could use the Nextian Number Theory to "solve" Douglas Adams answer "42", and get the answer to life the universe and everything?

using one book to solve another. wouldn't that be neat?

*************************4044845****************

by the way...I've been convicted of Gramatical Homicide, and charged 18 years to life, so don't bother telling me about all the spelling mistakes. It's already on my record.

Posted by: **MuseSusan** (---.union.edu)

Date: April 13, 2007 04:10PM

Actually, there's an existing field of math that does almost exactly that, although not precisely in number theory. It's called Reverse Mathematics, and it deals with figuring out what axioms are needed in order to prove a particular theorem. I think it's very exciting! (But then, I'm probably the biggest nerd you'll ever see…)

As far as 42, my personal theory is that someone has already done that, at which point the universe was instantly replaced with something even more inexplicable.

As far as 42, my personal theory is that someone has already done that, at which point the universe was instantly replaced with something even more inexplicable.

Posted by: **RookeeAlding** (68.208.65.---)

Date: April 13, 2007 09:58PM

at some point won't we get to something so "inexplicable' that we will be able to explain it just by saying it is "inexplicable" and accepting that cause the universe to be instantly replaced with something that is so "explainable" that we won't ever be able to figure it out? Ie. I can be explained so we no longer try to explain it. something like how does the telly work. I guess.

...

*************************4044845****************

by the way...I've been convicted of Gramatical Homicide, and charged 18 years to life, so don't bother telling me about all the spelling mistakes. It's already on my record.

...

*************************4044845****************

by the way...I've been convicted of Gramatical Homicide, and charged 18 years to life, so don't bother telling me about all the spelling mistakes. It's already on my record.

Posted by: **Puck** (---.landmark.edu)

Date: April 15, 2007 08:41AM

I thought that perhaps applying Nextian Number theory to "42" might result in the expression:

{(2b)u(~2b)}=?

...just to, you know, add yet another literary reference!

-------------------------

Metaphors be with you!

{(2b)u(~2b)}=?

...just to, you know, add yet another literary reference!

-------------------------

Metaphors be with you!

Posted by: **RookeeAlding** (---.hsd1.sc.comcast.net)

Date: April 15, 2007 07:06PM

Ah! now that makes me wonder. How much literary math there is out there, these three alone makes for quite and interesting subject. can you imagian having to go to school to learn such a strange subject.

Literary math 101

1. Using Nextian Number theory find the question to 42.

answer:{(2b)u(~2b)}=?

man I think that would be kinda fun to see on a test.

*************************4044845****************

by the way...I've been convicted of Gramatical Homicide, and charged 18 years to life, so don't bother telling me about all the spelling mistakes. It's already on my record.

Literary math 101

1. Using Nextian Number theory find the question to 42.

answer:{(2b)u(~2b)}=?

man I think that would be kinda fun to see on a test.

*************************4044845****************

by the way...I've been convicted of Gramatical Homicide, and charged 18 years to life, so don't bother telling me about all the spelling mistakes. It's already on my record.

Posted by: **MuseSusan** (---.union.edu)

Date: April 15, 2007 07:37PM

I'd like to see the Nextahedron (if that's the word--I don't have the book on me) implemented as a two-dimensional object in Flatland.

Posted by: **robcraine** (---.mcb.net)

Date: April 15, 2007 09:36PM

Puck Wrote:

>

> {(2b)u(~2b)}=?

>

The problem with that is that in written/spoken english, 'or' tends to be infer either 'a' or 'b' but not both. On the other hand the mathematical union allows the possibility of both 2b and not 2b.

I feel that the set {(2b)u(~2b)/(2b)n(~2b)} would be a better description.

And even that wouldn't give a numerical answer of '42.' It may result in the set containing only 42. Or did you mean "|{(2b)u(~2b)}|"?

Rob

------

That statement is either so deep it would take a lifetime to fully comprehend every particle of its meaning, or it is a load of absolute tosh. Which is it, I wonder?

Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

>

> {(2b)u(~2b)}=?

>

The problem with that is that in written/spoken english, 'or' tends to be infer either 'a' or 'b' but not both. On the other hand the mathematical union allows the possibility of both 2b and not 2b.

I feel that the set {(2b)u(~2b)/(2b)n(~2b)} would be a better description.

And even that wouldn't give a numerical answer of '42.' It may result in the set containing only 42. Or did you mean "|{(2b)u(~2b)}|"?

Rob

------

That statement is either so deep it would take a lifetime to fully comprehend every particle of its meaning, or it is a load of absolute tosh. Which is it, I wonder?

Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

Posted by: **SkidMarks** (---.manc.cable.ntl.com)

Date: April 16, 2007 05:45PM

But we already know what is the * ***Question ** to the ultimate answer!!

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

*My computer beat me at chess, but I won at kickboxing*

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Posted by: **MuseSusan** (---.union.edu)

Date: April 16, 2007 07:02PM

We do? What is the question? (And don't say "What's six times nine?")

Posted by: **SkidMarks** (---.manc.cable.ntl.com)

Date: April 17, 2007 08:49AM

I you don't want me to give you the question, don't ask me to give you the question.

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

*My computer beat me at chess, but I won at kickboxing*

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Posted by: **RookeeAlding** (68.208.65.---)

Date: April 18, 2007 08:48PM

no, it's 40 +2, but that's why I asked if the Nextian number theory could be used to solve it.

*************************4044845****************

by the way...I've been convicted of Gramatical Homicide, and charged 18 years to life, so don't bother telling me about all the spelling mistakes. It's already on my record.

*************************4044845****************

by the way...I've been convicted of Gramatical Homicide, and charged 18 years to life, so don't bother telling me about all the spelling mistakes. It's already on my record.

Posted by: **Anonymous User** (---.scansafe.net)

Date: July 23, 2007 11:10AM

From Wikipedia:

At the end of Mostly Harmless, which is the last of the series of novels, there is a final reference to the number 42. As Arthur and Ford are dropped off at club Beta (owned by Stavro Müller), Ford shouts at the cabby to stop "just there, number forty-two … Right here!" The entire Earth (in all dimensions, not just those in which it was demolished by the Vogons), is destroyed immediately after this final reference, which could lead to the Ultimate Question being, "Where does it all end?"

At the end of Mostly Harmless, which is the last of the series of novels, there is a final reference to the number 42. As Arthur and Ford are dropped off at club Beta (owned by Stavro Müller), Ford shouts at the cabby to stop "just there, number forty-two … Right here!" The entire Earth (in all dimensions, not just those in which it was demolished by the Vogons), is destroyed immediately after this final reference, which could lead to the Ultimate Question being, "Where does it all end?"

Posted by: **SkidMarks** (---.manc.cable.ntl.com)

Date: July 23, 2007 04:12PM

In Dirk Gently, there was a program called "Reason" which allowed you to fill in the desired result in a spreadsheet and it would then allocate values to give you the question you needed to ask so that you could be certain to get the answer you wanted.

We had something similar to fill in timesheets.

We had something similar to fill in timesheets.

Posted by: **robcraine** (---.mcb.net)

Date: July 23, 2007 10:25PM

And putting 42 into Dirk Gently's calculator would give the answer "a suffusion of yellow." I don't know if that's relevent.

Rob

------

That statement is either so deep it would take a lifetime to fully comprehend every particle of its meaning, or it is a load of absolute tosh. Which is it, I wonder?

Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

Rob

------

That statement is either so deep it would take a lifetime to fully comprehend every particle of its meaning, or it is a load of absolute tosh. Which is it, I wonder?

Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

Posted by: **MuseSusan** (---.union.edu)

Date: July 23, 2007 10:51PM

More precisely, putting in any question that has the answer 42 would give "a suffusion of yellow".

And gosh, I don't remember that from either Mostly Harmless or the Reason program from Dirk Gently (though I do remember the program that turned any string of data into music). I'm gonna have to reread all of those.

And gosh, I don't remember that from either Mostly Harmless or the Reason program from Dirk Gently (though I do remember the program that turned any string of data into music). I'm gonna have to reread all of those.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.