AI Assistant

Notifications

Clear all

Numbers

Summarize Topic

Strictly Surveying

Last Post by jimcox 3 months ago

15 Posts

7 Users

8 Reactions

1,217 Views

RSS

MightyMoe

(@mightymoe)

Posts: 10682

Member P&R, Founder

Topic starter

Translate ▼

Surveyors are obsessed with numbers. We are number driven in one side of our profession. Probably the more important side for boundaries are the legal implications of boundaries which can shove the numbers aside.

But since we're so connected to GPS, computer processing, communication infrastructure, our obsession with numbers has grown.

It's fascinating to explore the underlying numbers that make everything possible.

1/137

This number has vexed scientists since it was discovered. It's the number for the fine-structure constant. It's like PI the number isn't exactly 137 it's 137.0359xxxxxxx.

But it's the why of the number that physicists have not been able to explain it. If the number was slightly different, everything would fall apart.

The theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli who was obsessed with discovering the reason/meaning/math proof behind the number fell ill, was sent to the hospital and when a student of his visited Pauli told him to look at the room number, Pauli said, "It's 137, I'm never getting out of here alive", he died shortly after in room 137.

But Pauli wasn't the only one searching for meaning in the numbers, Richard Feynman was also on board and famously said it's the "number god forgot to explain".

The next number also became an obsession.

This was the resonance number of Carbon.

Fred Hoyle and others postulated that all the heavy elements after Hydrogen are created in stars, pumped out into space by nova reactions and thus our world and everything we observe is possible.

But there was a problem, Carbon can't be created in a star unless a resonance number or level precisely matches with another element. If that number matches life is possible, if that number doesn't match element creation fails. So knowing the number Hoyle backed in the answer and went to Cal-tech and told them to look for it with carbon. They were very skeptical, but since it was Hoyle they looked. Hoyle was saying since we exist then the number has to match the other element's number. He was correct the number matched, but he never could explain why or how which haunted him tell he passed. That number is stated as 7.65Mev.

The number for vacuum energy is another vexing number, if it's even slightly different, the universe would either collapse or endlessly expand without ever condensing into stars or elements, life wouldn't be possible either way. But it's not slightly different, it's precisely the energy needed to make it all work. No one can explain (find a math proof) why vacuum energy is what it is, but it makes stars and planets possible.

Posted : June 16, 2026 8:20 am

rankin_file

(@rankin_file)

Posts: 4135

Member Sustainer

Translate ▼

as John Calvin would say, “My, what a coincidence!”

Posted : June 16, 2026 12:06 pm

MightyMoe

(@mightymoe)

Posts: 10682

Member P&R, Founder

Topic starter

Translate ▼

@rankin_file

The numbers get really hairy if you let them get to you. Fortunately, I'm not smart enough to allow it to bother me.

Posted : June 16, 2026 1:59 pm

holy-cow

(@holy-cow)

Posts: 25996

Member P&R, Founder

Translate ▼

Someone, somewhere once said something about 42 being the only number that mattered.

Posted : June 16, 2026 3:54 pm

GaryG

(@gary_g)

Posts: 969

Member

Translate ▼

Everything is +/-

Posted : June 16, 2026 4:12 pm

MightyMoe

(@mightymoe)

Posts: 10682

Member P&R, Founder

Topic starter

Translate ▼

Posted by: @holy-cow

↑

Someone, somewhere once said something about 42 being the only number that mattered.

Youtubers wanted to know the favorite random number. They asked average people to pick a random number between 1 and 100. The most picked random number was 37. Does that tie into 137? Maybe.

Although when doing it they threw out the two most picked numbers 69 and 42 declaring that those aren't random. LOL.

Posted : June 17, 2026 7:32 am

holy-cow

(@holy-cow)

Posts: 25996

Member P&R, Founder

Translate ▼

@mightymoe

... 42. The number 42 is, in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams, the "Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything ...

We are such a diverse group here that I had assumed those with warped minds had read every word of the referenced book and would quickly respond. Didn't happen. We must be more sane than the average reader.

Posted : June 17, 2026 10:55 am

MightyMoe

(@mightymoe)

Posts: 10682

Member P&R, Founder

Topic starter

Translate ▼

Posted by: @holy-cow

↑

@mightymoe

... 42. The number 42 is, in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams, the "Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything ...

We are such a diverse group here that I had assumed those with warped minds had read every word of the referenced book and would quickly respond. Didn't happen. We must be more sane than the average reader.

Holy, I'm a fan of the Hitchhiker books. I can't say the same for the movies.

Posted : June 17, 2026 1:12 pm

Williwaw

(@williwaw)

Posts: 3644

Member P&R, Founder

Translate ▼

Being a Big Bang Theory fan I've got to go with 73, which is the 21st prime number and it's reverse 37 is the 12th prime number. In binary code it's written 1001001, which is the same written backwards or forwards.

Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get me.

Posted : June 17, 2026 5:17 pm

MightyMoe

(@mightymoe)

Posts: 10682

Member P&R, Founder

Topic starter

Translate ▼

@williwaw

73 was the number 2 pick of random 1-100 numbers.

Posted : June 18, 2026 7:34 am

peter-lothian

(@peter-lothian)

Posts: 1258

Member Founder

Translate ▼

Posted by: @mightymoe

↑

Posted by: @holy-cow

↑

@mightymoe

... 42. The number 42 is, in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams, the "Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything ...

We are such a diverse group here that I had assumed those with warped minds had read every word of the referenced book and would quickly respond. Didn't happen. We must be more sane than the average reader.

Holy, I'm a fan of the Hitchhiker books. I can't say the same for the movies.

Wonko the Sane approves of this message.

The BBC series was way better than those movies.

This post was modified 3 months ago by peter-lothian

Posted : June 18, 2026 8:51 am

MightyMoe

(@mightymoe)

Posts: 10682

Member P&R, Founder

Topic starter

Translate ▼

I believe Hickhiker's Guide was a late 1970's early 1980's era book. Somewhere about there. I don't remember much from it as far as details but 42 sticks with me. It's been 45 years or more.

Posted : June 18, 2026 1:35 pm

holy-cow

(@holy-cow)

Posts: 25996

Member P&R, Founder

Translate ▼

Hippie!!!!!!

Posted : June 18, 2026 2:45 pm

jimcox

(@jimcox)

Posts: 2118

Member Founder

Translate ▼

@mightymoe HHGTTG Started as a radio series, became a series of books (a Trilogy in Five Parts), got re-recorded as audio books - became a TV series - and there were a couple of movies.

This post was modified 3 months ago by jimcox

Posted : June 18, 2026 3:00 pm