Willieh Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 Okay. Here's a little test I have for you. Not a game, just a theory that I alone came up with. It wasn't until I started thinking about the fact that everytime I think of a number, the digits are always related somehow. I'm not sure why. But when I looked further into, I found that on a wide scale range, most people do it subconsiously. Now note that I didn't get this theory from a site, but solely came up with it on my own. There may be a site related to the topic I am going to present you with, but if there is I'm not aware of it. Okay let's begin. Think of a number with more than 2 digits. Just think of one, any number you like. Here's the number I just thought of: 16,807. Now what's odd about this number? Nothing at first glance, however there is absolutely nothing random about this number. Nothing. Break down what the number is. 16,80716= 8x28= 7+1 So every non neutral digit in this number is centered around the number 8.Another example:3,7123x2=6+1=7 The entire number is an equation within itself. The reason I didn't put this in games is because I think it would be better suited here in General. It is a theory I have come up with; not a substantial theory that would change history or anything, but merely an objective theory to which I was curious of. What's the number you thought of? See if it applies to this theory. Consider all the possibilities of how it could tie in with this theory. ¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸ ¸„¤^*´ .(Willie Adler) `*^¤„¸ `*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kale Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 hmm... It is an excelent theory, but I am not sure you can execute it the same way each time. Even you did something different in each. In the first one, you wrote that 16 (your starting number) = 8x2. In the second one you wrote that 3 (your starting number)x2 =6 Those methods are backward from each other, thus producing different results each time... But this is a lot like the move "The Number 23" where you can see any number in the numbers if you look hard enough. :P I find it very interesting, and a new thing for me to think about! ^_^ -Kale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willieh Posted July 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 hmm... It is an excelent theory' date=' but I am not sure you can execute it the same way each time. Even you did something different in each. In the first one, you wrote that 16 (your starting number) = 8x2. In the second one you wrote that 3 (your starting number)x2 =6 Those methods are backward from each other, thus producing different results each time... But this is a lot like the move "The Number 23" where you can see any number in the numbers if you look hard enough. :P I find it very interesting, and a new thing for me to think about! ^_^ -Kale[/quote']There are many variations on each problem you could do. Example:3,71212= 3+1x2+7 And I'm glad you find it interesting. ^_^ ¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸ ¸„¤^*´ .(Willie Adler) `*^¤„¸ `*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tkill93 Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 It may be because I haven't slept all night, but I really dont get it... Does it work for 1,000,002? Because that's the first number I thought of >_> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willieh Posted July 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 It may be because I haven't slept all night' date=' but I really dont get it... Does it work for 1,000,002? Because that's the first number I thought of >_>[/quote'] 1,000,002 0,1,2 So yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tkill93 Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 I still don't get it... >_> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willieh Posted July 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 I still don't get it... >_> Maybe I should break it down in a simpler way to understand it. Everytime someone says they are thinking of a number' date=' if that number has more than 2 digits, it's likely that the digits will be related to each other in some way. Considering your example: 1,000,002 The digits in this number are related because when put into order of least to greates they read 0000012 or if you shorten it, 0,1,2. A step further would be to get rid of the unecessary 0s and just make it 1,2. My theory is that if you try to think of a random number, off the top of your head without really considering this theory, the digits are [i']likely[/i] going to relate to each other some how. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tkill93 Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 So you just keep trying to think of some crazy way that numbers relate which has almost no relevance to anything? Fair enough. I was looking for a universal formula. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Careless Whisper Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 Alright. Try this.. I understand what you are doing...but it won't actually work on this number. 666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willieh Posted July 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 So you just keep trying to think of some crazy way that numbers relate which has almost no relevance to anything? Fair enough. I was looking for a universal formula. In a sense yes' date=' but in another sense no. I'm merely pointing out the fact that normally when you think of a "Random" number, it's not so random. My assumption would be that your brain groups these numbers together based off it's knolledge it already contains from previous encounters. So I guess what I'm really trying to prove is that most of the time a random number isn't random at all, or for that matter anything, but rather a subconsious decision made by your or someone else' brain. My way of proving this would be to explain how almost everytime you think of a number with more than 2 digits, all the digits relate. Alright. Try this.. I understand what you are doing...but it won't actually work on this number. 666 All the numbers are 6. How the hell could they not relate? Of course 666's digits relate because they are each 6, giving the digits a patter that is redundant, that redundant pattern being the relationship...:| ¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸ ¸„¤^*´ .(Willie Adler) `*^¤„¸ `*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Careless Whisper Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 --Oh really? I didn't notice that. [/sarcasm] Actually, they do not relate BECAUSE they are the same number. It's just asking if you're related to yourself. Sure, you carry your own families blood, but you are the same person, you cannot be related to yourself, because being related means you have a decent to relate to, not the same person. And even if you use copies of the number, it still does not relate, you have to relate the number to a different number inside the grand number. Also: In your first post, your first example. You broke down 16,807. You said that the entire grand number was based around 8. When it actually isn't. You tried to prove your point by saying 8x2=16. When actually, you can't do that to prove your point, for there is no 2 in the grand number. So why did you use the 2? If you're gonna use the 2, you might as well ad it to the Grand Number.Same thing with 7+1=8. You cannot add the 1 to the equation without adding a 1 to the Grand Number. Same theory with all the other numbers, except for TKill's number, his actually does make sense. --Note: This is just my philosophy and I am sharing it with you, not argueing with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willieh Posted July 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 Okay. Give me another random number and maybe I can make my theory more...clear for you. What i'm saying is that the entirety of that number was related. 16,80716 is equal to 8x2 making it directly related to 8 because it is a factor of 16.7 is directly related to 8 because it is numerically ordered before 8 all the digits of 666 are obviously related to each other. You mistake the 2 different types of relation. I'm not saying that the six was born into this world by anybody. I'm saying that the number's digits are related because 6, 6, and 6 is a pattern of repeating numbers, meaning that the digits are related, not ken folk. Take into consideration what exactly it is I'm saying (I'm not trying to flame you, but simply am offering a rebuttal) ¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸ ¸„¤^*´ .(Willie Adler) `*^¤„¸ `*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Careless Whisper Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 I know you're theory, I've seen other people with the same one. But I myself do not follow the theory. And try this one. 72 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willieh Posted July 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 I know you're theory' date=' I've seen other people with the same one. But I myself do not follow the theory. And try this one. 72[/quote'] Try the fact that I said above 2 digits. Also consider the fact that you put my theory into thought before coming up with that answer. Had you not been presented with this theory you undoubtably wouldn't have put logic into randomnizing the word yourself; which would in fact prove my point. Nothing can be random because everything you think is based off of your brain's own self consious logic. Now that you have been presented with my side of the story you will undoubtable come up with the number 720 as your answer because you know that would be impossible to do. However, had the number you chose been completely random, without there being any thought put into it, you probably wouldn't have chosen that number...would you've? :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silencerleader Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 You got Silencer interested in your theory. ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Careless Whisper Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 Actually. You are right. But, what is I chose a number like 925. Try that one. ^.^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willieh Posted July 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 Actually. You are right. But' date=' what is I chose a number like 925. Try that one. ^.^[/quote'] Only way I could make those digits work would be to go into finer complications which would essentially be irrelivent. But I could try: 9259-5=4 2=direct factor of 4 ¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸ ¸„¤^*´ .(Willie Adler) `*^¤„¸ `*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´¨¨`*^¤„¸¸„¤^*´ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silencerleader Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 You got Silencer interested in your theory. ^_^ How about...9444 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Careless Whisper Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 .. Alright. Using your theory, let's see what you make of this number. 731 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bringer Of The Apocalypse Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 065983. Try that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silencerleader Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 065983. Try that! It would just be 65983 or 0.65983 One at a time people!! He's only 1 person!!Really...try 9444. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willieh Posted July 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 You got Silencer interested in your theory. ^_^ How about...9444 Once again I'll have to go into finer mathematics. But never the less: 9x4 is equal to 36, 36 + 4 is equal to 40, 40 divided by 4=10, and 10 is directly related to 9 by numerical order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
「tea.leaf」 Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 I think this is bull. (Not to be offensive or anything.) You can rip apart ANY multi-digit number in existence and probably find some sort of pattern amongst its digits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v8561v Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 Hmmmm....interesting!!Now lemme think of a number.... -.-' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obi-wan Cannoli Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 If I can't figure the relationship in any of my numbers then they must be random because I am incapable of discovering a relation. You actually would have to think to find any relation.Which you cant do in a split second it takes to think of a random number. That was a bunch of mumbo jumbo but maybe someone can make something of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.