1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Festive numbers quiz

Discussion in 'Entertainment' started by NewToTeachingOldToMaths, Dec 30, 2016.

  1. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

  2. Lara mfl 05

    Lara mfl 05 Star commenter

    Valid point.
    gargs likes this.
  3. Spiritwalkerness

    Spiritwalkerness Star commenter

    Just bumping this up onto the first page
    gargs and Lara mfl 05 like this.
  4. Spiritwalkerness

    Spiritwalkerness Star commenter

    My thumbs are pricking :D
    gargs likes this.
  5. Flere-Imsaho

    Flere-Imsaho Star commenter

  6. NewToTeachingOldToMaths

    NewToTeachingOldToMaths Lead commenter

    Well ... it is STILL New Year's Day (in Hawaii ... )

    So here are some answers:

    (1) 4,014,489,600 is the number of square inches in a square mile

    (2) How many wives did Henry VIII have if you are (a) Roman Catholic, and (b) Anglican?

    Roman Catholic: the answer is 3, REGARDLESS of the view that you take on the canonical question of whether or not the Pope actually had the dispensing power to grant the dispensation to allow him to marry his deceased brother's wife (Catherine of Aragon, Jane Seymour and Anne of Cleeves if you accept that he did; Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour and Anne of Cleeves if you consider that he did not. It is a fine canonical point because the principle in Roman Catholic Canon Law is that the dispensing power belongs to the law maker; so the question boils down to whether the impediment was an impediment of Papal law or Divine law). The basis on which Sir Thomas Moore sought an annulment from the Pope was that the impediment was one of divine law, thus not within the Papal power of dispensation, thus the original dispensation permitting Henry's marriage to Catherine was itself invalid. This was probably a sound argument, were it not for the fact that the Pope was in the pocket of Catherine's uncle ... ). As to the rest, it is a simple matter of not recognizing the validity of any marriage celebrated while a former (valid) spouse is still living, but necessarily accepting the validity of any marriage celebrated while no former (valid) spouse is still living, since it is not necessary to the validity of a marriage under Roman Catholic canon law that it should have been celebrated by a Roman Catholic priest.

    Anglican: the answer can only ever be 4, since the marriages to Catherine of Aragon and Anne of Cleeves were both annulled - that is, declared invalid - leaving just the four valid marriages to Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Katherine Howard, and Catherine Parr.

    (3) How many great great great great grandparents do I have in common with my third cousin?

    My third cousin is somebody with whom I have a pair of great great grandparents in common. (A second cousin is somebody with whom I have a pair of great grandparents in common; and a first cousin is somebody with whom I have a pair of grandparents in common. As a mathematician, I suppose I should extend the sequence to the logical proposition that my noughth cousins are in fact my siblings, my minus first cousins are my children, my minus second cousins are my grandchildren and so on ... but sometimes it is better not to press the mathematical logic too far ... )

    If I have two great great grandparents in common with my third cousin, I must therefore have 4 great great great grandparents in common, and 8 great great great great grandparents.

    So the answer is 8

    (4) 35,840 is the number of ounces in a ton

    (5) You only go round widdershins, and once round is 15,840. What am I referring to, and what are my units?

    Kudos to whoever identified that this was an athletics track. They are 400 metres now, but before metrication they were 440 yards, which is 15,840 inches.

    So the answer is a pre-decimalization athletics track, and inches.

    (6) on 14 February 1971 it was 12, but on 15 February 1971 it was 5, yet it hadn't changed in any way. What was it?

    Full marks to whoever identified that this was a shilling. Well done! That is the correct answer.

    (7) 31,622,400 is the number of seconds in a leap year. Again, full marks to whoever identified that one correctly.

    (8) I have two English coins in my pocket. The face value of one of them is 672 times the face value of the other.

    The smaller coin is a half farthing - the smallest denomination of coin which has ever been issued for use in Britain. (Third farthings and quarter farthings also exist; but they were struck for circulation in Malta and Ceylon, NOT Britain.)

    There were four farthings in a penny, so eight half farthings; and twelve pennies in a shilling so 96 half farthings to a shilling.

    672 / 96 = 7

    So the value of the larger coin is 7 shillings. Was there ever a 7 shilling coin? Yes there was. The value of a guinea settled down at 21 shillings (and again, kudos to the poster who was aware that the values of the various denominations fluctuated in the early days of gold coinage ... ) and coins with a value of one third of a guinea, or 7 shillings, were struck in the reign of George III, between 1801 and 1813.

    (9) How many kings of England have been called Edward?

    There have been eight by number (if they were given a regnal number they were kings ... and if they reigned more than once they were still only one king) ... but regnal numbers are assigned to Kings (and Queens) of England since the conquest .

    England as a political entity existed before the conquest, and there were three Anglo-Saxon kings Edward as well: Edward the Elder, Edward the Martyr, and Edward the Confessor.

    kudos, again, to whoever it was who pointed out that Edward the Elder was King of Wessex, not King of England; but Edward the Martyr and Edward the Confessor both had the title King of England.

    So the answer is 10: two before the Conquest, and eight since

    (10) 5 + 7 = 11 if you are working in Base 11. Full marks to those of you who got it right.

    (Number bases are very useful things, I have started counting my age in hexadecimal. 31 sounds so much less Middle Aged than 49, don't you think? Of course, I've only recently been able to start doing this. A couple of yours ago my age in hexadecimal would have been 2F, and I don't think anyone would have been taken in by that ... )

    Anyway ... I do hope you all enjoyed my little festive quiz ... and well done to those of you who figured out one of more of my cunningly complicated conundra :D
    Lara mfl 05 and dunnocks like this.
  7. NewToTeachingOldToMaths

    NewToTeachingOldToMaths Lead commenter

    I think Spiritwalkerness probably deserves the prize on this one, for giving four clearly correct answers (although one of them was given in the form "[correct answer] or [not quite so correct answer] ... but I'm still in a festive mood, so I'll forgive that.)
    Lara mfl 05 likes this.
  8. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    I query number 3, because it isn't ALWAYS 8, it can be up to 8, because the same person can occupy more than one position for great great great great grandparents in your family tree.
    ( And this can happen more than once)
    bevdex and lilachardy like this.
  9. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    question 9, you are counting Edward V? he was numbered, but never became king?
  10. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    I think Mars was a BRILLIANT answer to number 5!
  11. Spiritwalkerness

    Spiritwalkerness Star commenter

    I just say a big 'Thank you' whilst I'm here.

    Lara mfl 05 likes this.
  12. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    yes, that was great fun! Thank you very much.xx
    Lara mfl 05 likes this.
  13. Didactylos4

    Didactylos4 Star commenter

    Enjoyable enough.
    I think one of the questions (the two coin one) would only be possible to answer correctly by looking the coins up (few are experts on such esoteric coins) and the answer to 3) is a purely mathematical one which does not take account of the sometime messy nature of human relationships and family.
    But it was still fun and I count myself extremely fortunate to have scored 40%.
    Sadly that isn't a pass mark :(
    Lara mfl 05 likes this.
  14. NewToTeachingOldToMaths

    NewToTeachingOldToMaths Lead commenter

    This is true ... but there are terms to identify this situation. For instance, if you share only one rather than both parents with a sibling they are your half sibling; if you share only one rather than both or a pair of grandparents with a cousin then they are your half cousin.

    Going the other way, if you share both sets of grandparents with a cousin (as happens where, say, two brothers marry two sisters and both have children) then they are double first cousins. With second cousins it is possible to have double, treble or quadruple second cousins; with third cousins it can be anything up to octuplet and so on.

    So if you are simply "third cousins" rather than one of the more esoteric descriptions, you share but one pair of great great grandparents. And that will then give you the same four great great great grandparetns and the same eight great great great grandparents.

    And even if there has been an incestuous liaison meaning that the same person is both a parent and a grandparent at any point, there must necessarily still be two parents, four grandparents and eight great grandparents ...
  15. NewToTeachingOldToMaths

    NewToTeachingOldToMaths Lead commenter

    Yes, I am. He was king. He was never crowned, but he was king.

    Edward VIII was never crowned, either.
    bevdex likes this.
  16. NewToTeachingOldToMaths

    NewToTeachingOldToMaths Lead commenter

    It was indeed brilliant ... and kudos for thinking of it.

    Even MORE kudos (and a bonus mark) if by some extraordinary coincidence it also turns out to be right ...
    Lara mfl 05 likes this.
  17. NewToTeachingOldToMaths

    NewToTeachingOldToMaths Lead commenter

    Ahhh ... but that prompted some of the most enjoyable discussions on this thread, did it not??

    And there was no pass or fail in this quiz ... so fear not. 40% is top of the class. Isn't that enough?

    (And for those who fared not so well ... take comfort from the fact that the youngest General in US history graduated bottom of his class at West Point. Just don't spoil it for yourselves by going and looking it up to check on me. Believe me ... it IS true. But you really DON'T want to go looking it up ... )
    Lara mfl 05 likes this.
  18. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    of course it's right!

    (well, roughly!)

    it depends exactly how you define an orbit of Mars, its the same as any other orbit, the thing it is orbiting is also spinning and orbiting, so the EXACT start and end point is difficult to specify
  19. NewToTeachingOldToMaths

    NewToTeachingOldToMaths Lead commenter

    OK ... I'll award you TWO bonus marks ... for tenacity ;)
    dunnocks and Lara mfl 05 like this.
  20. Lara mfl 05

    Lara mfl 05 Star commenter

    Agreed it was fun trying to guess and work out some to which one hoped to be able to deduct the answer.
    @didactylos you still fared a lot better than me.
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2017

Share This Page