Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:59, 9 January 2010

Hello, Julzes! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Misplaced Pages. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Misplaced Pages you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! PLUMBAGO 08:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC) Getting Started Misplaced Pages Tutorial • The five pillars of Misplaced Pages How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Hello Visitors

This space is reserved for an introduction. I won't be totally inactive over the short run, but I won't be doing much here either for a while. I won't be a SPA, but my first priority is mathematical coincidences. This is who I am for now:

I prefer 'Eegogee' as a name (or 'Eegee' or 'e.g.' for short). Anybody who is impressed with what I say at any point can also call me 'egghead', but around here that's unlikely any time soon (so many bright people). The reason for 'Eegogee' is in the number ${\displaystyle 3360633\ }$ (See below). The reason for my current name, which I don't know how to change, is just that the impulse was with me to call myself something related to my birthday. 'Julzes' comes from 'July-zero-six' and I noticed later I could make that the suggestive whole name Julzes Yroix. This provoked a joke told once before---Q.: Why is Jesus dead? A.: Because humans aren't exactly known to live for two thousand years, and he was no different. (You'd have to have been there to understand why that's funny, perhaps.) The reason my name stands as it is is that I don't know how to change it.

Please, if you speak to me here, expect that I may zero out the conversation rather than archiving it. Everything is essentially archived anyway, and this procedure is acceptable for user talk pages, according to policy. I keep what I want seen quickly here. Anything seriously informative to the general public will stay indefinitely, and third parties or those referring to what they and I have said to each other may use the 'History' tab for other matters.Julzes (talk) 08:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello (in all the many ways of saying that in all the languages of the world).Julzes (talk) 03:02, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I love base-10 coincidences

Found as the result of a family birthday coincidence:

${\displaystyle (365+1/4)^{4}=17797577732+7^{2}/2^{8}\,}$

Found 6 March 2009 (03/06/09, USA style):

${\displaystyle (365+1/4)^{2}=3^{7}*61+9/16\,}$

The first one people ever thought about?:

${\displaystyle e=2.718281828...\,}$

This is another one you might have seen:

${\displaystyle log2=0.30102999...\,}$

I ran across the following at OEIS:

The largest perfect power using no digit twice.

${\displaystyle 99066^{2}=9814072356\,}$

The number of squares like that (not including 1).

${\displaystyle 609\,}$

One pair at mathematical coincidences:

${\displaystyle 1/17=0.05882353\,}$

${\displaystyle 588^{2}+2353^{2}=5882353\,}$

My biggest simple discovery:

${\displaystyle 3360633\,}$:

A) The smallest 7-digit palindrome in three different bases (also in bases 9 and 11), and

B) The eighth base-ten palindrome that is a sum of all composite numbers to a certain point.

33633 is sixth on the list of B.

Something strange about primes also, followed by my contribution (I rediscovered the first part):

The sequence ${\displaystyle {109,10099,1000999,...}\,}$ has so many primes in its early part that x=10 far outstrips all small numbers with regards to simultaneous primality of x+x-1. I either discovered or rediscovered that 100 is the smallest number for which the concatenation of decremented numbers in sequence produces four primes somewhere in the sequence. I either discovered or rediscovered that 1000 is the first number that gives three primes in the quickest way (1000999, 1000999998997, and 1000999998997996995994993 are prime, and 10 is actually the first number giving two primes the quickest way.) Thanks go to another user for helping me with research showing just the degree to which the first part is strange.

This is all SIGNIFICANT, and there's plenty more.

Selection

Yes, genetic drift and horizontal gene transfer were certainly also important. People argue over the relative contributions of each. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm looking at stuff along the lines of what The Discovery Institute tries to assert, but more authoritative and balanced. An opinion registered on the possibility.Julzes (talk) 19:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Speaking bluntly, what the Discovery Institute tries to assert is just a mixture of junk science and legalistic posturing (see this article). An authoritative review on the topic of evolution vs design is this article from 2007. Tim Vickers (talk) 20:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware of that. But they COULD STILL BE FUNDAMENTALLY RIGHT, REGARDLESS OF MOTIVE AND PRACTICE. I think you understood my question. Why answer off-topic?Julzes (talk) 20:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

My overview of the source you cite is that it is how Darwin improved upon the THEN position of some design advocacy. We could agree that The Discovery Institute is largely a reactionary group, but at least they are living today. I was wondering about scientific opinion today as regards biological design--outlying or, from your apparent perspective, overly-charitable-to-the-other-side opinion. I appreciate the source, and it will be educational to me, but it does not answer my question. Thanks anyway. Let me know if something comes up, please.Julzes (talk) 21:01, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Organisms show some features that could be the result of either good design, or adaption through natural selection. They also show features that could either be the result of bad design, or the limits of what is possible through incremental adaptive changes (such as the blind spot that is only present in vertebrate eyes). Therefore the three possible hypotheses are that either organisms are the product of indifferent design, design that attempted to mimic the expected outcome of evolution, or that we are the outcome of evolution. The third appears simplest. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, simplicity is important. There is a broader issue. My particular angle is on resolution of the Fermi Paradox. You can see how I attempted to improve that article. I work from "God exists, but not the God you're thinking of." and try to get agreement. Going to be a struggle.Julzes (talk) 21:33, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

IPCC

Please read up on how the IPCC works.

Global warming

article probation

Misplaced Pages:General sanctions/Climate change probation

WP:3RR

You're very close to WP:3RR on global warming. That isn't the way to behave for an article on probation William M. Connolley (talk) 22:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)