- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Stats/Math Philosophy: You jokingly answer 288 to math Q's on here, 50% right
Posted on 9/10/16 at 8:51 am
Posted on 9/10/16 at 8:51 am
Here's an interesting thing about statistics and recurring frequencies of numbers.
Way back when we had an internet-breaking math equation that left the computer (be it human or calculator) with an answer of 2 or 288.
This became so popular that is was covered by journalists, bloggers, and loads of internet math forums and youtube channels.
The internet was inundated with searches for the number 2 and the number 288.
OK. So let's think of other numbers that are populating webspace.
We obviously have numbers from 0-9 because they make up all the digits of our numbers.
Then we have important dates and years: 2000, 1969, 2016, 1776.
Then we have pop culture numbers in song, band, movies, books, etc. 1984, 1812, 4.
And then we have EVERY CALCULATION completed by the google calculator or answer reported on a webpage.
If we have this huge dataset of every problem that has ever been run and every number that is referenced we can look at it as a sampling of all answers to all the math problems that exist. Of course there are limitations, like a webpage, due to lack of storage space, cannot hold a number with infinite digits. Likewise, google's search bar is limited by character spaces. However, it should give us a range in which our answer will fall into because the list is so exhaustive.
OK. So, think back to the number references. The most popular ones would either be because they make up a number (single digit) or they are popular from a cultural standpoint (band, year, day), OR they are a frequently occurring SOLUTION to a problem! And who is to say that you can separate these?
All of this to say: If you jokingly put 288 as a response to a question posted on this forum, you have a good chance (better than a wild guess) of being right!
That is because 288 was thrown around so much and populated that number group of all real answers that it appears at a higher frequency than other numbers!
So have fun! Put down 288 you might be right! And the more you put it down as a joke the more right you may become, because you are adding more references to that number!
**I used tremendous hyperbole listing 50% in the title to get you to read the post. I apologize.
Way back when we had an internet-breaking math equation that left the computer (be it human or calculator) with an answer of 2 or 288.
This became so popular that is was covered by journalists, bloggers, and loads of internet math forums and youtube channels.
The internet was inundated with searches for the number 2 and the number 288.
OK. So let's think of other numbers that are populating webspace.
We obviously have numbers from 0-9 because they make up all the digits of our numbers.
Then we have important dates and years: 2000, 1969, 2016, 1776.
Then we have pop culture numbers in song, band, movies, books, etc. 1984, 1812, 4.
And then we have EVERY CALCULATION completed by the google calculator or answer reported on a webpage.
If we have this huge dataset of every problem that has ever been run and every number that is referenced we can look at it as a sampling of all answers to all the math problems that exist. Of course there are limitations, like a webpage, due to lack of storage space, cannot hold a number with infinite digits. Likewise, google's search bar is limited by character spaces. However, it should give us a range in which our answer will fall into because the list is so exhaustive.
OK. So, think back to the number references. The most popular ones would either be because they make up a number (single digit) or they are popular from a cultural standpoint (band, year, day), OR they are a frequently occurring SOLUTION to a problem! And who is to say that you can separate these?
All of this to say: If you jokingly put 288 as a response to a question posted on this forum, you have a good chance (better than a wild guess) of being right!
That is because 288 was thrown around so much and populated that number group of all real answers that it appears at a higher frequency than other numbers!
So have fun! Put down 288 you might be right! And the more you put it down as a joke the more right you may become, because you are adding more references to that number!
**I used tremendous hyperbole listing 50% in the title to get you to read the post. I apologize.
This post was edited on 9/10/16 at 8:54 am
Posted on 9/10/16 at 8:54 am to Pectus
I may be stupid, but I'm stuppider after reading that.
Posted on 9/10/16 at 8:55 am to Pectus
(no message)
This post was edited on 9/10/16 at 8:56 am
Posted on 9/10/16 at 8:55 am to Pectus
It's 10am here, what the frick is your problem?
Posted on 9/10/16 at 8:57 am to Sellecks Moustache
Just an interesting tidbit I had to get out there.
288 shows up so much here, so why not.
288 shows up so much here, so why not.
This post was edited on 9/10/16 at 8:58 am
Posted on 9/10/16 at 9:01 am to Pectus
quote:311... You must not be down down Baw!!
Then we have pop culture numbers in song, band, movies, books, etc. 1984, 1812, 4.
Posted on 9/10/16 at 9:01 am to Pectus
God damnit pectus.
It's too early and I'm too hungover for this shite
It's too early and I'm too hungover for this shite
Posted on 9/10/16 at 9:03 am to Pectus
You think i read that shite on a Saturday morning?
Posted on 9/10/16 at 9:05 am to GEAUXT
288's trend over the last 5 years
2's trend over the last 5 years
The year 2016 is only now getting popular:
LINK
SS: The band 311 is less popular than 288:
LINK
2's trend over the last 5 years
The year 2016 is only now getting popular:
LINK
SS: The band 311 is less popular than 288:
LINK
This post was edited on 9/10/16 at 9:08 am
Posted on 9/10/16 at 9:10 am to Ash Williams
quote:
God damnit pectus.
It's too early and I'm too hungover for this shite
At least you are one of the few that read this that knows I am correct...philosophically.
Other posters don't think this is true.
Posted on 9/10/16 at 9:11 am to Pectus
quote:
Just an interesting tidbit I had to get out there.
There are multiple things wrong with this statement.
Posted on 9/10/16 at 9:14 am to PairofDucks
quote:
There are multiple things wrong with this statement.
If you jokingly answer:
0-9, or pi or square root of 2, 10, 15, 20, etc. you will be more right than 288.
But if you answer 19037601346481456 you will have a less of a chance of being right than if you jokingly put 288.
Posted on 9/10/16 at 9:19 am to Pectus
I am using the same reasoning as the most common words in the English language:
Most common words in the english language
The top 100 words in the English language make up 50% of the English language.
So, I can, with the same probability of a coin flip accurately guess the next word in a sentence by using the frequency of the cluster of words in that list. Your next word will be one of the 100, 50% of the time.
So, for the 288 response, you will be correct more than less searched for numbers in google, which would represent all numbers and solutions.

Most common words in the english language
The top 100 words in the English language make up 50% of the English language.
So, I can, with the same probability of a coin flip accurately guess the next word in a sentence by using the frequency of the cluster of words in that list. Your next word will be one of the 100, 50% of the time.
So, for the 288 response, you will be correct more than less searched for numbers in google, which would represent all numbers and solutions.
Posted on 9/10/16 at 9:46 am to athenslife101
OK, let's check his theory out...
Anyone bored enough to be reading this ...w/e it is, answer the following 3 questions...
What is 144 x 2?
What is 72 x 4?
What is 36 x 8?
Anyone bored enough to be reading this ...w/e it is, answer the following 3 questions...
What is 144 x 2?
What is 72 x 4?
What is 36 x 8?
Popular
Back to top

17











