Comments on: A mathematical conundrum http://chasingdaisy.com/2004/10/20/a-mathematical-conundrum/ A little bit of this, a little bit of that... Tue, 22 Nov 2011 22:27:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: erneylou http://chasingdaisy.com/2004/10/20/a-mathematical-conundrum/#comment-5057 erneylou Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://chasingdaisy.com/?p=1566#comment-5057 it did work for me...:D it did work for me…:D

]]> By: Carl http://chasingdaisy.com/2004/10/20/a-mathematical-conundrum/#comment-5058 Carl Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://chasingdaisy.com/?p=1566#comment-5058 If you pick 10 for the number of times you want to make love (OK, I was being ambitious!), you end up with a 6-digit number, but the curiosity still works, the first two digits being 10. If you pick 10 for the number of times you want to make love (OK, I was being ambitious!), you end up with a 6-digit number, but the curiosity still works, the first two digits being 10.

]]> By: David http://chasingdaisy.com/2004/10/20/a-mathematical-conundrum/#comment-5059 David Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://chasingdaisy.com/?p=1566#comment-5059 I'll just be all boring and mathematical and confirm that it only works as described if, yes, you choose a single-digit number in step 1. This is because, when you multiply out the expression it describes, you get 10000*x, where x is the number of nights you'd make love in a week, giving a five-digit number with x as the first digit. And I think it'll work in any other year if you change the 103/104 in step 5 appropriately [i.e. next year you'd used 104/105]. Hmm, I wonder if talk like this is why I don't get any? I’ll just be all boring and mathematical and confirm that it only works as described if, yes, you choose a single-digit number in step 1. This is because, when you multiply out the expression it describes, you get 10000*x, where x is the number of nights you’d make love in a week, giving a five-digit number with x as the first digit.

And I think it’ll work in any other year if you change the 103/104 in step 5 appropriately [i.e. next year you'd used 104/105].

Hmm, I wonder if talk like this is why I don’t get any?

]]> By: zeno http://chasingdaisy.com/2004/10/20/a-mathematical-conundrum/#comment-5060 zeno Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://chasingdaisy.com/?p=1566#comment-5060 right for the age, wrong for the position. right for the age, wrong for the position.

]]> By: Gert http://chasingdaisy.com/2004/10/20/a-mathematical-conundrum/#comment-5061 Gert Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://chasingdaisy.com/?p=1566#comment-5061 All it shows to me is that my method of doing 'difficult' subtractions hasn't changed since Infant 3... All it shows to me is that my method of doing ‘difficult’ subtractions hasn’t changed since Infant 3…

]]> By: Ruth http://chasingdaisy.com/2004/10/20/a-mathematical-conundrum/#comment-5062 Ruth Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://chasingdaisy.com/?p=1566#comment-5062 Glad that the position thing came out at 69 although I agree that it's not my favourite. However, had it come out as 27 or 45 I would have been completely paranoid - don't want to think there are positions out there I've never tried. But then don't get me started on 53... Glad that the position thing came out at 69 although I agree that it’s not my favourite. However, had it come out as 27 or 45 I would have been completely paranoid – don’t want to think there are positions out there I’ve never tried. But then don’t get me started on 53…

]]>