Fibonacci Numbers

[Xelebes]

28 197 781 736 352 808 868 066 242 881 892 871 008 227 658 829 511 523 778

 

[Xelebes]

45 624 969 256 769 871 162 687 349 400 430 950 037 353 264 935 332 782 291

 

[Xelebes]

73 822 750 993 122 680 030 753 592 282 323 821 045 580 923 764 844 306 069

 

[Xelebes]

The 270th Fibonacci Number is:

119 447 720 249 892 551 193 440 941 682 754 771 082 934 188 700 177 088 360

 

[Xelebes]

193 270 471 243 015 231 224 194 533 965 078 592 128 515 112 465 021 394 429

 

[Xelebes]

312 718 191 492 907 782 417 635 475 647 833 363 211 449 301 165 198 482 789

 

[Xelebes]

505 988 662 735 923 013 641 830 009 612 911 955 339 964 413 630 219 877 218

 

[Xelebes]

818 706 854 228 830 796 059 465 485 260 745 318 551 413 714 795 418 360 007

 

[Xelebes]

Fibonacci Number No. 275

1 324 695 516 964 753 809 701 295 494 873 657 273 891 378 128 425 638 237 225

 

[nihil0002]

 

[Xelebes]

276




2 143402 371 193 584 605 760 760 980 134 402 592 442 791 843 221 056 597 232

 

[Byron In Exile]

correct...
correct...
incorrect... should be 121393.

Should we start over from here, or keep going with all the carried errors?
Or we could use the next correct Fibonacci...
322 615 043 836 854 783 389 793 818 573 515 000 354 271 239 929

We want authentic numbers, so we don't care about errors, but gaps are not acceptable.

If the missing numbers can be filled in, that's okay.

But if actual Fibonacci numbers have been omitted, then we need to go back.

If large sections are in error, then they need to be replaced with proper numbers. The question will be whether it is easier to reset to an earlier number, or post the missing numbers and then continue.

 

[Byron In Exile]

276

2 143402 371 193 584 605 760 760 980 134 402 592 442 791 843 221 056 597 232

I do not know, nor presently have the tools to determine, whether or not this number is correct.

In the beginning, we could do the math in our heads.

Then, we used calculators.

After that, computers.

Now, it's still fun for math-people, but it takes a bit of time to add two 55-digit numbers, and the possibility of error is great. Then, if an error is made, every post after that absorbs that error.

 

[Byron In Exile]

Oh, hell.

 

[Xelebes]

I like how you have the Oberheim VCOs in your av.

277

3 468 097 888 158 338 415 462 056 475 008 059 866 334 169 971 646 694 834 457

 

[Byron In Exile]

I like how you have the Oberheim VCOs in your av.

277

3 468 097 888 158 338 415 462 056 475 008 059 866 334 169 971 646 694 834 457

Secretly, I own an original Oberheim FVS-1.

The original FVS and eight-voiced versions have a sound that even Oberheim's subsequent products could never duplicate. I asked one of their tech guys, after I'd previewed an OB-8, why the sound didn't match the old modular units, and he said that they'd tried to get it the same, but in analog, apparently the tracings of the wires on the circuit boards affect the sound. They'd followed the same schematic, but the sound wasn't the same.

But the AV is the front panel of a Studio Electronics SE-1X. It is a signal-analog Minimoog-comparable synth, although no keyboard, and the portamento and envelopes are a little different from Moog.

 

[Xelebes]

Yeah, I was only taking a stab. The only synths I've ever owned/played were the Yamaha DX7 (I'm on the hunt for one of these or a lesser locally but they seem to hard to get for some odd reason.), Roland Alpha Juno 2 (gotta play with the hoover in school, hehe!), Korg Poly800 II (destroyed in a flood! ) and now I have the Alesis Ion. I want the MicroKorg for it's simple vocoder - I just haven't had the guts to part my money for it yet.

But honestly, looking at drum machines now for live preformance.

 

[Xelebes]

278th Fibonacci Number:

5611500259351923021222817455142462458776961814867751431689 (58 digits)