On 8/16/20 2:14 PM, Calvin wrote:
Calvin is apparently not paying attention to the newsgroup, so I decided
to rescore the quiz myself. In the process, I discovered that Bruce
Bowler had been missed in the original scoring. Here's the original scoring:
>
> Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 TOTAL TB Quiz 608
> 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 53 Stephen Perry
> 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 9 51 Aren Ess
> 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 8 45 Mark Brader
> 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 8 46 Dan Blum
> 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 7 38 Dan Tilque
> 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 6 36 Pete Gayde
> 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 5 30 Erland S
> - - - - - - - - - - --- ----------
> 5 6 7 5 5 6 7 5 5 2 53 76%
My rescore is:
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 TOT TB Quiz 608
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 9 48 Dan Tilque
1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 8 51 Bruce Bowler
1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 8 51 Stephen Perry
1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 7 43 Mark Brader
1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 7 45 Aren Ess
1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 7 48 Dan Blum
0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 5 36 Pete Gayde
0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 23 Erland S
- - - - - - - - - - --- ----------
6 7 8 6 2 7 8 6 1 3 54
So Congratulations, umm... Me!
Barring, of course, any other corrections. Hope the formatting looks OK
to everyone. Since my news software line wraps before it posts, I had to
reformat with spaces instead of tabs. I'm sorry of this doesn't display
very well in your reader.
Now about the palindromic dates. Being in a nerdy mood, I decided to
find all such dates in the 909 year period in question. Along the way, I
realized that all palindromic dates of mm/dd/yyyy format were also
palindromic in the yyyy/mm/dd format. This is a peculiarity of having
4-digit years. The same relationship does not apply to other length
years. Anyway, here's my list. It's possible I missed some.
dd/mm/yyyy mm/dd/yyyy
11-NOV-1111 11/11/1111 11/11/1111
11-FEB-1120 02/11/1120
12-NOV-1121 12/11/1121
11-DEC-1121 12/11/1121
22-NOV-1122 22/11/1122
03-NOV-1130 03/11/1130
23-NOV-1132 23/11/1132
24-NOV-1142 24/11/1142
25-NOV-1152 25/11/1152
26-NOV-1162 26/11/1162
27-NOV-1172 27/11/1172
28-NOV-1182 28/11/1182
29-NOV-1192 29/11/1192
21-OCT-1201 10/21/1201
21-NOV-1211 11/21/1211
21-DEC-1221 12/21/1221
31-OCT-1301 10/31/1301
31-JAN-1310 01/31/1310
31-DEC-1321 12/31/1321
31-MAR-1330 03/31/1330
10-FEB-2001 10/02/2001
02-OCT-2001 10/02/2001
20-FEB-2002 20/02/2002
02-JAN-2010 01/02/2010
01-FEB-2010 01/02/2010
11-FEB-2011 11/02/2011
02-NOV-2011 11/02/2011
21-FEB-2012 21/02/2012
02-FEB-2020 02/02/2020 02/02/2020
The previous date palindromic in both formats is
01-JAN-1010 01/01/1010 01/01/1010
The next one will be
12-DEC-2121 12/12/2121 12/12/2121
The one after that will be
10-OCT-10101 10/10/10101 10/10/10101
However, as I said, the equivalence between M-D-Y and Y-M-D breaks down
for 5-digit years. So that date is not palindromic in yyyyy/mm/dd
format. Instead, this date is palindromic in that format:
01-JAN-10101 = 10101/01/01
--
Dan Tilque