Newsgroups: sci.math,alt.religion.kibology Path: news.cinenet.net!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!News.Toronto.iSTAR.net!news.istar.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!world!kibo From: kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry) Subject: Re: Cult numbers of Escultura Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself) Message-ID: X-Hello-To: Archimedes Plutonium Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 01:07:48 GMT X-Battlestar-Galactica-Date: 4721 centons, 63 microns, .02 rouettes References: <7laf6vtlm7.fsf@torstai.hit.fi> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp0a025.std.com Organization: welcome datacomp X-Newsreader: MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.4 Lines: 229 Xref: news.cinenet.net sci.math:100734 alt.religion.kibology:67098 X-Cache: nntpcache 1.0.6 (see ftp://suburbia.net/pub/nntpcache) In sci.math, Pertti Lounesto wrote: > > Escultura has introduced new numbers, called cult numers. > They have the property that 1 is distinct from 0.999... > although their norm are the same. Oh, come on, normal numbers don't join cults. Norm numbers hang around in church, go bowling, and on weekends they go to the roller-skating rink. (With normal skates, not "inline" skates.) Only weak-willed numbers would join a destructive cult. Unless, of course, the cult were spectacularly awesome and offered A FREE TOASTER TO ALL NEW MEMBERS. > Questions: > > What is the cult number with norm 1, distinct from 1 and above 1? > What are the cult numbers with norm 0, but distinct from 0? > How many real cult numbers there are with norm 0? > How many complex cult numbers there are with norm 0? I believe you're thinking of "Kibo numbers", which were discovered by Thom Grace in late 1993 and are referenced in David DeLaney's big old FAQ: [excerpted from http://electron.rutgers.edu/~bweiner/kibol/kibo-entry.html] > > If you have ever received email from Kibo, your official Kibo number > starts out as 1; if you have not received email from anyone whose Kibo > number is < n, but have received email from someone whose Kibo # is n, > then yours is n+1. Fractional Kibo numbers are imposters (i.e., ted > frank (q.v.)); Kibo's own Kibo number is 0. Posts don't count for Kibo > number purposes, only email. (A few others have had Kibo number zero as > well, earned in various ways; Kibo can also assign a number to you, and > came in 2nd in the "most evil net.personalities" vote, so watch it.) However, Andrew Bulhak proposed a different theory: > You're all weenerbranes! There's only one Kibo number, and that is 0.99, > which is added to prices to make items look cheaper than they in fact are. Which starkly contrasts with John Baez's hypothesis (untested): > Real cyberpunks don't go showing off their kibo number. You see, Kibo Numbers are a vast and fascinating field of study, not unlike combinatorics, topology, or plasma physics, although they ARE unlike Erdos numbers. And, of course, Kevin Bacon is best known for his constant struggle to get one. Other discussion in this fascinating field of mathematics, from my archive of mathematical, scientific, and Battlestar Galactica-related technical papers: > From: kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry) > Subject: Re: Kibo Numbers: A Proposal > Newsgroups: alt.religion.kibology > Organization: A place with really big letters taped to the walls > Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1993 11:59:01 GMT > > Thomas Auer (tom@cosy.sbg.ac.at) wrote: > > > > I really don't like this (Imagine for example that they will start to > > calculate taxes on Kibo numbers - that would ruin my whole life). > > For this reason I would appreciate it if someone with a Kibo number > > below infinity [NO! (infinity-1) doesn't count!] could response to this > > post. > > Don't forget that if you ever wonder what your Kibo number is, then it > goes down to 298... > > > P.S. Is it allowed to put one's Kibo number into the .sig? > > Allowed? Heck, it's MANDATORY! > -- K. > From: kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry) > Subject: Re: Kibo Numbers: a Prophecy > Keywords: Kibo Numbers, Integers, Fractions, Stupid Ideas > Newsgroups: alt.religion.kibology, alt.folklore.computers, alt.folklore.urban > Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1993 12:05:22 GMT > > Thom Grace (grace@iitmax.iit.edu) wrote: > > > > A week ago, some idiot [that would be me] proposed the idea of > > "Kibo Numbers". This idea has been surprisingly well-received; I've > > been contacted by a number of persons, many of whom have penetrating > > insights into the nature (and structure) of Kibo Numbers (or K-Numbers, > > as we'll refer to them). > > > > There is one matter that I think we need to clear up: that of the > > range of possible K-Numbers. Although I posted a few days ago about this, > > let me make it clear: K-Numbers are non-negative integers, with 0 reserved > > for Kibo; 1 is the lowest that the rest of us can achieve. However, many > > have raised the issue of even lower K-Numbers because of "special > > accomplishments" (e.g., running into Kibo in the store, knowing what Kibo > > looks like, getting email from Kibo, knowing where Kibo buys books, etc.). > > Unfortunately, 1 is the lowest we can go! 0.5 is not a valid K-Number! > > Waah! I want 0.5! I want 0.5! > > > The source of this concern is this statement from Kibo: > > "Note that the first 100 applicants receive a bonus of -0.5!" > > See, that means my number works out to be 0, just as you wanted, even > though it's *really* 0.5. > > > Easy: prophesy. Fractional (perhaps even continuum?) Kibo Numbers > > may be found in the future! If you can figure out how to do this, please > > let me know ... I have a number of messages here that you should attend to! > > You should just deal with your mail the way I do: just save it all up > for a week and then print it all out. Makes replying to it much harder > and so saves you lots of trouble. > -- K. Andy Wardley said: > > kibology is the study of fourier transforms and their effect on small > furrier creatures. Hence, kibo numbers indicating the number of > transformations required to do something or other which is really quite > clever indeed. Robert Kulagowski: > > What's my Kibo number if someone _else_ says that Kibo spoke to me in > person? Some fractal value? Something in the domain of Complex numbers? > From: daniel@networx.com (Daniel Schunneman) > Subject: Re: kibo@world.std.com > Newsgroups: alt.wired, alt.religion.kibology > Organization: Networx, Inc > Date: 12 Jan 1994 23:25:26 GMT > > James "Kibo" Parry (kibo@world.std.com) wrote: > > > > In alt.wired, Kurt Lovelace wrote: > > > > > > Hey, Kibo, how do you get a 'Kibo number', and will I have a better day > > > tommorow because of it? > > > > You should ask alt.folklore.urban; it was their idea. Besides, you're > > allowed to have a nice day tomorrow, even if you don't want to! > > > > -- K. > > It's analogous to a Godel number, but much more way cool. > > daniel@networx.com Chuck Turnitsa: > > Considering the unwarranted use that they have recieved, I propose that > all Kibo numbers be recalled immediately for maintenance, reassessment of > their respective assignees. > > Unless of course, you can prove that it is not a real number. same author, different day: > > The answer is, of course you can have a Kibo number, the trick is in finding > somebody to give one to you. For unlike integers and real numbers, of which > there are an infinite amount, there are only. . .well I can't say how many > Kibo numbers there are, but it is a limited amount. Secretly, of course, I > know how many there are, but the amount is a Kibo number itself, and since > it is already in use, I can't use it here. John Baez: > > This gave me a great idea. Erdos numbers and Kibo numbers are not very > useful as it stands because (despite Turnitsa's claim) lots of people > have the same one. What we need is a system more like Goedel numbers > --- recall from your mathematical logic class (the one you slept through > in college) that each formula in mathematics is assigned a *unique* > Goedel number, which allowed Goedel to encode descriptions of formulas > into numbers and make formulas that refer to themselves! So, how to do > this? Here's how: the first person who meet Kibo on, say, April 1st is > assigned Goedel number 1. (Kibo, of course, gets 0.) Kibo has to > inform the fellow of this. It doesn't really matter if it's EXACTLY the > first person (some dogcatcher could be running by and not even NOTICE > Kibo, for example), but what matters crucially is that the person be > INFORMED OF HIS KIBO NUMBER and told to do the same thing to the next > person HE meets, giving that person Kibo number 2, and so on! Before we > know it, everyone in the world will be assigned a unique number, and we > will never need to use names again!!!!!!!! WRITE PRESIDENT CLINTON AND > MAKE IT THE *LAW*!!!! It should also be pointed out that graphing the relationship between your Kibo Number and your Geek Code "K" value should make a Lissajous figure shaped like a capital "K". For details on the Geek Code, see: http://www.geekcode.com/#kibo Bear in mind that the "K" scale of the Geek Code is the only one which goes up to "++++++", whereas all the others top out at or below "+++++". This leads to an elementary proof that Kibo's Geek Code is longer than anyone else's. I hope this is a competent answer to your serious question about cultic and/or Kibological numbers. -- K. And remember, occult is the opposite of cult. Oh, and here's a repost of something from 1994 which isn't really good enough to be worth posting at all, so instead I'm reposting it. > From: faber@swiss.cs.wisc.edu (Ted) > Subject: Re: kibo number > Newsgroups: alt.religion.kibology > Organization: GaTEA, ThreadBusters Cadre > Date: 10 Mar 1994 17:22:42 GMT > > Rose Marie Holt (rmholt@u.washington.edu) writes: > > > > What is a Kibo number? Can I have one? Would it be good for me? > > I think the question you wanted to ask is "What's a Kibo number and where > can I get some?" > > You'll get the hang of it. > > "And here's a repost of something from 1993 which isn't really good > enough to be worth posting at all, so instead I'm reposting it." > -- James 'Kibo' Parry > > -- > Ted Faber Figment at Large faber@cs.wisc.edu > "The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit." -- Maugham