The following are the first twenty terms of a sequence: 1, 4, 8, 9, 16, 25, 27, 32, 36, 49, 64, 72, 81, 100, 108, 121, 125, 128, 144, 169, . . . Same idea as the other sequences. Describe the pattern of the sequence. If you use a search engine, please don't submit it in the comments. If it hasn't been solved by Thursday, I'll give a hint. Also, if you ask a polar question (i.e., a yes/no question), I will probably answer it if it relates to this sequence. I'll post the solution on next week's sequence. Last week's sequence (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 3, 7, 4, 6, 5, . . .) was the smallest number, say m, such that n divided m! (m-factorial). E.g., 10 divides 5!=120, but not 4!=24, so a(10)=5. E.g., 16 divides 6!=720, but not 5!=120, so a(16)=6. It was not solved.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
... 196, 200, 216, 225, 243, 256, 288, 289, 324, 343, 361, 392, 400
It is the ordered list of all numbers where there is a repetition of each unique prime factor.
4 = 2*2 (2 is repeated)
72= 2*2*2*3*3 (2 and 3 are repeated)
T
P.S. A Catholic believes that Jesus was clear when he told metaphors, and when he was being literal.
ie. The kingdom of heaven "is like" - as opposed to, this "IS" my body.
Are there any places where Jesus taught something metaphorically, where he doesn't use "like" or something to clearly state that it shouldn't be interpreted literally?
(The Catholic said that transubstantiation has to be true because Jesus was very clear that he wasn't speaking metaphorically whenever he spoke of the elements).
T
Matthew 26:26, "Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, 'Take, eat; this is my body.'"
The parable of the sons and the father (commonly known as the Parable of the Prodigal Son) might be used as well. In Luke 15 there are three parables, verses 4-6, 8-9, and 11-32. For the first parable Luke introduces it saying, "So he told them this parable" (v. 3), but there are three parables there. So in verse 11 (where the third parable starts), Jesus says, "And he said, 'There was a man who had two sons.'" There's no introduction to this parable. Yet, it's obvious that it's a parable.
In Mark 10:30-35 there's the Parable of the Good Samaritan (in the greater context of Mk. 10:25-37). There's no simile language (i.e., "is," "like," or "as") and it's not explicitly called a parable either.
But I would say back to the Catholic, "Jesus said in John 6:35, 'I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.' So how do you get out of hunger? By coming to Jesus. How do you satiate your thirst? By believing in Jesus. Some eating and drinking Jesus by His own metaphor is conversion language."
In John 6:35 Jesus is clear that eating and drinking are metaphorical for conversion.
T, the "I am the bread of life" statement is only one of Jesus's I AM statements in John. Is he actually a vine? Is he actually light? Is he actually a door? I don't think so. Consistency would require Catholics to say yes.
My take on John 6 is that the Jews were not actually offended because of cannibalism (which is what Catholics argue and what some Protestants also concede).
Instead, from vv. 38, 50 and 58 we see that Jesus is making clear claims of being divine (coming down from Heaven), which is actually also what the Jews grumble about in vv. 41-42. The Jews get furious about his claim to be from Heaven, and this is also the focus of Jesus's response when he defends himself in the passage (vv. 44, 46, 57, 62, 65).
Nowhere in the passage is cannibalism actually stated -- it's a nice argument if you believe in transubstantiation, but I don't think it's actually there explicitly even in the minds of the Jews. It makes just as much, if not more sense, if they stop following him because of his claims to divinity (a form of blasphemy).
It also allows Peter's confession to make even more sense. "Jesus, you just claimed to be divine, but even though that sounds crazy, I'm going to believe you, because it seems that you actually do have the words of eternal life."
Post a Comment