Most remarkable sentence in the history of mathematics

[Paul Epstein]

Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
The sentence reads, in its entirety:
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

[Stefan Ram]

Post by Paul Epstein
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

In the US about 0,029092998 of all people have "John" as their given name,
so the probability for four people to be name thus is 0,029092998⁴, i.e.,
0,0000007163972472391.

0,000000064, the probability to win big time in the German lottery is
smaller by a factor of more than 10.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Stefan Ram

Post by Paul Epstein
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

In the US about 0,029092998 of all people have "John" as their given name,
so the probability for four people to be name thus is 0,029092998⁴, i.e.,
0,0000007163972472391.

Who says that they were American? It seems to me more likely that they
were British, in which case the "coincidence" would be even less worth
noting. As for being the "most remarkable sentence in the history of
mathematics", that's absurd.

Post by Stefan Ram
0,000000064, the probability to win big time in the German lottery is
smaller by a factor of more than 10.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Stefan Ram

Post by Paul Epstein
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

In the US about 0,029092998 of all people have "John" as their given name,
so the probability for four people to be name thus is 0,029092998⁴, i.e.,
0,0000007163972472391.

Who says that they were American? It seems to me more likely that they
were British, in which case the "coincidence" would be even less worth
noting. As for being the "most remarkable sentence in the history of
mathematics", that's absurd.

Have the frequencies of "John" and "Mary" been plummeting Over There
as drastically as Over Here? I think "Caleb" is at or near the top
these days, but nowadays it changes from year to year, as it didn't
use(d) to.

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Stefan Ram
0,000000064, the probability to win big time in the German lottery is
smaller by a factor of more than 10.

[RH Draney]

Post by Stefan Ram

Post by Paul Epstein
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

In the US about 0,029092998 of all people have "John" as their given name,
so the probability for four people to be name thus is 0,029092998⁴, i.e.,
0,0000007163972472391.

As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

[John Varela]

Post by RH Draney

Post by Stefan Ram

Post by Paul Epstein
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

In the US about 0,029092998 of all people have "John" as their given name,
so the probability for four people to be name thus is 0,029092998, i.e.,
0,0000007163972472391.

As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

[RH Draney]

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney
As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

I once attended a business meeting at which five of the seven
participants were Dave or David....r

[s***@gmail.com]

Post by RH Draney

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney
As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

I once attended a business meeting at which five of the seven
participants were Dave or David....r

I haven't seen that density of Davvyness,
but there always seems to be a bunch around.
Back in the bronze age classes always seemed to have multiple
Dav*, John, and Steve for the males,
while it was {C,K}ath{y,ie,ee} and Laur{a,ie,el} for the females.

(Both Steve and Steven went by Steve,
and I think there was a Stephen who went by Steve;
there were no Stefs on the male lists,
but some Stephanies used the f in the short form.)

/dps

/dps

[Ross]

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by RH Draney

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney
As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

I once attended a business meeting at which five of the seven
participants were Dave or David....r

I haven't seen that density of Davvyness,
but there always seems to be a bunch around.
Back in the bronze age classes always seemed to have multiple
Dav*, John, and Steve for the males,
while it was {C,K}ath{y,ie,ee} and Laur{a,ie,el} for the females.
(Both Steve and Steven went by Steve,
and I think there was a Stephen who went by Steve;
there were no Stefs on the male lists,
but some Stephanies used the f in the short form.)
/dps

(Just realized:)
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Ross

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by RH Draney

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney
As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

I once attended a business meeting at which five of the seven
participants were Dave or David....r

I haven't seen that density of Davvyness,
but there always seems to be a bunch around.
Back in the bronze age classes always seemed to have multiple
Dav*, John, and Steve for the males,
while it was {C,K}ath{y,ie,ee} and Laur{a,ie,el} for the females.
(Both Steve and Steven went by Steve,
and I think there was a Stephen who went by Steve;
there were no Stefs on the male lists,
but some Stephanies used the f in the short form.)
/dps

(Just realized:)
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

Which is more remarkable, three out of four, or two out of two? I have
exactly two brothers-in-law and both are called John. (This is not an
invitation to Stefan Ram to report another inane calculation, based on
inappropriate assumptions and leading to a result expressed with an
absurd degree of precision.)

[Jerry Friedman]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Ross

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by RH Draney

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney
As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

I once attended a business meeting at which five of the seven
participants were Dave or David....r

I haven't seen that density of Davvyness,
but there always seems to be a bunch around.
Back in the bronze age classes always seemed to have multiple
Dav*, John, and Steve for the males,
while it was {C,K}ath{y,ie,ee} and Laur{a,ie,el} for the females.
(Both Steve and Steven went by Steve,
and I think there was a Stephen who went by Steve;
there were no Stefs on the male lists,
but some Stephanies used the f in the short form.)
/dps

(Just realized:)
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

Which is more remarkable, three out of four, or two out of two?

Three out of four, unless 1/4 or more of the population has the name
in question. I'm not worrying about whether having four brothers-in-law
is more or less likely than having two.

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I have
exactly two brothers-in-law and both are called John. (This is not an
invitation to Stefan Ram to report another inane calculation, based on
inappropriate assumptions and leading to a result expressed with an
absurd degree of precision.)

Actually, 1/4 is very slightly low, as having a brother-in-law named
John decreases the supply of Johns (not johns) for one's other brothers-
in-law.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Jerry Friedman

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Ross
(Just realized:)
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

Which is more remarkable, three out of four, or two out of two?

Three out of four, unless 1/4 or more of the population has the name
in question. I'm not worrying about whether having four brothers-in-law
is more or less likely than having two.

They could be successive rather than simultaneous. Cf. "I'm Enery the
eighth I am ... I got married to the widow next door, she's been married
seven times before, and every one was an Enery"

Happy STS, everyone!

Post by Jerry Friedman

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I have
exactly two brothers-in-law and both are called John. (This is not an
invitation to Stefan Ram to report another inane calculation, based on
inappropriate assumptions and leading to a result expressed with an
absurd degree of precision.)

Actually, 1/4 is very slightly low, as having a brother-in-law named
John decreases the supply of Johns (not johns) for one's other brothers-
in-law.

[Richard Heathfield]

On 05/02/2020 06:43, Ross wrote:

<snip>

Post by Ross
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

I would argue that, since you have perfect information, odds don't apply.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Ross
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

I would argue that, since you have perfect information, odds don't apply.

I'd take the question to mean "What is the expected fraction of people
in roughly Ross's situation who have three out of four brothers-in-law
named John?" Or variants.

Not to mention "of the same name."

[charles]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Ross
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

I would argue that, since you have perfect information, odds don't apply.

I'd take the question to mean "What is the expected fraction of people
in roughly Ross's situation who have three out of four brothers-in-law
named John?" Or variants.

Not to mention "of the same name."

I've only got one brother-in-law called James, but it's also the name of
both my sons-in-law.

[David Kleinecke]

Post by charles

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Ross
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

I would argue that, since you have perfect information, odds don't apply.

I'd take the question to mean "What is the expected fraction of people
in roughly Ross's situation who have three out of four brothers-in-law
named John?" Or variants.

Not to mention "of the same name."

I've only got one brother-in-law called James, but it's also the name of
both my sons-in-law.

I have only one sister (now widowed) but that meant three
brothers-in-law. None of them was John.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by charles
I've only got one brother-in-law called James, but it's also the name
of both my sons-in-law.

My middle name is James. It's also the middle name of my father, my
eldest son, and his eldest son.

(It's also the first name of my grandfather and my
great-great-grandfather. The Irish like recycling names within a family.)

[musika]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by charles
I've only got one brother-in-law called James, but it's also the
name of both my sons-in-law.

My middle name is James. It's also the middle name of my father, my
eldest son, and his eldest son.
(It's also the first name of my grandfather and my
great-great-grandfather. The Irish like recycling names within a family.)

My grandfather's first name was Thomas which became my father's middle
name and then my brother's first name although he goes by his middle name

[John Varela]

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 00:39:45 UTC, Peter Moylan

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by charles
I've only got one brother-in-law called James, but it's also the name
of both my sons-in-law.

My middle name is James. It's also the middle name of my father, my
eldest son, and his eldest son.
(It's also the first name of my grandfather and my
great-great-grandfather. The Irish like recycling names within a family.)

The Irish are hardly alone in that.

In my father's ancestry there was a series of at least six
consecutive first-born sons named José. There may have been more,
but that's as far back as I have been able to trace the ancestry.
The string was broken when my father's eldest brother died young,
though one of the other sons in that generation had middle name
José.

In my wife's family are four consecutive fathers and sons all named
Milton. None of them was actually called Milton; they went by one
of the nicknames Big Mick, Mickey, or Mick. Two of them are still
living. This family carries a German surname and lives in
Cincinnati.

Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

My father was Anthony, my middle name is Anthony, our eldest son's
middle name is Anthony, and his eldest son has middle name Anthony.
Our grandson by a different son has first name Anthony, and the
boy's other grandfather has first name Anthony. That last Anthony
is of Irish descent, coming full circle.

I don't even particularly like the name Anthony. Neither did my
father, because he thought Tony Varela sounded too Italian. Ah!
Those Europeans.

[Tony Cooper]

Post by John Varela
I don't even particularly like the name Anthony. Neither did my
father, because he thought Tony Varela sounded too Italian. Ah!
Those Europeans.

I never thought there was anything wrong about being of Italian
descent, but I spent a lot of years denying that I was of Italian
descent because of being named Anthony and known as Tony.

It was not the best name to have in grade school when most of the
other boys were Bill, Bob, John, Mike, Tom, and those sort of common
names (at the time).

[Quinn C]

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.

A neighbor that my mother was often talking to (but she didn't even call
"a friend") was somewhat embarrassed about naming her son the same as my
brother.

In contrast, any number of people can share the same middle name, even
siblings.

[Quinn C]

Post by Quinn C
That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.

That didn't come out right. I guess the thought was "their children who
are cousins", but simply dropping the "their" works, too.

[b***@shaw.ca]

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

I assume there's some German or Dutch blood in the family.
"Adelheid" in both languages means nobility or nobleness.

Post by Quinn C
That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.

In my family, there are several names shared by cousins. They all
tend to be named after the grandparents they have in common.
Families are pretty good at inventing add-on terms to distinguish
between members with the same first name.

bill

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by b***@shaw.ca

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

I assume there's some German or Dutch blood in the family.
"Adelheid" in both languages means nobility or nobleness.

Post by Quinn C
That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.

In my family, there are several names shared by cousins. They all
tend to be named after the grandparents they have in common.
Families are pretty good at inventing add-on terms to distinguish
between members with the same first name.

Hence many Dutch have double given names,
like Jan-Kees, or Bartel-Joris,

Jan

[John Varela]

Post by b***@shaw.ca

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

I assume there's some German or Dutch blood in the family.
"Adelheid" in both languages means nobility or nobleness.

The mother of the first Adelheid was from aplace called Wesel, in
Germany. She married an officer in Napoleon's army and was taken to
his home in Rouen, where she gave birth to Adele. When her husband
was killed, she returned to Wesel and Adele became Adelheid.
Adelheid married Moritz Wuerpel and the family moved to the USA, in
order to save the boys from the Prussian military draft.

Post by b***@shaw.ca

Post by Quinn C
That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.

In my family, there are several names shared by cousins. They all
tend to be named after the grandparents they have in common.
Families are pretty good at inventing add-on terms to distinguish
between members with the same first name.
bill

[Quinn C]

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.
A neighbor that my mother was often talking to (but she didn't even call
"a friend") was somewhat embarrassed about naming her son the same as my
brother.
In contrast, any number of people can share the same middle name, even
siblings.

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

Whereas my sister insisted that she didn't name her firstborn after our
mother's cat.

The son in turn had to live with the frequent assumption that he was
named after a tennis player who became suddenly very famous the summer
after his birth.

[RH Draney]

Post by Quinn C

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

Whereas my sister insisted that she didn't name her firstborn after our
mother's cat.
The son in turn had to live with the frequent assumption that he was
named after a tennis player who became suddenly very famous the summer
after his birth.

Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...(my name came from my father, who was born at
a time when the most likely celebrity influence was the star of the film
"A Tale of Two Cities")....r

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by RH Draney

Post by Quinn C

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

Whereas my sister insisted that she didn't name her firstborn after our
mother's cat.
The son in turn had to live with the frequent assumption that he was
named after a tennis player who became suddenly very famous the summer
after his birth.

Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...

(How young _are_ you?)

Post by RH Draney
(my name came from my father, who was born at
a time when the most likely celebrity influence was the star of the film
"A Tale of Two Cities")....r

... who received his Oscar for his least distinguished performance ...

[Quinn C]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by RH Draney

Post by Quinn C

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

Whereas my sister insisted that she didn't name her firstborn after our
mother's cat.
The son in turn had to live with the frequent assumption that he was
named after a tennis player who became suddenly very famous the summer
after his birth.

Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...

(How young _are_ you?)

Ronald McDonald started appearing in 1963. And people don't know that
exactly, so I guess the scenario is possible even for someone who's 60
by now.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Quinn C

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by RH Draney

Post by Quinn C

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

Whereas my sister insisted that she didn't name her firstborn after our
mother's cat.
The son in turn had to live with the frequent assumption that he was
named after a tennis player who became suddenly very famous the summer
after his birth.

Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...

(How young _are_ you?)

Ronald McDonald started appearing in 1963.

Where? When did he become famous? Remember, McD wasn't in cities until
the mid 70s at the earliest (we got their national advertising but
couldn't do anything about it -- I can pinpoint my first sighting of
a McD's restaurant to early June 1972, because it was when I went along
for the ride when a dormmate was driving someone to the Syracuse airport
(meaning they weren't in Ithaca, either). Just saw it from the road, we
didn't consider going in). Presumably I first went to one in Chicago
toward the end of that year, but it wasn't memorable as my first White
Castle was.

The clown himself had little presence in prime-time advertising outside
appeals to support Ronald McDonald House, which is a string of "hostels"
that accommodate the families of children who are hospitalized.

Post by Quinn C
And people don't know that
exactly, so I guess the scenario is possible even for someone who's 60
by now.

More salient for the date is the emergence of the other Ronald, which
was rather later than that. He first appeared as a Goldwater flack in
1964, and parlayed that into the defeat of no-longer-popular Gov. Pat
Brown in 67.

[Quinn C]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Quinn C

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by RH Draney
Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...

(How young _are_ you?)

Ronald McDonald started appearing in 1963.

Where? When did he become famous?

I guess when RH was young wherever RH was living.

("Growing up in SoCal in the early '60s",

Post by Peter T. Daniels
More salient for the date is the emergence of the other Ronald, which
was rather later than that. He first appeared as a Goldwater flack in
1964, and parlayed that into the defeat of no-longer-popular Gov. Pat
Brown in 67.

For the right kind of movie fan, obviously much earlier. Or for someone
in the movie business, given that he was president of the Screen Actors
Guild for many years, starting 1947.

[Ross]

Post by Quinn C

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Quinn C

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by RH Draney
Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...

(How young _are_ you?)

Ronald McDonald started appearing in 1963.

Where?

Washington, D.C.
Image reboot 1966, appearing in Southern California from that year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_McDonald

When did he become famous?

Dunno. Better check with the Fame Hall of Fame.

Post by Quinn C
I guess when RH was young wherever RH was living.
("Growing up in SoCal in the early '60s",

Post by Peter T. Daniels
More salient for the date is the emergence of the other Ronald, which
was rather later than that. He first appeared as a Goldwater flack in
1964, and parlayed that into the defeat of no-longer-popular Gov. Pat
Brown in 67.

For the right kind of movie fan, obviously much earlier. Or for someone
in the movie business, given that he was president of the Screen Actors
Guild for many years, starting 1947.
--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)

[Tony Cooper]

Post by Ross

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Quinn C

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by RH Draney
Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...

(How young _are_ you?)

Ronald McDonald started appearing in 1963.

Where?

Washington, D.C.
Image reboot 1966, appearing in Southern California from that year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_McDonald
When did he become famous?
Dunno. Better check with the Fame Hall of Fame.

Even easier is to check with the source that is evidently unfamiliar
to PTD: the internet. Willard Scott "invented" Ronald McDonald based
on his prior appearances as Bozo the Clown. It was at the invitation
of McDonald's to create a character for them. Scott was working for a
McDonald's franchise owner.


The character was initially played by Scott, but later by Michael
Potakovs who was "Coco the Clown" took over the role.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Ross

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Quinn C

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by RH Draney
Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...

(How young _are_ you?)

Ronald McDonald started appearing in 1963.

Where?

Washington, D.C.
Image reboot 1966, appearing in Southern California from that year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_McDonald
When did he become famous?
Dunno. Better check with the Fame Hall of Fame.

Even easier is to check with the source that is evidently unfamiliar
to PTD: the internet. Willard Scott "invented" Ronald McDonald based
on his prior appearances as Bozo the Clown. It was at the invitation
of McDonald's to create a character for them. Scott was working for a
McDonald's franchise owner.
The character was initially played by Scott, but later by Michael
Potakovs who was "Coco the Clown" took over the role.

Too bad the moron didn't bother to look at what the actual question was.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Quinn C

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Quinn C

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by RH Draney
Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...

(How young _are_ you?)

Ronald McDonald started appearing in 1963.

Where? When did he become famous?

I guess when RH was young wherever RH was living.
("Growing up in SoCal in the early '60s",

Post by Peter T. Daniels
More salient for the date is the emergence of the other Ronald, which
was rather later than that. He first appeared as a Goldwater flack in
1964, and parlayed that into the defeat of no-longer-popular Gov. Pat
Brown in 67.

For the right kind of movie fan, obviously much earlier. Or for someone
in the movie business, given that he was president of the Screen Actors
Guild for many years, starting 1947.

At which time he was a Classic Liberal Democrat and a Union Activist.

Not something his hagiographers wish to recall.

[Bob Martin]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Quinn C

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by RH Draney

Post by Quinn C

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

Whereas my sister insisted that she didn't name her firstborn after our
mother's cat.
The son in turn had to live with the frequent assumption that he was
named after a tennis player who became suddenly very famous the summer
after his birth.

Growing up when I did, I've had to spend most of my life explaining that
I was named neither for a hamburger spokesclown nor a senile
actor-turned-politician...

(How young _are_ you?)

Ronald McDonald started appearing in 1963.

Where? When did he become famous? Remember, McD wasn't in cities until
the mid 70s at the earliest (we got their national advertising but
couldn't do anything about it -- I can pinpoint my first sighting of
a McD's restaurant to early June 1972, because it was when I went along
for the ride when a dormmate was driving someone to the Syracuse airport
(meaning they weren't in Ithaca, either). Just saw it from the road, we
didn't consider going in). Presumably I first went to one in Chicago
toward the end of that year, but it wasn't memorable as my first White
Castle was.

We frequented a McDonalds in Kingston NY in 1970 (I have 8mm film of it).
The sign outside boasted "One billion hamburgers sold".

Post by Peter T. Daniels
The clown himself had little presence in prime-time advertising outside
appeals to support Ronald McDonald House, which is a string of "hostels"
that accommodate the families of children who are hospitalized.

Post by Quinn C
And people don't know that
exactly, so I guess the scenario is possible even for someone who's 60
by now.

More salient for the date is the emergence of the other Ronald, which
was rather later than that. He first appeared as a Goldwater flack in
1964, and parlayed that into the defeat of no-longer-popular Gov. Pat
Brown in 67.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Bob Martin
We frequented a McDonalds in Kingston NY in 1970 (I have 8mm film of it).
The sign outside boasted "One billion hamburgers sold".

In a similar era, a cartoon (I've forgotten where) showed this as

One billion hamburgers sold
One million hamburgers eaten
One thousand hamburgers digested.

[Ken Blake]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Bob Martin
We frequented a McDonalds in Kingston NY in 1970 (I have 8mm film of it).
The sign outside boasted "One billion hamburgers sold".

In a similar era, a cartoon (I've forgotten where) showed this as
One billion hamburgers sold
One million hamburgers eaten
One thousand hamburgers digested.

In the Woody Allen Movie "Sleeper," there's a brief shot of a McDonalds
with a sign outside it saying

795,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
sold.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Bob Martin
We frequented a McDonalds in Kingston NY in 1970 (I have 8mm film of it).
The sign outside boasted "One billion hamburgers sold".

In a similar era, a cartoon (I've forgotten where) showed this as
One billion hamburgers sold
One million hamburgers eaten
One thousand hamburgers digested.

In the Woody Allen Movie "Sleeper," there's a brief shot of a McDonalds
with a sign outside it saying
795,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
sold.

Unfortunately, a long time ago they stopped updating the count and went
with "Billions and billions served." (It was never clear whether they
were counting burgers or people.) I don't think the slogan is used any
more on the buildings.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Bob Martin

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Quinn C
Ronald McDonald started appearing in 1963.

Where? When did he become famous? Remember, McD wasn't in cities until
the mid 70s at the earliest (we got their national advertising but
couldn't do anything about it -- I can pinpoint my first sighting of
a McD's restaurant to early June 1972, because it was when I went along
for the ride when a dormmate was driving someone to the Syracuse airport
(meaning they weren't in Ithaca, either). Just saw it from the road, we
didn't consider going in). Presumably I first went to one in Chicago
toward the end of that year, but it wasn't memorable as my first White
Castle was.

We frequented a McDonalds in Kingston NY in 1970 (I have 8mm film of it).
The sign outside boasted "One billion hamburgers sold".

I wonder why Kingston was more highly favored than Ithaca. I don't
recall ever stopping in Kingston, but we frequently visited the Big
City of Newburgh -- there was a bakery with wonderful cannoli -- when
we were at the summer place near Monroe, and I imagine Kingston was
similar.

Went to what must have been one of Pete Seeger's first _Clearwater_
concerts on the river -- the sloop was moored alongshore, and the
crowd was on the grassy hillside overlooking it on the Beacon side.
Of course we got there shortly before the end, because my mother
was in charge of the getting on the road ...

[Anders D. Nygaard]

Post by Quinn C

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.
A neighbor that my mother was often talking to (but she didn't even call
"a friend") was somewhat embarrassed about naming her son the same as my
brother.
In contrast, any number of people can share the same middle name, even
siblings.

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

Whereas my sister insisted that she didn't name her firstborn after our
mother's cat.

Before we met, my wife was fond of the name "Sigurd", but, this being
quite obscure and not expecting anyone else to like it, she used it for
a cat. Thereby preventing our firstborn from having the name - I would
have been happy, but it was skunked.

Post by Quinn C
The son in turn had to live with the frequent assumption that he was
named after a tennis player who became suddenly very famous the summer
after his birth.

When we had our daughter, we seriously considered calling her "Mary",
a (rare but) traditional name with a completely Danish pronunciation.
Thereby narrowly escaping her having to defend that not only was she
not named after the Danish crown princess, but her name was pronounced
quite differently: The crown princess, who is of Australian origin, for
some reason still goes by the English pronunciation; earlier generations
Danish-ified their names when marrying into the royal family.

/Anders, Denmark.

[Quinn C]

Post by Anders D. Nygaard
The crown princess, who is of Australian origin, for
some reason still goes by the English pronunciation; earlier generations
Danish-ified their names when marrying into the royal family.

That's internationalization for you, isn't it?

Slightly different, but related, I think: Up to George VI, English
royals were routinely referred to in German by the Germanized form of
their name (Kònigin Viktoria, König Georg). With EII, the German and
English forms of her name are both common, and it's almost always "die
Queen". And going forward, I think nobody would dream of an English king
named Karl or Wilhelm.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Quinn C

Post by Anders D. Nygaard
The crown princess, who is of Australian origin, for
some reason still goes by the English pronunciation; earlier generations
Danish-ified their names when marrying into the royal family.

That's internationalization for you, isn't it?
Slightly different, but related, I think: Up to George VI, English
royals were routinely referred to in German by the Germanized form of
their name (Kònigin Viktoria, König Georg). With EII, the German and
English forms of her name are both common, and it's almost always "die
Queen". And going forward, I think nobody would dream of an English king
named Karl or Wilhelm.

"William" is a bit unlikely -- they didn't do so well with the last two
of that name. (Wm. II must've been WilliamanMary? Also no great prize.)

Charles has said that (if he ever gets the throne) he'll take some other
name.

[John Varela]

On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 18:32:10 UTC, Quinn C

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.

I'm still working on that part of the family tree. It turns out
that there was a fifth daughter, and she did not name her daughter
Adelheid, probably because she herself was named Adelheid.

Post by Quinn C
A neighbor that my mother was often talking to (but she didn't even call
"a friend") was somewhat embarrassed about naming her son the same as my
brother.
In contrast, any number of people can share the same middle name, even
siblings.

Indeed.

My grandmother had two younger sisters, and all three of them had
middle initial A. There had been an older sister, Addy, who died at
age 10, before my grandmother was born. I have always assumed that
Addy was a nickname for Adelheid, and speculated that one of the
younger sisters had middle name Adelheid. Just today I pinned down
that both my grandmother and the youngest sister had middle name
Adelheid.

So that made a Grandmother, one daughter and four granddaughters
named Adelheid, plus two granddaughters with middle name Adelheid.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by John Varela
On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 18:32:10 UTC, Quinn C

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.

I'm still working on that part of the family tree. It turns out
that there was a fifth daughter, and she did not name her daughter
Adelheid, probably because she herself was named Adelheid.

Post by Quinn C
A neighbor that my mother was often talking to (but she didn't even call
"a friend") was somewhat embarrassed about naming her son the same as my
brother.
In contrast, any number of people can share the same middle name, even
siblings.

Indeed.
My grandmother had two younger sisters, and all three of them had
middle initial A. There had been an older sister, Addy, who died at
age 10, before my grandmother was born. I have always assumed that
Addy was a nickname for Adelheid, and speculated that one of the
younger sisters had middle name Adelheid. Just today I pinned down
that both my grandmother and the youngest sister had middle name
Adelheid.
So that made a Grandmother, one daughter and four granddaughters
named Adelheid, plus two granddaughters with middle name Adelheid.

The name, sometimes shortened to 'Aleid' was popular in the middle ages
among the nobility.
There have been various countesses with the name,

Jan

[John Varela]

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.
A neighbor that my mother was often talking to (but she didn't even call
"a friend") was somewhat embarrassed about naming her son the same as my
brother.
In contrast, any number of people can share the same middle name, even
siblings.

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

My daughter-in-law named her dog Bob, after her father.

[Janet]

Post by John Varela

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.
A neighbor that my mother was often talking to (but she didn't even call
"a friend") was somewhat embarrassed about naming her son the same as my
brother.
In contrast, any number of people can share the same middle name, even
siblings.

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

My daughter-in-law named her dog Bob, after her father.

We had a cat named Wendy .The next door neighbour gave birth to a girl
and came round to say "We've decided to call the baby Wendy, but we
don't want her named after your cat, so please change the cat's name "

We didn't.

Janet

[Jerry Friedman]

...

Post by Janet

Post by John Varela

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

My daughter-in-law named her dog Bob, after her father.

We had a cat named Wendy .The next door neighbour gave birth to a girl
and came round to say "We've decided to call the baby Wendy, but we
don't want her named after your cat, so please change the cat's name "
We didn't.

*snort*

Obviously the only safe thing to do is give your cat a name that can't
possibly be given to a child, if there were such a name.

[Phil Hobbs]

Post by Jerry Friedman
...

Post by Janet

Post by John Varela

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

My daughter-in-law named her dog Bob, after her father.

We had a cat named Wendy .The next door neighbour gave birth to a girl
and came round to say "We've decided to call the baby Wendy, but we
don't want her named after your cat, so please change the cat's name "
We didn't.

*snort*
Obviously the only safe thing to do is give your cat a name that can't
possibly be given to a child, if there were such a name.

My first cat was called "Paw". I think that qualifies.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

[Quinn C]

Post by Phil Hobbs

Post by Jerry Friedman

Post by Janet
We had a cat named Wendy .The next door neighbour gave birth to a girl
and came round to say "We've decided to call the baby Wendy, but we
don't want her named after your cat, so please change the cat's name "
We didn't.

*snort*
Obviously the only safe thing to do is give your cat a name that can't
possibly be given to a child, if there were such a name.

My first cat was called "Paw". I think that qualifies.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paw_Lagermann>

That took three seconds.

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by Jerry Friedman
...

Post by John Varela

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

My daughter-in-law named her dog Bob, after her father.

  We had a cat named Wendy .The next door neighbour gave birth to a girl
and came round to say "We've decided to call the baby Wendy, but we
don't want her named after your cat, so please change the cat's name "
    We didn't.

*snort*
Obviously the only safe thing to do is give your cat a name that can't
possibly be given to a child, if there were such a name.

My first cat was called "Paw".  I think that qualifies.

We call a neighbour's cat Ming - as in Ming the Merciless.

[CDB]

Post by Jerry Friedman
...

Post by Janet

Post by John Varela

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

My daughter-in-law named her dog Bob, after her father.

We had a cat named Wendy .The next door neighbour gave birth to a
girl and came round to say "We've decided to call the baby Wendy,
but we don't want her named after your cat, so please change the
cat's name "
We didn't.

*snort*
Obviously the only safe thing to do is give your cat a name that
can't possibly be given to a child, if there were such a name.

Here, Btfsplk; here, boy.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by CDB

Post by Jerry Friedman

Post by Janet
We had a cat named Wendy .The next door neighbour gave birth to a
girl and came round to say "We've decided to call the baby Wendy,
but we don't want her named after your cat, so please change the
cat's name "
We didn't.

*snort*
Obviously the only safe thing to do is give your cat a name that
can't possibly be given to a child, if there were such a name.

Here, Btfsplk; here, boy.

Our two cats are called Basil and Sybil. Although those have been
people's names in the past, it seems unlikely that they will be so used
in the near future.

[charles]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by CDB

Post by Jerry Friedman

Post by Janet
We had a cat named Wendy .The next door neighbour gave birth to a
girl and came round to say "We've decided to call the baby Wendy,
but we don't want her named after your cat, so please change the
cat's name "
We didn't.

*snort*
Obviously the only safe thing to do is give your cat a name that
can't possibly be given to a child, if there were such a name.

Here, Btfsplk; here, boy.

Our two cats are called Basil and Sybil. Although those have been
people's names in the past, it seems unlikely that they will be so used
in the near future.

I had a friend who named his cats 'Keith' & 'Prowse' on the basis of a
ticket agency's slogan "You want the best seats, we have them". Some
older Brits might remember this.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Peter Moylan
[ … ]
Our two cats are called Basil and Sybil. Although those have been
people's names in the past, it seems unlikely that they will be so used
in the near future.

I don't think I've known a Basil. (I knew a Baz once and thought he was
a Basil until I learned that he was a Barry.) As for Sybils, I knew one
in the 1970s. However, if she's still around she must now be in her
nineties: doesn't invalidate your statement.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Quinn C

Post by John Varela
Back in my family, one of my great-great grandmothers was named
Adelheid. Four of her children had daughters, and every one of them
named their eldest daughter Adelheid. When one of those Adelheids
died in childhood, a later daughter was given the middle name
Adelheid.

That surprises me. While I have few data points to back it up, I'd have
assumed that people around me avoided naming their cousins the same.
A neighbor that my mother was often talking to (but she didn't even call
"a friend") was somewhat embarrassed about naming her son the same as my
brother.
In contrast, any number of people can share the same middle name, even
siblings.

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

I read that as "My great-aunt named her 'Chihuahua', after my mother."
I thought an odd name for a daughter.

[Quinn C]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

My great-aunt named her chihuahua after my mother....r

I read that as "My great-aunt named her 'Chihuahua', after my mother."
I thought an odd name for a daughter.

But fine for a mother?

[Ross]

Post by Richard Heathfield
<snip>

Post by Ross
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

I would argue that, since you have perfect information, odds don't apply.

I'd take the question to mean "What is the expected fraction of people
in roughly Ross's situation who have three out of four brothers-in-law
named John?" Or variants.
--
Jerry Friedman

Actually I meant it as an echo of the journalistic
cliché, usually meant to suggest "This is fantastically
improbable". But I don't mind other interpretations.

[Jerry Friedman]

Post by Ross

Post by Richard Heathfield
<snip>

Post by Ross
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

I would argue that, since you have perfect information, odds don't apply.

I'd take the question to mean "What is the expected fraction of people
in roughly Ross's situation who have three out of four brothers-in-law
named John?" Or variants.
--
Jerry Friedman

Actually I meant it as an echo of the journalistic
cliché, usually meant to suggest "This is fantastically
improbable".

OK. "Sneaky O. Possum" used to use that one here in the usual
extended sense of "This would be fantastically improbable, except
that there appears to be an unmentioned factor that reflects
discredit on somebody."

Post by Ross
But I don't mind other interpretations.

That's good.

[Jerry Friedman]

Post by Richard Heathfield
<snip>

Post by Ross
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

I would argue that, since you have perfect information, odds don't apply.

I'd take the question to mean "What is the expected fraction of people
in roughly Ross's situation who have three out of four brothers-in-law
named John?" Or variants.

One difficulty, as so often with this kind of question, is defining
what "roughly the same situation" is. Age range? Can we assume all
brothers-in-law being from the same country? Etc.

Quite true.

[RH Draney]

Post by Ross
I have exactly four brothers-in-law.
Three of them are named "John".
What are the odds?

Dunno, but wouldn't it be worth noting if the odds were greater that
three had the same name than if all four did?...

(In five-card draw poker, a hand with one pair beats one with nothing,
but there are more possible hands with a pair than with nothing at all)....r

[Mark Brader]

Post by RH Draney
(In five-card draw poker, a hand with one pair beats one with nothing,
but there are more possible hands with a pair than with nothing at all).

Er, no, there are 1,098,240 possible hands with one pair, but 1,302,540
with nothing. (And 198,180 with something better than one pair, making
2,598,960.)

[Peter Moylan]

Post by RH Draney

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney
As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

I once attended a business meeting at which five of the seven
participants were Dave or David....r

Paging Dr Seuss.

<URL:https://stuff.mit.edu/people/dpolicar/writing/poetry/poems/tooManyDaves.html>

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney

Post by Stefan Ram

Post by Paul Epstein
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

In the US about 0,029092998 of all people have "John" as their given name,
so the probability for four people to be name thus is 0,029092998, i.e.,
0,0000007163972472391.

As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

Yes. That's why Stefan Ram's calculation has little meaning.

[John Varela]

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 15:07:52 UTC, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney

Post by Stefan Ram

Post by Paul Epstein
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

In the US about 0,029092998 of all people have "John" as their given name,
so the probability for four people to be name thus is 0,029092998, i.e.,
0,0000007163972472391.

As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

However you do have Donald John Trump and Donald John Trump Jr.
currently fairly prominent.

But they never use their middle names, as evidenced by the fact that
I wasn't aware of them until just now.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by John Varela
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 15:07:52 UTC, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"

However you do have Donald John Trump and Donald John Trump Jr.
currently fairly prominent.

But they never use their middle names, as evidenced by the fact that
I wasn't aware of them until just now.

Except, of course, at the Inauguration and every time the Articles of
Impeachment are read out.

[Quinn C]

Post by John Varela
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 15:07:52 UTC, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney

Post by Stefan Ram

Post by Paul Epstein
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

In the US about 0,029092998 of all people have "John" as their given name,
so the probability for four people to be name thus is 0,029092998, i.e.,
0,0000007163972472391.

As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

However you do have Donald John Trump and Donald John Trump Jr.
currently fairly prominent.

But they never use their middle names, as evidenced by the fact that
I wasn't aware of them until just now.

Trevor Noah makes a game out of reading it differently every time
("Donald Jazeera Trump', "Donald Jemima Trump" ...)

[Quinn C]

Post by John Varela

Post by RH Draney

Post by Stefan Ram

Post by Paul Epstein
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

In the US about 0,029092998 of all people have "John" as their given name,
so the probability for four people to be name thus is 0,029092998, i.e.,
0,0000007163972472391.

As I used to say to annoy someone I worked with, "Your parents had no
imagination; every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John"....r

I have used the same line, but do so much less often nowadays.
WIWAL and well into adulthood there was almost always another John
in my class or work group. But nowadays John is not a particularly
common name, at least not in the USofA.

That's a bold statement. It's still the most common first name in the
US. What you may mean is that it's not one of the most common names
among children and teens any more, so that the existing Johns lean
older.

Even in 2018, it still ranked #27 among boys' baby names, which means
that there's about 1 John for every 2 Liams (the most common name),
which seems too high for me to call it "not particularly common".

But maybe I'm misinterpreting that phrase. By the standards of a few
decades ago, no first name is really common among babies born these
days. In 1880, one in twelve male children were named John; in 1970, it
was still one in thirty; these days, the most popular name barely
exceeds one in a hundred.

[Tony Cooper]

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:54:38 -0500, Quinn C

Post by Quinn C
That's a bold statement. It's still the most common first name in the
US. What you may mean is that it's not one of the most common names
among children and teens any more, so that the existing Johns lean
older.

I know some older people who have become hunched-over, but they use a
cane or Zimmer frame to resist falling when leaning too far.

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I am missing something. Like what's remarkable about it.

[Paul]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I am missing something. Like what's remarkable about it.

That there are four people mentioned and they all have exactly the
same first name.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Paul

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I am missing something. Like what's remarkable about it.

That there are four people mentioned and they all have exactly the
same first name.

Big deal. If they were all called Aloisius that might be worth quoting,
but John?

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I was once showing an English visitor around our university campus. We
passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few minutes later,
another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six people we
encountered were called Bruce.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Peter Moylan
I was once showing an English visitor around our university campus. We
passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few minutes later,
another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six people we
encountered were called Bruce.

Australia, was it?

If there were women on the campus, would most of them have been Sheila?

[Peter Moylan]

On Sunday, February 2, 2020 at 11:01:32 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan

Post by Peter Moylan
I was once showing an English visitor around our university
campus. We passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few
minutes later, another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six
people we encountered were called Bruce.

Australia, was it?

What made this experience strange is that Bruce is not a particularly
common name in Australia these days. But of course I couldn't convince
my English visitor of that. He was primed by previous propaganda to
believe that it's a common Australian name.

If there were women on the campus, would most of them have been Sheila?

I think the name Sheila died out here in my mother's generation.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I was once showing an English visitor around our university campus. We
passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few minutes later,
another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six people we
encountered were called Bruce.

I can imagine a boink that gathered most of the AUE regulars, at which
I said "Hello Peter" to four people in succession. However, I don't
think I know what Peter Young looks like; you and PTD I would probably
recognize; and maybe Peter Duncanson.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I was once showing an English visitor around our university campus. We
passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few minutes later,
another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six people we
encountered were called Bruce.

I can imagine a boink that gathered most of the AUE regulars, at which
I said "Hello Peter" to four people in succession. However, I don't
think I know what Peter Young looks like;

only for not recently following the link at the bottom of his posts. I
just need to look out for someone who looks like one of my
brothers-in-law (who lives near Stroud -- not all that far from
Cheltenham).

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
you and PTD I would probably recognize; and maybe Peter Duncanson.

[Katy Jennison]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I was once showing an English visitor around our university campus. We
passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few minutes later,
another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six people we
encountered were called Bruce.

I can imagine a boink that gathered most of the AUE regulars, at which I
said "Hello Peter" to four people in succession. However, I don't think
I know what Peter Young looks like; you and PTD I would probably
recognize; and maybe Peter Duncanson.

I've met PTD and Peter Young (on separate occasions). Would I recognise
Peters Moylan and Duncanson, I wonder. The photo of Peter M on the
archived aue website is (as are they all) somewhat out-of-date, and a
search reveals that you share your name with a baseball player; on the
other hand I've seen Facebook photos and I'd probably spot you from
those. But I don't think I have any picture of Peter D at all.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I was once showing an English visitor around our university campus. We
passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few minutes later,
another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six people we
encountered were called Bruce.

I can imagine a boink that gathered most of the AUE regulars, at which
I said "Hello Peter" to four people in succession. However, I don't
think I know what Peter Young looks like; you and PTD I would probably
recognize; and maybe Peter Duncanson.

I've met PTD and Peter Young (on separate occasions). Would I recognise
Peters Moylan and Duncanson, I wonder. The photo of Peter M on the
archived aue website is (as are they all) somewhat out-of-date, and a
search reveals that you share your name with a baseball player; on the
other hand I've seen Facebook photos and I'd probably spot you from
those. But I don't think I have any picture of Peter D at all.

I think this is his website
www.peterduncanson.net/

Thanks. I'll certainly try to localise a copy
of the historical novel by his niece,
whether or not it is the right Peter.

It is: Cloud Chamber, by Clare George. (2003)

Jan

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I was once showing an English visitor around our university campus. We
passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few minutes later,
another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six people we
encountered were called Bruce.

I can imagine a boink that gathered most of the AUE regulars, at which
I said "Hello Peter" to four people in succession. However, I don't
think I know what Peter Young looks like; you and PTD I would probably
recognize; and maybe Peter Duncanson.

I've met PTD and Peter Young (on separate occasions). Would I recognise
Peters Moylan and Duncanson, I wonder. The photo of Peter M on the
archived aue website is (as are they all) somewhat out-of-date, and a
search reveals that you share your name with a baseball player; on the
other hand I've seen Facebook photos and I'd probably spot you from
those. But I don't think I have any picture of Peter D at all.

I think this is his website
www.peterduncanson.net/

Thanks. I'll certainly try to localise a copy
of the historical novel by his niece,
whether or not it is the right Peter.
It is: Cloud Chamber, by Clare George. (2003)

Four people at amazon.co.uk liked it.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker
for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the
manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I was once showing an English visitor around our university campus. We
passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few minutes later,
another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six people we
encountered were called Bruce.

I can imagine a boink that gathered most of the AUE regulars, at which
I said "Hello Peter" to four people in succession. However, I don't
think I know what Peter Young looks like; you and PTD I would probably
recognize; and maybe Peter Duncanson.

I've met PTD and Peter Young (on separate occasions). Would I recognise
Peters Moylan and Duncanson, I wonder. The photo of Peter M on the
archived aue website is (as are they all) somewhat out-of-date, and a
search reveals that you share your name with a baseball player; on the
other hand I've seen Facebook photos and I'd probably spot you from
those. But I don't think I have any picture of Peter D at all.

I think this is his website
www.peterduncanson.net/

Thanks. I'll certainly try to localise a copy
of the historical novel by his niece,
whether or not it is the right Peter.
It is: Cloud Chamber, by Clare George. (2003)

Four people at amazon.co.uk liked it.

I just splurged all of 1.78 euro on it, for a second hand copy.
(two more in stock, you can have one too)

I'll see if I'm positive too,

Jan

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I was once showing an English visitor around our university campus. We
passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few minutes later,
another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first six people we
encountered were called Bruce.

I can imagine a boink that gathered most of the AUE regulars, at which
I said "Hello Peter" to four people in succession. However, I don't
think I know what Peter Young looks like; you and PTD I would probably
recognize; and maybe Peter Duncanson.

I've met PTD and Peter Young (on separate occasions). Would I recognise
Peters Moylan and Duncanson, I wonder. The photo of Peter M on the
archived aue website is (as are they all) somewhat out-of-date, and a
search reveals that you share your name with a baseball player; on the
other hand I've seen Facebook photos and I'd probably spot you from
those. But I don't think I have any picture of Peter D at all.

I think this is his website
www.peterduncanson.net/

Thanks. I'll certainly try to localise a copy
of the historical novel by his niece,
whether or not it is the right Peter.

She is my niece.

Post by J. J. Lodder
It is: Cloud Chamber, by Clare George. (2003)
Jan

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Katy Jennison

On 2020-02-03 05:01:28 +0100, Peter Moylan

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable
Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose. The sentence reads, in
its entirety: "I would like to thank John Cleave, John
Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful comments and John
Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

I was once showing an English visitor around our university
campus. We passed a person I knew. "Hello, Bruce", I said. A few
minutes later, another "Hello Bruce". Something like the first
six people we encountered were called Bruce.

I can imagine a boink that gathered most of the AUE regulars, at
which I said "Hello Peter" to four people in succession. However, I
don't think I know what Peter Young looks like; you and PTD I would
probably recognize; and maybe Peter Duncanson.

I've met PTD and Peter Young (on separate occasions). Would I
recognise Peters Moylan and Duncanson, I wonder. The photo of Peter
M on the archived aue website is (as are they all) somewhat
out-of-date, and a search reveals that you share your name with a
baseball player; on the other hand I've seen Facebook photos and I'd
probably spot you from those. But I don't think I have any picture
of Peter D at all.

You wouldn't recognise me from my most recent Facebook photo, taken on
the occasion of a grandaughter's birthday. The celebration was in a park
on a very hot day. In the interests of protecting myself from the sun, I
was wearing a floppy hat and sunglasses, and I hardly even recognise
myself in that photo. And in fact I had to remove my sunglasses before
the granddaughter recognised me.

[Richard Heathfield]

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

[Mark Brader]

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics...
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker
for helpful comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism
of the manuscript and especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Buckaroo Banzai and I say it's Grover's Mill, NJ, that he should avoid.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

[Paul]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

What is considered a basic mathematical constant is to some extent a
matter of opinion. Pi is a questionable candidate for the "basic
mathematical constant" label -- 2 * pi occurs more often in maths than
pi does, and 2 * pi is a more natural constant since the radius is more
salient than the diameter.

Paul

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Paul

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

What is considered a basic mathematical constant is to some extent a
matter of opinion. Pi is a questionable candidate for the "basic
mathematical constant" label -- 2 * pi occurs more often in maths than
pi does, and 2 * pi is a more natural constant since the radius is more
salient than the diameter.

You're wriggling.

[Paul]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Paul

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

What is considered a basic mathematical constant is to some extent a
matter of opinion. Pi is a questionable candidate for the "basic
mathematical constant" label -- 2 * pi occurs more often in maths than
pi does, and 2 * pi is a more natural constant since the radius is more
salient than the diameter.

You're wriggling.

Changing the subject, rather than wriggling.
I have absolutely no problem or objection to anyone saying:
"It's not really remarkable at all", "It's not worth pointing out."
"The post is ridiculous", "A time-wasting post like this is so egregious
that the OP should be punished by being forbidden to eat mature cheddar
cheese for at least three years." etc.

Paul

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Paul

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

What is considered a basic mathematical constant is to some extent a
matter of opinion. Pi is a questionable candidate for the "basic
mathematical constant" label -- 2 * pi occurs more often in maths than
pi does, and 2 * pi is a more natural constant since the radius is more
salient than the diameter.

Easily fixed: e^{2*pi*i} = ln{1}.
or, if you prefer: 2*pi*i = ln(ln(1)).

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker
for helpful comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism
of the manuscript and especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

What is considered a basic mathematical constant is to some extent a
matter of opinion. Pi is a questionable candidate for the "basic
mathematical constant" label -- 2 * pi occurs more often in maths than
pi does, and 2 * pi is a more natural constant since the radius is more
salient than the diameter.

Easily fixed: e^{2*pi*i} = ln{1}.
or, if you prefer: 2*pi*i = ln(ln(1)).

Eh, you might wish to reconsider this,

Jan

[Peter Moylan]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Paul

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

What is considered a basic mathematical constant is to some extent a
matter of opinion. Pi is a questionable candidate for the "basic
mathematical constant" label -- 2 * pi occurs more often in maths than
pi does, and 2 * pi is a more natural constant since the radius is more
salient than the diameter.

Easily fixed: e^{2*pi*i} = ln{1}.
or, if you prefer: 2*pi*i = ln(ln(1)).

Eh, you might wish to reconsider this,

Oops. OK, I see the problem. Please ignore the above. I'll try to
remember to double-check in future.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Paul

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker
for helpful comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism
of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

What is considered a basic mathematical constant is to some extent a
matter of opinion. Pi is a questionable candidate for the "basic
mathematical constant" label -- 2 * pi occurs more often in maths than
pi does, and 2 * pi is a more natural constant since the radius is more
salient than the diameter.

You are right of course, but it is a bit late to change,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for
helpful comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the
manuscript and especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

That isn't an equation.
It is the definition of \pi.

BTW, you should back your slashes,
on pain of being grossly in error,

Jan

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for
helpful comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the
manuscript and especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

That isn't an equation.
It is the definition of \pi.
BTW, you should back your slashes,
on pain of being grossly in error,

Yes. I only noticed the wrong slash right now, just before reading your
comment.

[Ken Blake]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

Did you mean i/pi? If so, that's wrong. It should be i*pi

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

Did you mean i/pi? If so, that's wrong. It should be i*pi

Yes. Jan pointed it out. I meant \pi.

[Ken Blake]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

Did you mean i/pi? If so, that's wrong. It should be i*pi

Yes. Jan pointed it out. I meant \pi.

Yes, I saw her message and your reply after I posted the above.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Ken Blake

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Richard Heathfield

Post by Paul Epstein
Many find the equation exp(pi * i) = -1 to be remarkable.
However, I think I may have stumbled upon the most remarkable sentence
in the history of mathematics.
It's from Subrecursion: Functions and Hierarchies by H. E. Rose.
"I would like to thank John Cleave, John Mayberry, and John Tucker for helpful
comments and John Shepherdson for much careful criticism of the manuscript and
especially for help with Chapter 5."

If your remarkometer is that sensitive, stay well away from Rock Ridge.

Also, I prefer to write Euler's equation as e^{i/pi) + 1 = 0. That way
you include all five basic mathematical constants.

Did you mean i/pi? If so, that's wrong. It should be i*pi

Yes. Jan pointed it out. I meant \pi.

Yes, I saw her

his, I think, unless I've been labouring under a delusion for years.

Post by Ken Blake
message and your reply after I posted the above.

[Madhu]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Ken Blake
Yes, I saw her

his, I think, unless I've been labouring under a delusion for years.

Post by Ken Blake
message and your reply after I posted the above.

another feather for Quinn's cap