I had not read this before, but told many students the same about my PIN code and I a quiz about the last digits. Love it.
225 karma · joined February 10, 2019
I had not read this before, but told many students the same about my PIN code and I a quiz about the last digits. Love it.
This made me smile and I agree.
This stands out to me, and speaks perhaps broader than the article itself? I’m sure this has been in the spotlight before, but well put for many areas I think.
"The paradox is that this bot glut could eventually push most human interaction offline again; news (real news, that is) will be shared by talking, jobs will be found through connections, and friends will discover major life updates about one another at events and reunions. This is the best case. Another option is that we will have bot-free zones online."
"As more components of our lives become automated, we may want to give some extra thought to which of our routine human interactions are ok to reduce to a bot, and which are worth doing the old-fashioned way, with our own voices, hands, and eyes."
Title: Distribution of the Number of Steps to Kaprekar's Constant
We are trying Kaprekar's routine.
I choose a four-digit number with at least two different digits: 2345. We find the largest possible variant 5432 and the smallest possible variant 2345 from the digits and begin the routine...
5432 - 2345 = 3087 8730 - 0378 = 8352 8532 - 2358 = 6174
We have arrived at Kaprekar's constant: 6174 after 3 steps.
This is fine. If I now do this on all possible four-digit numbers, the number of steps required before 6174 is reached is distributed as follows:
The diagram showing the distribution of steps: https://earth.hoyd.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/kaprekars_...
This distribution seems a bit strange and not entirely intuitive. I immediately feel that the distribution should have been more evenly distributed.
Perhaps not evenly, but I think that one step to 6174 should be rarer than seven steps, shouldn't it? It has to do with the calculation i guess. There are a limited number of combinations where the result is 6174 on the first attempt. It feels a bit obvious and matches the diagram above. It slowly rises towards seven steps, is that to be expected?
What I find most strange is that three steps tops all others. Why is that? Why is there such a large presence of three? What does it mean? I would very much like to find an explanation for this.
https://www.esero.no/prosjekter/cansat/ https://vimeo.com/866239028
It reminded me of the childrens book "Did Jesus Ever See a Penguin?"
Premiere Pro -> Davinci Resolve
InDesign -> Affinity Publisher
Illustrator -> Inkscape
Photoshop -> Gimp
I work at Andøya Space where perhaps most of the space research on Aurora had been done by sending scientific rockets into space for the last 60 yrs.