:3
Tell me you’re not a dart player without telling me you don’t play darts.
Honestly I generally assume that everyone that isn’t a slightly portly northern English man carrying a pint does not play darts seriously
You could also be a genetically enhanced doctor, taught by an Irishman
Dutch bald people
Gen X Californians for some reason
Yakuza series fan.
299,999 is divisible by 7 and 17.
4:20 pm
A bit random no?
C’mon Chloe! This is 3rd grade math.
The information was there in front of Chloe and me this whole time, and still, we never realized
I think it helps to remember that 3 times 7 is 21. When I think abotu that it looks less wrong.
It’s the stupid seven multiplication table. Whatever glitch in human software makes it look so much less intuitive than all the others messes with so many other things that should be easy. I swear I struggle every time I have to look at it. I had to double check seven times three multiple times right now.
I don’t think that actually helps, because it’s all vibes. 51 looks prime, because of no reason at all, and absolutely nothing looks like it should be divisible by 17, again, because raisins.
Knowing why it’s true doesn’t make it look right.
The digit sum of 51 is 6, which is divisible by three. So 51 is also divisible by three. It’s not even hard to see that it’s not prime.
Yup, my personal prime check is:
- Even?
- Ends in 5?
- Digits sun sum to 3?
If it fails all three and it’s not an “obvious” prime (<20), then it’s prime enough for me.
Also
Ends in 0,
but that’s covered by 5 really.
It’s also covered by being even.
But I can wrap my head around that 51 is divisible by seventeen because of 21 and seven plus something that deals with the remaining 30 somewhere.
I know that’s not how it works, but as you say it fixes my vibes when I see the 21 hiding inside the 51.
I’ll say this: the other thing that makes this one a hard pill to swallow is that 17 looks way too big, and my vibes fix doesn’t address that, but hey.
Why not add the digits? If the sum of digits is divisible by 3, the number is divisible by 3. 5 + 1 is divisible by 3, so it’s not prime.
49 “looks” more prime to me because it fails that test, and if I didn’t know it’s 72, I’d say it’s probably prime.
I think the posts along these lines are already two steps too far away from the vibes.
Nobody is even considering the number being prime, it just looks like there can’t be a round number of one against the other because one is big and ends in seven and the other is relatively small and ends in 1.
If you’re even thinking about divisibility rules you’re doing it wrong. As in, your brain is too impacted by maths to see what the numbers look like from instinct alone. There’s no thinking in this, they just look weird together.
I have to remember it in patterns.
Digits go:
7, 4, 1
8, 5, 2
9, 6, 3
0
Tens go:
0, 1, 2
2, 3, 4
4, 5, 6,
7
Then my brain recognises everything else and I can’t explain it properly 😂
There’s a drinking game called 7’s. Basically everyone has to count by 7 (first person: 7, second person: 14, third person: 21, etc) and you have to take a shot every time you get one wrong.
Right now, sober, I remember my multiplication tables really well and wouldn’t find it challenging.
But when I think of the mess that I left in the kitchen last night making a snack after drinks with friends, I can imagine the damage this game would cause.
If there’s a number that’s the most oddball in the multiplication table, it’s 7.
It’s a prime number that doesn’t share any common divisors with 10, and isn’t adjacent to a divisor of 10 either.
2 and 5 are common divisors of 10, so they’re piece of cake.
3 is so small and close to 2, so it’s not too difficult to get.
9 is one off from 10, so it has a very predictable pattern.
4, 6 and 8 are even numbers, so they share common divisors with 10.
3 is easy because of the “digits sum to 3” trick, if you get stuck counting by 3s, it’s easy to reset. Oh, and the proof for this is based on our 10-based number system, so your point absolutely stands.
And 52 is divisible by 13.
Somehow less offensive.
If it bothers your OCD, think of it more as (7x3)+(10x3)=17x3=51
Dude/ Dudette that’s worse. 7x3=21, 10x3=30, 21+30=
49251That does less insane to the membrane
I see them as the same except that your way illustrates what his parentheses are doing.
The way I see it the parentheses are good, it the 17x3 that hurts my brain.
It’s already broken down, then gets more complicated by the 17x3. In my mind I now need to separate 17 into 10 and 7 then multiply them each by 3 and add them together, which is where we started in the first place.
Brains are different, that’s how mine goes though.
I understood that to be a reference to the original screenshot. Thus the two equal signs. It was a way to walk you through how the breakdown ties back in.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯Not disagreeing, and I upvoted you for a different perspective. I did not see it that way, though I do now.
Like I said, brains are different.
Nah, 45 + 6
153 + 23
three is the first number that starts to cause problems.
Three is my favorite number, you take that back.
Punctuation.
100,000,001 is also divisible by 17
I’m really starting to think this 17 is not a good guy
Just wait until you find out that 17 is divisible by 17
So simple math problems are blowing people’s minds now?
Always has been.
Just wait for the annual “PEDMAS vs PEMDAS”
discussionflame-war on any major social media platform.Why? Not sure what the debate is, if you divide/multiply first?
It can matter if you don’t have enough significant figures, so I tend to do division last to preserve as much precision as I can. In theory it shouldn’t matter, but it can matter in practice.
So the debate is whether it could or could not matter?
No, the debate is stupid.
I’m just saying there is a situation where it could matter, not that the debate is valid.
Ah, I’m still trying to figure out what the debate is. Sorry mate, but thanks for trying to respond, I appreciate you having tried. I’m just missing something.
“Pedmas” sounds like a holiday for pedophiles…
End of debate.
Dart players know this
By a similar pattern, 91 is not a prime number. Really got me once.
Is it 13? I bet it’s 13. Bloody thing keeps making trouble.
Yup, 7 and 13.