Two people are separately confronted with the list of numbers [2, 5, 9, 25, 69, 73, 82, 96, 100, 126, 150 ] and offered a reward if they independently choose the same number. If the two are mathematicians, it is likely that they will both choose 2—the only even prime. Non-mathematicians are likely to choose 100—a number which seems, to the mathematicians, no more unique than the other two exact squares. Illiterates might agree on 69, because of its peculiar symmetry—as would, for a different reason, those whose interest in numbers is more prurient than mathematical.
I’m a programmer and it seemed like the obvious choice was “2”. It is right there are the start of the list! Was there some indication that the individuals were given different (ie. shuffled) lists? If they were shuffled or, say, provided as a heap of cards with numbers on them it may be slightly more credible “eye of the beholder” scenario.
I’m not very sure, but I think I’d have chosen 73 as the only nontrivial prime. It stands out in the list because as I go over it it’s the only one I wonder about.
I’m a programmer and it seemed like the obvious choice was “2”. It is right there are the start of the list! Was there some indication that the individuals were given different (ie. shuffled) lists? If they were shuffled or, say, provided as a heap of cards with numbers on them it may be slightly more credible “eye of the beholder” scenario.
I would have chosen 2 if playing with a copy of myself, but 100 if playing with a randomly chosen person from my culture I hadn’t met before.
I’d have chosen 73 if I was playing with a copy of myself. Just because all else being equal I’d prefer to mess with the researcher.
I’m not very sure, but I think I’d have chosen 73 as the only nontrivial prime. It stands out in the list because as I go over it it’s the only one I wonder about.
Before reading the last sentence I thought of this.
Wow. My facetiously mastubatory clone and I evidently coordinate well with Asperger’s caricatures as well!