Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))
From: Kaz Kylheku (kaz_at_ashi.footprints.net)
Date: 11/24/03
- Next message: Espen Vestre: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Previous message: Jason Sewall: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- In reply to: William D Clinger: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Next in thread: Espen Vestre: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Espen Vestre: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Joe Marshall: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Pascal Bourguignon: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Anthony Ventimiglia: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Bruce Hoult: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 24 Nov 2003 06:35:12 -0800
cesuraSPAM@verizon.net (William D Clinger) wrote in message news:<fb74251e.0311231700.4dd802fe@posting.google.com>...
> Nils Goesche asked:
> > You mean, you really believe you need a computer to find out whether
> > 100! is prime?
>
> Hey, 2! is a prime. Why shouldn't there be others?
I've never been able to overcome my amazement that 10!, 11! ... are
all divisible by 10. The list of zero digits grows, too as you get
past 100!, 1000! and so on. It's just friggin' amazing how these
factorials are such damn round numbers in the decimal system. That
kind of goes to show ya that there is, like, more to this base ten
thing than just the number of fingers on the human hand!
- Next message: Espen Vestre: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Previous message: Jason Sewall: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- In reply to: William D Clinger: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Next in thread: Espen Vestre: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Espen Vestre: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Joe Marshall: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Pascal Bourguignon: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Anthony Ventimiglia: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Reply: Bruce Hoult: "Re: (sqrt (factorial 100))"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|