OT: Are All Odd Numbers Prime?

On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 23:59:25 +0200, "[jongware]" Gave us:

And one cannot carry one's drink from the bar to a table either...

On Sat, 3 Jun 2006 20:46:18 +0100, "moriman" Gave us:

Well, she was never president, though she was the bearded wife of one.

Watching Barbara Bush "do a number" would be more nauseating than watching Roseanne sing the National Anthem.

The modern computer programmer writes the mathemetician's solution, depending on the optimizer to reduce it to the engineer's solution :-).

How many mathematicians to change a light bulb?

One, who hands it to five Californians, thereby reducing it to a previously solved riddle.

And there are, of course, many more even number than odd ones. Since if you double an odd number you get an even one, and if you double an even number you get an even one, there must be twice as many even numbers as odd ones....

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 21:37:40 +0100, Nick Atty Gave us:

Pretty good, and even slightly funny.

There has to be just as many odd ones though as they are required as separators for even numbers.

Interestingly, that argument does not preclude the possibility that there are /more/ odd numbers than even numbers. :-)

Ought to be more evens. Zero is even. But that depends which infinity is, too.

Tim

And in fact there *are* more odds. If you halve an odd number you get something that is neither odd nor even, but if you halve an even number you have an even chance of getting an odd number, so statistically you have a better than even chance of more odds.

On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 00:22:12 GMT, Patrick Hamlyn Gave us:

I think that is a pretty odd remark. There... now we're even.

I spent several long, agonising minutes deciding not to say that. And for what? :-)

ObPuzzle (old chestnut): ONE ONE TWO TWO THREE ELEVEN ------ TWENTY

One 1 plus two 2's plus three 11's is 1 + 2(2) + 3(11) = 38, which does not equal 20 (dashes as summation line) or divide evenly by 20 (division line).

:-P

Tim

It *is* funny, though most of us have heard it (several times) before.

By this argument there are as many rational numbers as irrationals! (There is a rational between any two distinct irrationals.)

James Dow Allen

Indeed, there are infinitely many rationals between any two distinct irrationals. And yet there are infinitely more irrationals than rationals. It is this kind of thing that leads some to conclude that mathematics itself is irrational. :-)

On 4 Jun 2006 23:46:46 -0700, "James Dow Allen" Gave us:

Yes, but that is an oddly irrational debate.

All prime numbers are odd, apart from 2. 8-)

Leon

On 5 Jun 2006 02:40:29 -0700, "Leon" Gave us:

All Usenet dabblers unable to read topic headers are ODD as well...

In message , "[jongware]" writes

This is not true. The statute you refer to defines various values for pi, including 5.5; but 3 is not among them.

Nick

I don't think you can really say that (relationship of amounts). You can say that the rationals are denumerable, and that the irrationals are not. Here denumerable means capable of being put into one to one correspondence with the positive integers. Hence the invention of various alephs.