Author |
Topic: 2017 (Read 4291 times) |
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender: 
Posts: 13730
|
Does anyone have any interesting facts about the number 2017?
It's a prime and part of a sexy prime pair with 2011.
It's a zero of the Mertens function
 (2017) = (2017-1) + (2017-2)
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 23rd, 2016, 6:28am by towr » |
 IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
 |
Re: 2017
« Reply #1 on: Dec 23rd, 2016, 5:35pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Theme: 2+0+1=3 and 7:
333 + 3 + 333 + 3 + 333 + 7 + 333 + 3 + 333 + 3 + 333
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #2 on: Dec 23rd, 2016, 6:24pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Also, 2017 is in the center of the immediate prime neighbours: 2011 on the left and 2027 on the right. Assembled together they all form yet another prime:
201120172027
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
dudiobugtron
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 735
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #3 on: Dec 27th, 2016, 11:14am » |
Quote Modify
|
In hexadecimal it is 7e1, which in decimal scientific notation represents 7.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #6 on: Dec 28th, 2016, 4:10pm » |
Quote Modify
|
- for the record:
2017 = 92 + 442
where nine is three squared and forty four is, of course, twenty two squared, 
- low intensity love affair with 9: recursively subtract the sum of digits of the current number from the current number:
2017 - 10 = 2007
and so, downward, we subtract: occasionally 27 but mostly 9 and 18 [at some point: 1818-18]
- interpreted as "a 24-hour period" it is 84 days and one hour:
2017 = 24x84 + 1 = 2016 + 1
- a busy beetle, running along a circumference, will count 5 full revolutions and then some:
2017 = 360x5 + 217
where the remainder corresponds to 7/6 past 7 on the face of an analogue clock
Any interest in constructing the first 100 natural numbers from the digits in 2017 and some basic operations?
0 = 2 x 0 x 1 x 7
1 = (2 + 0 - 1)7
2 = 2 + 0 x 1 x 7
3 = 2 + 1 + 0 x 7
4 = 7 - 1 - 0 - 2
5 = 7 - 2 - 0 x 1
6 = 7 - 1 - 2 x 0
7 = 7 + 2 x 0 x 1
8 = 7 + 1 + 2 x 0
9 = 7 + 2 + 0 x 1
10 = 2 + 0 + 1 + 7
11 = 2 + 0! + 1 + 7
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
dudiobugtron
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 735
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #7 on: Dec 28th, 2016, 5:07pm » |
Quote Modify
|
12 = 12 + 0 x 7
or 12 = 3 x 2 + 7 - 0!
on Dec 28th, 2016, 4:10pm, rloginunix wrote:- low intensity love affair with 9: recursively subtract the sum of digits of the current number from the current number:
2017 - 10 = 2007
and so, downward, we subtract: occasionally 27 but mostly 9 and 18 [at some point: 1818-18] |
|
This is a result of the fact that the digits of multiples of 9 add to a multiple of 9. (and subtracting a multiple of 9 from another yields a multiple of 9 as well.)
I would be interested in whether there were any numbers (past a certain point) which didn't have a low-intensity love affair with 9.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 28th, 2016, 5:07pm by dudiobugtron » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #8 on: Dec 28th, 2016, 10:24pm » |
Quote Modify
|
12 = 2*7-1-0!
13 = 2*7-1-0
14 = 2*7-1*0
15 = 2*7+1+0
16 = 2*7+1+0!
17 = 2*(7+1)+0!
18 = 2*(7+1+0!)
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #9 on: Dec 29th, 2016, 11:03am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 28th, 2016, 5:07pm, dudiobugtron wrote:
(sorry, can't use 3 explicitly (take towr's version or 12 = 7 + (2 + 1)! - 0!))
19 = C(7, 2) - 0! - 1 = 2 + 0 + 17 = 20 - 17
20 = 7x(2 + 1) - 0!
21 = 7x(2 + 1) + 0
Separately, as a sum of consecutive primes (A000040) I only managed to assemble 2011:
2011 = 157 + ... + 211
Doesn't seem to work for 2017.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #10 on: Dec 29th, 2016, 11:43am » |
Quote Modify
|
With the help of a (C) program:
2011 = 661 + 673 + 677
2015 = 389 + 397 + 401 + 409 + 419
2016 = 71 + ... + 157
No cigar for 2017.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
dudiobugtron
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 735
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #11 on: Dec 29th, 2016, 12:13pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 29th, 2016, 11:03am, rloginunix wrote:
(sorry, can't use 3 explicitly (take towr's version or 12 = 7 + (2 + 1)! - 0!)) |
|
Oh gosh, I am obviously not on form in this thread.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #12 on: Dec 29th, 2016, 1:01pm » |
Quote Modify
|
22 = 7x(2 + 1) + 0!
23 = (7-2-1)! - 0!
24 = (7-2-1)! + 0
25 = (7-2-1)! + 0!
26 =  (7-2) + 0! + 1
27 =  17x dx + 2 + 0!
28 = 7*2*(1+0!)
29 = 17x+(2) dx - 0!
30 = 17x+(2) dx + 0
31 = 17x+(2) dx + 0!
32 = 2(7-1-0!)
33 =  e7/2  + 0*1
34 = e7/2 + 0 + 1
35 = e7/2 + 0! + 1
36 = (7-1)2 + 0
37 = (7-1)2 + 0!
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 29th, 2016, 1:27pm by towr » |
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
    
Gender:
Posts: 2873
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #13 on: Dec 29th, 2016, 4:50pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 28th, 2016, 5:07pm, dudiobugtron wrote:| I would be interested in whether there were any numbers (past a certain point) which didn't have a low-intensity love affair with 9. |
|
It's not terribly interesting.
The sum of the digits of a number is the same value mod 9 as the number itself (because 10n*an = 1n*an = an (mod 9) ) so subtracting the sum of digits from the original number gives a multiple of 9 for any [e]positive[/e] integer
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 30th, 2016, 5:40am by rmsgrey » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #14 on: Dec 29th, 2016, 7:57pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 29th, 2016, 4:50pm, rmsgrey wrote:| It's not terribly interesting. |
|
I concur, we made it too easy for ourselves.
Will the following "conservation of ordinal position" constraint make it more interesting:
- the digits in the construction must keep their yearly position
The construct with the smallest number of operat[ions]/[ors] shall win:
0 = 2 x 0 x 1 x 7
1 = (2 - 0 - 1)7
2 = 2 - 0 x 1 x 7
3 = -2 - 0! - 1 + 7
4 = -2 - 0 - 1 + 7
5 = -2 - 0 x 1 + 7
6 = -2 - 0 + 1 + 7
7 = 2 x 0 x 1 + 7
8 = 2 x 0 + 1 + 7
9 = 2 - 0 x 1 + 7
10 = 2 - 0 + 1 + 7
11 = 2 + 0! + 1 + 7
12 = 20 - 1 - 7
13 = (2 - 0 + 1)! + 7
14 = 20 + 1 - 7
15 = -2 + 0 + 17
16 = -2 + 0! + 17
17 = 2 x 0 + 17
18 = 2 - 0! + 17
19 = 2 + 0 + 17
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #15 on: Dec 29th, 2016, 11:12pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Dec 29th, 2016, 7:57pm, rloginunix wrote:
I concur, we made it too easy for ourselves. |
|
He was talking about something else, though...
20 = 20 * 17
21 = (20+1)*7 20 + 17
22 = log(20!) * 1 + log(7!)
23 =  log(20!) * 1 + log(7!)
24 = log(20!) + 1 + log(7!)
25 = exp( (2+0) * ln(-1+ (7)) )
26 = 20 - 1 + 7
27 = 20 + 1 * 7
28 = 20 + 1 + 7
29 = 20 + 1 * ln(7!)
30 = 20 + 1 + ln(7!)
31 = 20 + ln((1+7)!)
32 = 2(-0! - 1 + 7)
33 = exp(20-1*7)
34 = (2 + 0) * 17
35 = exp(2)* (-0!-1+7)
36 = exp(2) - 0!* (-1+7)
37 = 20 + 17
38 = ((201)) - ln(7)
39 = ((201)) - ln(7)
40 = ((201)) * ln(7)
41 = ((201)) + ln(7)
42 = ((201)) + ln(7)
43 = ((201)) + log(exp(7))
44 = ((201)) + log(exp(7))
45 = exp(2)* ln((0*1+7)!)
I'll leave the winning to someone else, it's hard enough getting this far.
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 1st, 2017, 11:01am by towr » |
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #16 on: Dec 30th, 2016, 3:10pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Nice.
I am sure it's just a typo - for 21 you meant 20 + 17.
on Dec 29th, 2016, 11:12pm, towr wrote:| He was talking about something else, though... |
|
Yeah, I know - programmer's habit to reuse things.
Speaking of reuse - let's reuse!
46 = -2 - 0 + (-1 + 7)!!
47 = -2 + 0! + (-1 + 7)!! = ((2 + 0!)!)!! - 17
48 = (2 + 0!)! x (1 + 7)
49 = ((2 + 0!)! + 1) x 7
50 = 2 + 0 + (-1 + 7)!!
51 = (2 + 0!) x 17 = -20 +  (1 + 7!) = !((2 + 0!)! - 1) + 7
52 = 20! + 1! + 7!!! 2 x (0! + 1) x F7
53 = 2h(0! + 1) + 7!!!! (e2- 0!)!! - e1+ 7
54 = (2 + 0!)! + (-1 + 7)!!
55 = ((2 + 0 + 1)!)!! + 7
56 = ((2 + 0! + 1)!! x 7
Reference:
h(n) - hexagonal numbers A000384
n!! is A006882
n!!! is A007661
n!!!! is A007662
!n is A000166
[e]
see towr's comment below
[/e]
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 31st, 2016, 7:02pm by rloginunix » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #17 on: Dec 30th, 2016, 11:56pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Hmm, editing that mistake screwed up the whole post. The symbol script doesn't seem to work on this computer.
I also think that when you start needing references, it may be going a bit over the top. You can probably find some function f(x) that does exactly what you want somewhere on the web, or otherwise put it somewhere.
Maybe it's an idea to limit it to what wolframalpha will accept? That should be broad enough. So n!! is ok, but not n!!!
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #18 on: Dec 31st, 2016, 7:47pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Deal!
I've checked - it computes subfactorials (!4 = 9, !5 = 44) and Fibonacci numbers as 'fibonacci 7' returning 13.
Before the New Year rolls through the East Coast (4!! = 8, 6!! = 48, 7!! = 105, (1 + 7!) = (5041) = 71):
57 = -(((2 + 0 + 1)!)!! + 7!!
58 =
59 =
60 =
61 = -(!((2 + 0!)! - 1)) + 7!!
62 =
63 = !(2 + 0! + 1) x 7
64 = 20 - 1 + 7
65 = -(2 + 0!)! + (1 + 7!)
66 =
67 =
68 = -2 - 0! + (1 + 7!)
69 = -2 - 0 + (1 + 7!)
70 = -2 + 0! + (1 + 7!)
71 = 2 x 0 + (1 + 7!)
72 = 2 - 0! + (1 + 7!)
73 = 2 + 0 + (1 + 7!)
74 = 2 + 0! + (1 + 7!)
75 =
76 =
77 = (2 + 0!)! + (1 + 7!)
78 =
79 =
80 =
81 =
82 =
83 =
84 = -20 - 1 + 7!!
85 = -20/1 + 7!!
86 = -20 + 1 + 7!!
87 =
88 = 2 x !(-0! - 1 + 7)
89 =
90 =
91 =
92 =
93 =
94 = 2 x (-0! + (-1 + 7)!!)
95 =
96 = (2 + 0) x (-1 + 7)!!
97 = -((20! + 1)!!) + 7!!
98 = -((2 + 0!)! + 1) + 7!!
99 = -((2 + 0!)! x 1) + 7!!
100 = -((2 + 0!)! - 1) + 7!!
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #19 on: Jan 2nd, 2017, 12:13pm » |
Quote Modify
|
57 = (2%)^(0 - 1) + 7
..
60 = ldexp(-2, 0!) + ldexp(1, totient(7))
..
62 = -2 + 0 + ldexp(1, totient(7))
..
66 = 2 + 0 + ldexp(1, totient(7))
67 = 2 + 0! + ldexp(1, totient(7))
..
80 = gcd(round(ldexp(2, 0!) / (1%))), 7!)
..
91 = -2 + 0! / (1%) - 7
92 = -2 + 0! / (1%) - totient(7)
93 = lb(2) * 0! / (1%) - 7
95 = 2 + 0! / 1% - 7
..
101 = lb(2) + 0! / ((1^7)%)
102 = 2 + 0! / ((1^7)%)
103 = ?
104 = -2 + ((0! / 1%) + totient(7))
105 = -2 + ((0! / 1%) + 7)
106 = lb(2) * (0! / (1%) + totient(7))
107 = lb(2) + (0! / (1%) + totient(7))
108 = 2 + (0! / (1%) + totient(7))
109 = 2 + (0! / (1%) + 7)
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
dudiobugtron
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 735
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #20 on: Jan 2nd, 2017, 12:16pm » |
Quote Modify
|
...
2017 = 2017
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 2nd, 2017, 12:16pm by dudiobugtron » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #21 on: Jan 2nd, 2017, 7:07pm » |
Quote Modify
|
103 = -2 - 0 x 1 + 7!!
I don't think I have the patience to slug it out to 2017!
(love % idea)
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #22 on: Jan 3rd, 2017, 11:37am » |
Quote Modify
|
58 = floor((20 + 1) * lb(7))
59 = ceil((20 + 1) * lb(7))
75 = floor(201 / sqrt(7))
76 = floor(sqrt(20) * 17)
78 = ceil(ldexp(20, 1) * ln(7))
79 = ceil((sqrt(20) + 1) / (7%))
81 = floor(20 * lb(17))
82 = floor(20 * sqrt(17))
83 = ceil(20 * sqrt(17))
87 = floor(log(20)^17)
89 = ceil(201^log(7))
90 = (totient(20)^-1) * gamma(7)
94 = ((2^0) / 1%) - totient(7)
103 = floor(201 / ln(7))
110 = ceil(lb(201) / (7%))
111 = floor(totient(201) * log(7))
112 = ldexp(totient(20), 1) * 7
113 = ceil(ldexp(20, 1) * lb(7))
114 = (20 - 1) * totient(7)
115 = 20! mod (-1 + gamma(7))
116 = floor(ln(20) * exp(1) / (7%))
117 = floor(20 / (17%))
118 = ceil(20 / (17%))
119 = floor((20 - (1%)) * totient(7))
120 = 20 * (1 * totient(7))
121 = ceil((20 - exp(1)) * 7)
122 = ceil((2^((0! - 1%) * 7)))
123 = floor((2 - (0 + 1%))^7)
124 = ldexp(-2, 0!) + ldexp(1, 7)
125 = totient(201) - 7
126 = (20 + 1) * totient(7)
127 = !20 mod (1 + gamma(7))
128 = ldexp(gcd(20, 1), 7)
129 = (2^0) + ldexp(1, 7)
130 = 2 + 0 + ldexp(1, 7)
131 = 2 + 0! + ldexp(1, 7)
132 = totient(201) mod floor(exp(7))
133 = (20 - 1) * 7
134 = floor((totient(201) + lb(7)))
135 = ceil((totient(201) + lb(7)))
136 = totient(20) * 17
137 = ceil(((20 + exp(1)) * totient(7)))
138 = totient(201) + totient(7)
139 = totient(201) + 7
140 = 20 * 1 * 7
141 = ceil((20 * (1% + 7)))
142 = ceil((log(2)^(0 - sqrt(17))))
143 = ceil((ldexp(20, -1) / 7%))
144 = 20% / 1 / gamma(7)
145 = ceil(20% * (1 + gamma(7)))
146 = 20 / (1%) - !7
147 = (20 + 1) * 7
148 = (20 + ldexp(1, 7))
149 = floor(log(201)^totient(7))
150 = (ldexp(2%, 0!)^-1) * totient(7)
151 = ceil(ln(20) * (1%) * 7!)
152 = floor(20 * exp(1) * lb(7))
153 = floor(ldexp(20% + 1, 7))
154 = ceil(ldexp(20% + 1, 7))
155 = floor((sqrt(20)^exp(1)) * sqrt(7))
156 = floor(totient(201) / log(7))
157 = ceil(totient(201) / log(7))
158 = floor((ldexp(2, 0!) / 1%)^log(7))
159 = floor((20 + exp(1)) * 7)
160 = 20 * (1 + 7)
161 = ceil(sqrt(20)^-1 * gamma(7))
162 = (gamma(20) * (1%)) mod !7
163 = floor(lb(20) / (1% * sqrt(7)))
164 = ceil(lb(20) / (1% * sqrt(7)))
165 = floor(ldexp((log(20) - 1%), 7))
166 = floor(ldexp(log(20), 1 * 7))
167 = ceil(ldexp(log(20), 1 * 7))
168 = 20! mod (1 + gamma(7))
169 = floor(201 * log(7))
170 = gamma(20) mod (-1 + !7)
171 = ceil(log(2)^(0 + exp(1) - 7))
172 = floor((totient(20) - 1)^sqrt(7))
173 = ceil((totient(20) - 1)^sqrt(7))
174 = floor(sqrt(201)^ln(7))
175 = (ldexp(2%, 0!)^-1) * 7
176 = ceil(2 + 0 + ldexp(exp(1), totient(7)))
177 = floor(ldexp(ln(2), (0 + 1 + 7)))
178 = ceil(ldexp(ln(2), (0 + 1 + 7)))
179 = floor(ldexp(sqrt(2) - 0 - (1%), 7))
180 = (ldexp(2, 0!)^-1) * gamma(7)
181 = floor(ldexp(sqrt(2), 0 + 1 * 7))
182 = ceil(ldexp(sqrt(2), 0 + 1 * 7))
183 = ceil(ldexp(sqrt(2) + 0 + (1%), 7))
184 = floor(ldexp(ln(2)^(0 - 1), 7))
185 = ceil(ldexp(ln(2)^(0 - 1), 7))
186 = 2 * (0! / (1%) - 7)
187 = ceil((ldexp(ln(2), 0!)^totient(17)))
188 = 2 * (0! / (1%) - totient(7))
189 = floor(ldexp(gamma(20)^(1%), 7))
190 = ceil(ldexp(gamma(20)^(1%), 7))
191 = floor(ldexp(ln(20), 1 * totient(7)))
192 = ldexp(2 + 0 + 1, totient(7))
193 = 2 / (0 + (1%)) - 7
194 = 201 - 7
195 = 201 - totient(7)
196 = floor((20 / exp(1))^sqrt(7))
197 = ceil((20 / exp(1))^sqrt(7))
198 = floor(201 - lb(7))
199 = ceil((201 - lb(7)))
200 = 2 / (0 + (1^7)%)
(I haven't thrown them all through wolfram-alpha yet. it sometimes reacts a bit different than python)
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 3rd, 2017, 11:58am by towr » |
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #23 on: Jan 3rd, 2017, 12:02pm » |
Quote Modify
|
in general
2k+0 = lb(2)+log(0!/(1%....%))+7
2k+1 = 2+log(0!/(1%....%))+7
(Which is definitely not the least number of operators for most)
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
rloginunix
Uberpuzzler
Posts: 1029
|
|
Re: 2017
« Reply #24 on: Jan 3rd, 2017, 1:30pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I've checked till 120 - wolframalpha has issues with 87, 89, 94 and 111.
With 94 it's just a typo - extra parens are needed around 1%: "((2^0) / (1%)) - totient(7)"
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
RIDDLES SITE
WRITE MATH!
Home 
Help 
Search 
Members 
Login 
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print