|
newton.saber wrote: "The last and largest prime has 12,389,238,993,382 digits in it.
There is no number after that. You fall into a mathematical abyss where imaginary dragons will eat you. This also proves that the universe if flat.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: This also proves that the universe if flat.
Your universe threw a compile-error, saying "flat" is not a valid boolean.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's OLD news. Sheesh, mathematics has come a long way since then with all our newfangled technology. We now stuff that Euclid couldn't even dream about, like the end of primes. 
|
|
|
|
|
Euclid was obviously pressured by the clerics, yet on his death-bed he muttered "they still end".
|
|
|
|
|
|
newton.saber wrote: "The last and largest prime has 12,389,238,993,382 digits in it. We've recently discovered that everything after that number is divisible by 2 evenly"
Er yeah.
What if the 12,389,238,993,382nd digit is 3?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: What if the 12,389,238,993,382nd digit is 3?
THat's old math.
It is sad to see the uneducated try to understand how this advanced math system works.
Very sad indeed.
The primes are over so get over it.
|
|
|
|
|
It's true for values of 2 close to 1.5 .
|
|
|
|
|
May the prime be with you!
|
|
|
|
|
I've gotta tell ya: as wannabe-jokes go, this one isn't even as funny as: "Hey, scientists say that gravity doesn't attract, any more, so buy lots of duct tape to keep your sht1 from flyin' off!"
To hit the funnybone you're aiming at, your point has to be something that's believable enough to make people stop and think about it.
The "all numbers above n are divisible by two" thing is just not going to cut it in a developers' forum.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: The "all numbers above n are divisible by two" thing is just not going to cut it in a developers' forum.
It might for large values of 2.
I'm retired. There's a nap for that...
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
H.Brydon wrote: It might for large values of 2.
Ah, you mean the "2" part, rather than the "1" part. I see what you mean.
With Boolean values in a non-zero-based system, the "1" would be the zero, and the "2" would be the 1, and, as such, becomes a factor of any integer, without a remainder!
Now I get it!
(Now that's absurd!)
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Some of us find absurdity amusing. 'Tis unfortunate that you do not.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I would if it were but it ain't so I can't.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: The "all numbers above n are divisible by two" thing is just
not going to cut it in a developers' forum.
You just need to choose the correct numbering system.
In any binary floating-point system, there will be a largest representable odd integer. All representable numbers larger than that will be integers, and divisible by two.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, but then some evil genius (probably Doctor Doom or the Master) will come along and stick a "1" on the end, break all our computer systems, and take over the world in the ensuing chaos.
Better not to go there, I think.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Ah, but then some evil genius (probably Doctor Doom or the Master) will come along and stick a "1" on the end
Converting IEEE binary64 to binary65, and simultaneously modifying the hardware on every IEEE floating point-compatible machine in the world?
Not even Chuck Norris could do that! 
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: Not even Chuck Norris could do that!
He has already done it N+1 times.
|
|
|
|
|
N+1 is small fish, for Chuck Norris.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I heard on the radio that the numbers are much shorter than that and repeat almost twice before repeating again.
The entire numeric sequence boils down to 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3, 3.
So all numbers are technically prime, including 1 in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
According to Watership Down (if I recall correctly) the numbers (in full) are 1, 2, 3, 4, thousand.
|
|
|
|
|
Or is it 1 2, 1 2. Is this thing on?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Since primes are proven to be limitless, the only interpretation I can draw from this discovery is that we are indeed living in a Matrix, and CERN has just hit its numerical limits! 
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
They wanted me for the remote position. I was pretty stoked. They were having the budget meeting to make me an offer, and then the CEO put hiring on hold 
I've been in contact with several head hunters. It's pretty frustrating that you can't keep them from harassing you when you don't want a job, but then you can't get them to answer your emails when you are actually looking. They take your resume, tell you about a few options, and then you never hear from them again.
Either way, this job isn't getting any better. I just wish there was a way out.
Elephant elephant elephant, sunshine sunshine sunshine
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
