666 is the traingular of 36

So a triangular number, such as 666, is one that fits the formula:

(x[sup]2[/sup] + x)
2

This is a trick I learned for computing large sums of consecutive integers: Imagine you want to quickly add the numbers 1 to 100. You figure:

1 + 100 = 101
2 + 99 = 101
3 + 98 = 101

50 + 51 = 101

So there are 50 pairs of integers, each adding up to 101. 50 x 101 = 5,050.

For 36, there will be 18 pairs of integers, each adding up to 37. The formula, (x/2) (x+1), simplifies to
(x[sup]2[/sup] + x)
2

Cool.

The staff report mentioned 6.66 e3 as the floating point beast. Shouldn’t that be 6.66 e2?

Another irony meter bites the dust.

Dear SDStaff Dex, you mention in your article that

I’m sure you realize that fundamentalists are way ahead of you, and have already trained their sights on bar codes ( http://www.av1611.org/666.html ) and their more modern cousin, as embraced by walmart, radio frequency identification (RFID) chips ( http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,70308-0.html ).

And, what deems this triangular? It’s just a sum of a string of numbers! “Triangular” makes it sound like something really special. What if the sum is a four digits number? Is it still deemed a “triangular” number???

  • Jinx :confused:

Triangular numbers

666 = 1[sup]3[/sup] + 2[sup]3[/sup] + 3[sup]3[/sup] + 4[sup]3[/sup] + 5[sup]3[/sup] + 6[sup]3[/sup] + 5[sup]3[/sup] + 4[sup]3[/sup] + 3[sup]3[/sup] + 2[sup]3[/sup] + 1[sup]3[/sup]

666 = 3[sup]6[/sup] – 2[sup]6[/sup] + 1[sup]6[/sup]

666 = 2[sup]2[/sup] + 3[sup]2[/sup] + 5[sup]2[/sup] + 7[sup]2[/sup] + 11[sup]2[/sup] + 13[sup]2[/sup] + 17[sup]2[/sup]

Somehow, I have this vision in my head of the author going to a friend who knew math and saying “I need a cool number for this thing I’m writing, whatcha got?” “Ummm…well, six hundred sixty six is pretty cool.” “Okay, thanks.”

Who am I to argue? :smiley:

In the first place I never heard before that 6 is short of perfection. I heard in fact that it is a holy number because it is a “perfect number” ie it is the sum of its factors, one of only four such numbers known in the ancient world. cite

Secondly, in the ancient world surely it wouldn’t have been “six repeated three times” since Arabic numerals weren’t widely used, wouldn’t it have been written as DCLXVI?

On review I see the DCLXVI issue has been discussed in another thread : http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=365382

That is all very interesting but of doubtful value.

Now what was/is the question?

Why should there be a question? The forum title is Comments on Staff Reports. This is a comment, and it’s on a staff report. Q.E.D.

Welcome to the boards. :slight_smile:

Although your maths is accurate, I think you’ve missed the Biblical point.
You’ve had to stretch to associate 666 with Solomon.
The **true link ** is with another Biblical person:

And Joshua, the son of Nun, called the priests and said unto them “Take up the Ark of the Covenant, and let seven priests bear seven trumpets of ram’s horns before the Ark of the Lord.”

Note the reference to horns - clearly meaning the Devil.
Note how the Devil is put before the **holiest object in Christendom ** (The Ark of the Covenant)
Clearly Joshua was a Devil-worshipper, and it was the Devil that destroyed the walls of Jericho and tempted Joshua to slaughter every man, woman, child and animal in the city.

The proof (link with 666):

Joshua is the 6th book of the Bible. The above is Joshua 6 verse 6.

my error, GQ, mea culpa! :smack:

That is amusing, but it should be noted that chapters were not imposed on the original texts. The earliest record of chapter divisions in the New Testament date to the early 13th century (and were not standardized among copies for another couple of centuries) and verses were not numbered until the publication of a parallel Greek and Latin study volume in 1551. The Tanakh/Old Testament was divided into “meaningful passages” (called parashoth) sometime before the first century, but the imposition of the chapters that we recognize, today, did not occur until they were inserted into versions of the Latin Vulgate, (also around the thirteenth century) from which they were inserted into Hebrew and Greek copies to permit ease of study.

So, even if we imagine that God inspired the author of Revelation to make a reference to Joshua, we then have to assume that God did not want anyone to know about the reference for over 1100 years.

I should also note that the ram’s horns (or “shofar”) were specifically NOT symbolic of the devil, but were horns blown to announce special or especially holy occassions.

Oh, well, if you’re gonna use logic and common sense and refer to history, what good is that when we’re talking serious mysticism?

This trick brought to you by Gödel.

As I expect you know, I’m an atheist. :eek:
But if I were to believe in this stuff, I certainly would have no problem with God doing the above.
After all, he faked the fossil record and planted misleading astronomical evidence just to test our belief in Creationism…