Talk:Strange numbers: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(is 0 strange?) |
(→is 0 strange: Commented.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== is 0 strange == |
== is 0 strange == |
||
For that matter, are all the 1-digit numbers 1..9 strange? (I assumed they are, trivial change for me if not). --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 15:54, 23 February 2021 (UTC) |
For that matter, are all the 1-digit numbers 1..9 strange? (I assumed they are, trivial change for me if not). --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 15:54, 23 February 2021 (UTC) |
||
:As the definition currently stands, I would say that no single digit number is strange because no digit of such a number has a neighbor. However, there would be some sense in augmenting the definition so that single digit primes are strange (i.e they would have a putative left neighbor of '0') though, of course, 0 itself would still not be. --[[User:PureFox|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox|talk]]) 17:00, 23 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 17:00, 23 February 2021
is 0 strange
For that matter, are all the 1-digit numbers 1..9 strange? (I assumed they are, trivial change for me if not). --Pete Lomax (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- As the definition currently stands, I would say that no single digit number is strange because no digit of such a number has a neighbor. However, there would be some sense in augmenting the definition so that single digit primes are strange (i.e they would have a putative left neighbor of '0') though, of course, 0 itself would still not be. --PureFox (talk) 17:00, 23 February 2021 (UTC)