|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
I said "maybe" zmjezhd. Ok, maybe it was a Muskhogean indian word. They had plenty of b,f,s,t's and such. Yeah that was it..a Muskhogean word that means "we the people". 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290 |
I said "maybe" zmjezhd.
Hmm. You typed:
tamawafabasaeaaaaaaaeasabafawamat ... is a Hawaiian word that maybe means "everyone together".
The maybe seemed to be modifying the alleged meaning of the explicit Hawai'ian word. Or, maybe I don't understand what you mean by is. And, for the record, I said: "I realize this is probably a joke". (Stick a big old bracketed nictitatin' smilie here.)
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
Time's up! And I hope that the failure of this group to solve my puzzle was a lack of interest in the puzzle. Otherwise, one might think you folk slow, and we know well that that isn't the case. No matter, here is the answer to the acronym-palindrome-awad-puzzle which offered up the clue "everyone all together". tamawafabasaeaaaaaaaeasabafawamattsuwm and maverick and whitman and faldage and bingly and sjmax and etaion and alex and anu and annastrophic and elizabeth and sparteye and belmarduk and father and wolfahulicolic and musick and tED. **** ( Sorry, Consuelo and inselpeter and jackie and of troy and belligerentyouth and, of course, zmJezhd; I couldn't find you all a mate. )
Last edited by themilum; 11/08/05 05:37 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290 |
zmJezhd; I couldn't find you all a mate.
Not a problem. Bob's me Uncle, and jheem's me China.
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 725
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 725 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
ebabe
Cheap whiskey and palindromey stuff don't mix. Especially when palindroming numbers because palindroming numbers involves high math, i.e. addition.
There are only two kinds of palindromes; (1) words that read the same from left to right as they do from right to left, and (2) single numbers that total the same amount when the digits are inversed, and (3) when both numbers and letters can be inversed without altering the meaning of each. (I don't count #3)
But anyway, my palindrome "ebabe" (24,000 google hits) numbers "52125" if each letter is assigned its relative position in the progressive numbering of our alphabet. Of course all palindromic words are palindromic numbers, but this one serves well as a handy challange to find the root number for the palindrome.
But it won't be easy. I'll bet my bottom dollar that there is not a "ebabe" in the house who can find that elusive number.
Neither have I...yet, but I'll bet you my other bottom dollar that I can...can you? Go!
------------------------------------------>
Some interesting facts: What is a Palindrome?
A palindrome is something that reads the same forward as it does backward. It originated in the early 17th century from the Greek word palindromos (palíndromos), literally meaning "running back again."
Numbers: "52125", "4334", "8", and "1758571".
Words: "Radar", "I", "Eve", "Deed", and the world's longest in the English language: "Redivider".
"Madam, I'm Adam", and the timeless classic: "A man, a plan, a canal... Panama".
Numeric Palindromes: Here's the algorithm:
1. Pick a number.
2. Reverse its digits and add this value to the original number.
3. If this is not a palindrome, go back to step 2 and repeat.
Do all numbers eventually become palindromes by this process? It was suggested that this is the case but it hasn't been proven.
Most numbers become palindromes fairly quickly, in only a couple of steps:
13 -- 13 + 31 = 44 (one step)
64 -- 64 + 46 = 110 then 110 + 011 = 121 (two steps)
87 -- 87 + 78 = 165 then 165 + 561 = 726 then 726 + 627 = 1353 then 1353 + 3531 = 4884 (four steps)
In fact, about 80% of all numbers under 10,000 solve in 4 or less steps. About 90% solve in 7 steps or less. A rare case, number 89, takes 24 iterations to become a palindrome. It takes the most steps of any number under 10,000 that has been resolved into a palindrome. But the number 196 has not yet been found to result in a palindrome even after 40,000,000 steps of inversions and additions that led to a number with 600,000,000 digits.
Last edited by themilum; 11/21/05 02:29 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 34
newbie
|
|
newbie
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 34 |
hmm ...the root number for the palindrome...
well...number or no number...am still an ebabe...
lolll...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529 |
Uh, my bad, ebabe maygodbwidu. It, uh, seems that, uh, the root number of palindrome "52125" is "52125". In other words the palindrome number is its own root number. But hey, I'm happy. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
Thanks, 'milum. In the future, I'll be looking at the number '196' with new eyes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,542 Likes: 1
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,542 Likes: 1 |
This site has this to say about the "196 Conjecture": Palindromic Number Conjecture
Apply the 196-algorithm, which consists of taking any positive integer of two digits or more, reversing the digits, and adding to the original number. Now sum the two and repeat the procedure with the sum. Of the first 10000 numbers, only 251 do not produce a palindromic number in [23] steps [or less] (Gardner 1979).
It was therefore conjectured that all numbers will eventually yield a palindromic number. However, the conjecture has been proven false for bases which are a power of 2 [ * ], and seems to be false for base 10 as well. Among the first 100000 numbers, 5996 numbers apparently never generate a palindromic number (Gruenberger 1984). The first few are 196, 887, 1675, 7436, 13783, 52514, 94039, 187088, 1067869, 10755470, ... (Sloane's A006960).
It is conjectured, but not proven, that there are an infinite number of palindromic primes. With the exception of 11, palindromic primes must have an odd number of digits.
SEE ALSO: 196-Algorithm, Demlo Number.[ * ] On the other hand...isn't 64 [a] power-of-2 base? [You palindromized that in just two steps!] [edited for clarification]
Last edited by wofahulicodoc; 11/25/05 01:52 AM.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,333
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
608
guests, and
2
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
