Live data from Hacker News

42

johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com

11–20 of 62 posts

Re: 42

#11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every number has special properties :) Edit: In fact, I'd be astounded to encounter a number that did not exhibit any special properties. Until, of course, one makes "having no special properties" a special property. In that case, I would no longer be astounded.

We proceed by induction. Clearly n =1 is special, as it divides every integer. Assume k is special. If k +1 is not special, then it is special, as it is the first non-special number to come after a special number. This is a contradiction; then k +1 is special. ■

We may also proceed by ordinary semantics: every number is special, as it specifies itself.

Re: 42

#13

The explanation that I liked the most was: 42 For-tea-two Tea for two

I was never quite sure whether the number (42) or the decimal representation thereof (4*10 + 2) was relevant. Your interpretation would tend to the latter…

Re: 42

#16

The explanation that I liked the most was: 42 For-tea-two Tea for two

I was never quite sure whether the number (42) or the decimal representation thereof (4*10 + 2) was relevant. Your interpretation would tend to the latter…

I believe I read this in The Salmon of Doubt, where Douglas Adams explained he pretty much chose it arbitrarily. "42 will do", were his words, IIRC.

Re: 42

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every number has special properties :) Edit: In fact, I'd be astounded to encounter a number that did not exhibit any special properties. Until, of course, one makes "having no special properties" a special property. In that case, I would no longer be astounded.

We proceed by induction. Clearly n =1 is special, as it divides every integer. Assume k is special. If k +1 is not special, then it is special, as it is the first non-special number to come after a special number. This is a contradiction; then k +1 is special. ■

That was extremely enjoyable to read.
Post reply on HN