The Museum of HP Calculators

HP Forum Archive 17

 feeling old....Message #1 Posted by Les Wright on 29 June 2007, 12:02 p.m. I turned 43 on Wednesday and felt pretty good. Then, in doing som SysRPL programming, I realized that that is 67 in hexadecimal. I don't even want to think about dog years. Or binary. :) Les

 Re: feeling old....Message #2 Posted by Gerson W. Barbosa on 29 June 2007, 12:30 p.m.,in response to message #1 by Les Wright Hello Les, Happy Birthday! - albeit a little late... Quote: I turned 43 on Wednesday and felt pretty good. Then, in doing som SysRPL programming, I realized that that is 67 in hexadecimal. I fear there's a little mistake here, as #67h = 6 * 16 + 7 = #103d, isn't it? Actually, somehow you have converted your age to base 6 :-) Best regards, Gerson. P.S.: Will turn 46 next Jul/22. That's #2Eh, which doesn't make me look any younger... Anyway, I was able to run 2510 meters in 12 minutes this morning :-) Edited: 29 June 2007, 12:35 p.m.

 Re: feeling old....Message #3 Posted by Jeff O. on 29 June 2007, 12:47 p.m.,in response to message #2 by Gerson W. Barbosa At first I thought Les used base-6 also, but, of course he could not be 67 in base-6.

 Re: feeling old....Message #4 Posted by Gerson W. Barbosa on 30 June 2007, 11:27 a.m.,in response to message #3 by Jeff O. Oops! :-)

 Re: feeling old....Message #5 Posted by Paul Brogger on 2 July 2007, 9:44 a.m.,in response to message #3 by Jeff O. Even the first digit in 67 would be improper representing a value in base-six. As we all know, when representing values in any base n, the value n appears as "10". The numeral six ("6") shouldn't appear in any base-six value, just as the numeral eight ("8") doesn't appear in any octal representation, the numeral used for ten ("A"?) doesn't show in any decimal value, and the numeral that might be used for sixteen ("H"?) won't show in any hexadecimal value. [End of pedantic rant/reminder.] I (probably, all too predictably) remind folks at two oft-obsessed-over passages that: ``` 4010 = 2816, and 5010 = 3216 ``` (I'm 55, which I might choose to represent as either 3716, or 678.)

 Re: feeling old....Message #6 Posted by Gerson W. Barbosa on 2 July 2007, 12:24 p.m.,in response to message #5 by Paul Brogger Quote: (I'm 55, which I might choose to represent as either 3716, or 678.) In order to avoid more silly mistakes, I will refrain myself from representing my age in bases others than 10. However, using Mars as a reference makes me look younger (only 24.42 martian years) and lighter (only 64.46 pounds. Mars wouldn't make me any taller than 5' 8" though :-)

 Re: feeling old....Message #7 Posted by Dave Shaffer (Arizona) on 2 July 2007, 5:42 p.m.,in response to message #6 by Gerson W. Barbosa "Mars wouldn't make me any taller than 5' 8" though" Actually, depending on how you measure it, it would! The meter was originally defined so that there were 10,000,000 meters from the equator to the pole (along the meridian through Paris - as opposed to those Brits, who preferred feet and yards and the Greenwich Meridian!). Since Mars is only about 60% as big (in diameter) as the Earth, a similarly-defined Martian meter would be 60% smaller than a terrestrial meter - so you would be 60% taller in Martian meters!!

 Re: feeling old....Message #8 Posted by Dave Shaffer (Arizona) on 2 July 2007, 5:45 p.m.,in response to message #7 by Dave Shaffer (Arizona) Oops - not "60% smaller" but 60% as large!! But, since 1/0.6 = 1.666, you would be more than 60% "taller."

 Re: feeling old....Message #9 Posted by Gerson W. Barbosa on 2 July 2007, 6:15 p.m.,in response to message #8 by Dave Shaffer (Arizona) Good point! Hadn't thought of this. Being 2.88 Martian meters tall looks pretty good to me :-)

 Re: feeling old....Message #10 Posted by Jeff O. on 2 July 2007, 12:37 p.m.,in response to message #5 by Paul Brogger Quote: Even the first digit in 67 would be improper representing a value in base-six. D'oh! So I guess Les is 111 in base-6. (He keeps getting older and older!) Quote: I (probably, all too predictably) remind folks at two oft-obsessed-over passages that: ``` 4010 = 2816, and 5010 = 3216 ``` Conjecture - If humans had 16 fingers instead of only 10, we would we all feel so much younger. (Probably not, actually.)

 Re: feeling old....Message #11 Posted by Egan Ford on 2 July 2007, 1:09 p.m.,in response to message #10 by Jeff O. Quote: Conjecture - If humans had 16 fingers instead of only 10, we would we all feel so much younger. (Probably not, actually.) Two thumbs per hand would make thumbboarding the 71B much faster.

 Re: feeling old....Message #12 Posted by Walter B on 2 July 2007, 1:21 p.m.,in response to message #10 by Jeff O. Quote: Conjecture - If humans had 16 fingers instead of only 10, we would we all feel so much younger. No need to go so far. Remember Mayas in todays Guatemala, Belize and Yucatan had a base-20 system. That would cover every reasonable human age, e.g. me showing up as a real twen -- feeling twice as elastic immediately :-) BTW: 16 in base 16 would be G, if it would exist. End of pedantic correction.

 Re: feeling old....Message #13 Posted by Paul Brogger on 2 July 2007, 6:53 p.m.,in response to message #12 by Walter B Quote: 16 in base 16 would be G Ouch! I'll stuff my pedantic troll back in his cave, and try to keep him there for a while . . .

 Re: feeling old....Message #14 Posted by Palmer O. Hanson, Jr. on 2 July 2007, 8:48 p.m.,in response to message #5 by Paul Brogger You wrote: Quote: Even the first digit in 67 would be improper representing a value in base-six. Way back when, when I was first introduced to this stuff, we wouldn't have restricted the definition of a base six number as you do. We recognized that if the writer said that 67 was a base six number then the number was equal to decimal 43. We might have noted that the writer hadn't managed to perform all of the "carries" that were available. When we used octal or hexadecimal representation as a shorthand for the ones and zeroes we recognized that the representation wouldn't have any digits greater than one less than the base. But, that's not really tied to the definition of base as I remember it.

 Re: feeling old....Message #15 Posted by Gerson W. Barbosa on 2 July 2007, 9:41 p.m.,in response to message #14 by Palmer O. Hanson, Jr. In fact, at least the first digit in 67 is not improper in this base-6 system: Back to the usual definition of base, this Q&D HP-33s program might help me convert decimal numbers (up to 215) to base six correctly: ```LBL N ENTER ENTER 6 INT/ x<>y 6 Rmdr x<>y ENTER ENTER 6 Rmdr x<>y 6 INT/ 100 * x<>y 10 * + + RTN 43 XEQ N -> 111 ``` the writer :-)

 Re: feeling old....Message #16 Posted by Les Wright on 29 June 2007, 12:56 p.m.,in response to message #2 by Gerson W. Barbosa Actually my logic in saying I am 67 is this: 67 = 4*16 + 3 I am using the decimal digits in the hexadecimal system to give the 67 numeral. I know I have the logic backwards, but I thought it was funny. Les

 Re: feeling old....Message #17 Posted by Walter B on 29 June 2007, 12:59 p.m.,in response to message #16 by Les Wright Happy birthday! Quote: I know I have the logic backwards, but I thought it was funny. Oh yes, it was ;) Will become worse with age...

 Re: feeling old....Message #18 Posted by Jeff O. on 29 June 2007, 12:42 p.m.,in response to message #1 by Les Wright Wouldn't you be (only) 2B in hex? I think you flipped your conversion, as if you were 67 in decimal, you'd be only 43 in hex. Quote: I don't even want to think about dog years. When I turned 40, a "friend" gave me a shirt on which appeared a cartoonish drawing of a crumbling dog skelton and the message "In dog years, I'm dead." Not sure what that means, but sometimes I feel that way. At 43 you're still just a (quite alive) pup.

 Re: feeling old....Message #19 Posted by Peter Geiser on 29 June 2007, 12:56 p.m.,in response to message #18 by Jeff O. It is said that each year a dog lives compares to seven human years. So, a 7-year old dog has about the same age as a 56-year old human. With 40 dog years, you'd be around 280, which is not likely achieved. But back to the first post: congratulations Les! Let's be glad that we count in decimal, not hex. I hope you feel rather 43(oct)-ish... Best regardsPeter

 Re: feeling old....Message #20 Posted by Woody Larkin on 29 June 2007, 7:59 p.m.,in response to message #19 by Peter Geiser Hi, A newer approximaton of a dog's age compared to a human's is as follows: Age: 1st 2 years = 25 years; each additional year = 4 human years. A 15 year old dog would be equivalent to a 77 year old person. A 43 year old man would be equivalent to a 4 1/2 year old dog which is still in its prime.

 Babbling Message #21 Posted by Palmer O. Hanson, Jr. on 29 June 2007, 9:26 p.m.,in response to message #1 by Les Wright From the vantage point of decimal 78 this thread looks a lot like what we used to call "the babbling of babes in the woods". But, Happy Birthday anyway.

 Re: feeling old....Message #22 Posted by db (martinez, ca.) on 30 June 2007, 12:45 a.m.,in response to message #1 by Les Wright les; you're only 516 months old? post again when you are old enough to have something interesting to say.

 Re: feeling old....Message #23 Posted by JMBaillard on 30 June 2007, 5:28 p.m.,in response to message #1 by Les Wright ```Happy Birthday Les! In fact, you're only 15708 days old, whereas I am 18328.419 Concerning sysRPL, I take notes but I only know very few things about long reals, for instance Rectangular-Polar at the address #2B498h Polar-Rectangular -------------- #2B4C5h ( on a HP-48 ) Best regards, JMB. ```

Go back to the main exhibit hall