digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

The answer to life, the universe and everything IS actually 42

news.com.au — Our galaxy weighs three times 10 to the power of 42kg - a number written as 3 followed by 42 zeroes, which has echoes of author Douglas Adams's fictional answer to the question of life, the universe and everything in his series Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • zeldalord, on 10/11/2007, -16/+68hahaha - Douglas Adams was smarter than he made out.
    that is sooooo cooool
    • Akaji, on 10/11/2007, -6/+44Or, you know, just happened to have a lucky guess. Or perhaps not so lucky - I mean, how many millions of measurements can we make? It's not at all unlikely that at least one of them could be 'related' (forcibly, through human construction) to the number 42.
      • Hayaemsay, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17It's not the mass of the universe, just the galaxy.

      • resplence, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13Way to over-analyze it.
      • miriclaire, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Adams actually was astounded that the number 42 had such significance AFTER THE FACT by those interested in such number contriving. All coincidence, he said.Still, fun.
    • Tsen, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13@Akaji:
      Heaven forbid we find something amusing in an absolutely meaningless way.
    • Jookly, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Highly improbable!
    • TheNuminous, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0How did Adams make out? I've always thought he was very intelligent.
      • miriclaire, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3He died of a heart attack six years ago at age 49. Very sad.
    • kungfujedis, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1So, somehow 3000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 = 42? And its the wieght of just one galaxy. And its in Kg, which is an arbitrary choice. I'm a big fan of Adams, but this is dumb
    • vornan19, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Aye, he was a hoopy frood indeed.
  • peterkillion, on 10/11/2007, -7/+70that is bizzare - in a vogon sort of way.... it was the apes that completed the equation yes?
    • bluemansteele, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2no it was the mice, but the apes where part of the experiment and knew a bit about the answer in the second phase of the deep thought calculator known as "Earth". Arthur Dent was part of the last bit of the experiment before the Earth was blown up so he had the answer ...or, actually, because the answer was already known as 42 ... the question subliminally on his brain.
      • aquadoctorbob, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5When you say subliminal, you mean really subliminal -- the mice wanted to cut up his brain to get the question out. It was Fenchurch who had the ultimate question on the tip of her tongue but lost it just when the Earth was demolished.

        Oh man, now I want to go back and listen to the series again.
        • hfactor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3You mean "read the book".
        • Tsen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10It was a radio series before it was a book. There've been so many versions of it...several radio transcripts, TV, books, movie. Though as Douglas Adams said, the books set the record straight once and for all. Or at least firmly crooked.
        • gavintlgold, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Ahh.. but in the later books monkeys play scrabble and somehow spell out the question to the answer, right?
    • Hoov, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4I'd digg you up peter but you're at +42. So I made a useless comment instead.
  • iching, on 10/11/2007, -31/+154Too bad he's not alive

    he would have gotten the biggest kick out of this.

    Now if I could just find my towel.
  • ThinkBox, on 10/11/2007, -20/+6w h a t i s s i x t i me s s e v e n
  • Jazzillion, on 10/11/2007, -13/+143Buried as inaccurate: The universe, life, and everything is not the milky way galaxy. In fact, it is not even 1/42nd of everything.
    • gangstawhiteboy, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3lets bury you as "not being able to read an entire article"!
    • Cyr1dian, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1And then there's this paragraph:
      "To do so, the group first estimated the "escape velocity" of the galaxy - the speed stars passing near the sun needed to attain in order to escape its gravitational pull."

      That's ambiguous at best, utter ***** at worst. What they probably mean is the escape velocity to get out of the milky way, but then they seemingly started to confuse our galaxy with our solar system.
      • xister, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yeah, I was a little confused when the author of the article stated this:

        "While it's possible to estimate the mass of the entire universe, accurately measuring galaxies, particularly distant ones, is another matter."
        I was under the impression the author meant it was easier.
        How is it easier to measure the mass of the entire universe, but the galaxies and systems that comprise it are harder?
    • Katana314, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Not to mention, if you take any number from 1 to 100, chances are you can find some quirky, unique fact about it.
      • awhiteflame, on 10/11/2007, -0/+161 is the only number exactly between 60 and 62.
    • burgerpocket, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2oh, shut up and enjoy the joke.
  • toolsdrummer, on 10/11/2007, -4/+35very cool. however, it's the weight of our -galaxy- they're talking about. not the entire universe.

    still dugg.
    /ducks
    • MISDIREK7ED, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Why would you want to end ducks? What did they ever do to you?
  • freakk123, on 10/11/2007, -1/+31Somehow I'm not surprised.
    And yeah, I know it's only our galaxy, but have a sense of humor.
    • kcpwnsgman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8well, there was always something fundamentally wrong with the universe
  • fuzzmeister, on 10/22/2007, -7/+105http://www.google.com/search?q=the+answer+to+life+the+universe+and+everything
    • I_am_so_smrt, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2Crap! I hit the dig down button for this. Add +1 Digg.

      There, now I feel better ;)
      • jivemasta, on 10/13/2007, -1/+7Actually it would be +2, one for the -1 you added accidentally, and one for the one you intended to add. Learn math.
    • MattS, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Thank you, Fuzzmeister!! I never knew about the Google Calculator doing that!! Nice add..
  • AlphaSoulja, on 10/11/2007, -0/+39Why does it say weight and not mass?
    • artap99, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Because that is what the author wrote before he published the article.
    • bioskope, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4Because the galaxy is also subject to the gravitational pull of the rest of the Universe, hence its mentioned as weight!
      • mousy, on 11/11/2007, -0/+8Weight is measured in Newtons (since it is a force) whereas mass is measured in kilograms like the value quoted in the article.
    • alok0, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2maybe cause the the article is fake and has so little scientific background that they do not know the difference between weight and mass.
  • datagod, on 10/25/2007, -9/+11Are they taking into account the vast quantities of dark matter and other gargantuan massive bodies such as Richard Dawkins ego?
  • FadieZ, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18dugg for Douglas Adams being right all along and pretending not to know
  • AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -3/+15I dugg it but I don't have time to talk, there are a bunch of monkeys who need to speak to me about a copy of Hamlet.
    • tdtmmttdt, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1only funny/relevant comment here and you people won't digg, lame
  • zubi, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17digg buttons arent toys.
  • benlong, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4earth is flat.
  • Owned1Up, on 10/11/2007, -7/+24Strait from an interview with him when asked on the origin, see wikipedia:

    "The answer to this is very simple. It was a joke. It had to be a number, an ordinary, smallish number, and I chose that one. Binary representations, base thirteen, Tibetan monks are all complete nonsense. I sat at my desk, stared into the garden and thought '42 will do.' I typed it out. End of story. "

    Stop trying to make it into reality by saying...oh well if you divide the earths weight by 65.4 and take the remainder times a monkey it equals 42. Idiots.
    • hardcle, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I don't care. He knew the answer on a subconscious level. The same way Arthur knew the question.
    • aquadoctorbob, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Hahaha. +Digg for multiplying stuff by monkeys. Bistromathics has nothing on that.
    • xister, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3But... but... If you take the number of letters in Arthur's name and multiply by the number of letters in "Douglas" it comes out to 42!!! Don'cha see? This number stuff HAS to be true!

      /another wacky theory
    • sourcemonkey, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Yes, it's sad. But it's also sad calling people idiots when you use 'strait' instead of 'straight'.
    • PulsarZero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Oh, just enjoy the joke while it lasts.

  • tobikow, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2The philosophers arent going to go on strike now, are they?
  • ruddy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1u mean its not 23??
  • psiDevil98, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5hmm.... I wonder what ELSE he was right about?
    • SunbearOZ, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4The Vogons?
      • TradaPIB, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8The theory which states if anybody figures out what the universe is here for, it will be instantly replaced with something more bizarre and complex? Or the other theory which states this has already happened?
      • TradaPIB, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Double post.
    • hiPpymIck, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1..he wrote/presented this documentary (Hyperland) in the 90s about what to do once data is digitized ..
      cos there are loads of different possibilities for accessing it - using computers to do the donkey work
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOsPKjbMvxY
  • I_am_so_smrt, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2But this answer doesn't fit the question. Can someone please discover the ultimate question!
  • Mikeropology, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3my house number is 42!
  • EradicateIV, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Mass? Weight?
    Difference? Naaaaaa!
    • cl0n3x, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Weight=How much you weigh on Earth
      Mass=How much you actually weigh
      You=Artard
      • benmandude, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Close but no cigar.
        Mass= How much matter something has in it
        Weight= mass x gravity
        • jivemasta, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Close but no cigar. Mass = How much matter is in something. Weight = mass * (gravity + y-axis acceleration)

          Your weight can change even on earth, If you are free falling, you weigh 0, if you are landing your acceleration would be negative relative to the direction of gravity, therefore you would weigh more.

  • fullphaser, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Wrong, the answer is 47 after corrections for inflation.
  • senatebuddy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0lame.
  • kermithefrog, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1LOST discusses this in depth
    • CrazyForSW, on 10/11/2007, -5/+14, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42, 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42, 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42, 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42, 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42, 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42 . . .
  • georgetds, on 11/08/2007, -0/+23I am not worried until the dolphins disappear.
    • trickinit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0And we better keep our eyes on the mice...
  • otaking, on 10/11/2007, -2/+23
  • Usernamesarefun, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Awww, fuzzmeister beat me to it...
  • MaybellineSP, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0But what was the question?
  • TradaPIB, on 10/11/2007, -0/+642. Every time I haps upon this number in my day to day activities (school, net, checking the time) I am reminded of the great trilogy D.A. wrote. The number seems to pop up frequently (or maybe I am just aware of it blah blah) :)
    • jonshipman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Dumbledore's Army?
      • applesjgtl, on 12/04/2007, -0/+0OK, now I'm confused. I thought we were talking about 42 X (monkeys) squared?
  • afruff23, on 10/16/2007, -10/+7OMG! 9/11 Adds up to 20. 42 - 20 = 22

    22x3=66/11=6x111=666

    The universe and 9/11 is the DEVIL!
    • miriclaire, on 10/21/2007, -0/+2Good one...that is just about what numerologists do....one article on 666 said bill gates's name added up to it somehow...yet, they forgot to take into consideration is name is william.
  • dichotom, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I, for one, welcome our numerical overlord.

    sigh... *floods ballasts*
  • cvrti5, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Weight is relative to a gravitational field. Perhaps you meant "mass".
  • cl0n3x, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2I thought it was 23?
  • moonguidex, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4It's only the galaxy, but it can be so much more if you think about it, the relationship between numbers and us is what makes us so special, and the fact that a single number can have so much significance when the actual number is just an idea brought up by humanity as a way of quantifying is staggering. These are the things that make me glad to be living in these times, when we are just opening our eyes to this stuff, we are very lucky. Anyway, sorry for the long comment but I'm having a great day and I hope everyone else is too!!!... even if you dig me down, hehehe...Cheers!!!
  • mparker7410, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"Unlike the "ordinary matter" of stars and planets, scientists have only hunches about the nature of the invisible material that, along with "dark energy", they estimate makes up 96 per cent of the universe.

    What is it? How is it distributed across the universe? Does it really even exist? "

    WTF! Who else is tired of hearing about Dark Matter and Dark Energy? We don't know exactley what makes up 96% of the universe so something is just made up to explain it? Reading that last line is just unbelievable to me.
  • Asianwaste, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1So based on this rationale, since our galaxy happens to weight a power of 42, the whole universe finds definition from this? I guess since the Milky Way is the center of the universe.
    • rsky, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The Universe is infinitely large, so yes it is the center of the Universe. So is Earth and the Sun.
    • johnnyboyc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That's arguable.
  • jivemasta, on 10/11/2007, -14/+1I hate this stupid 42 *****. It's not even from a good book. There is no answer to everything, and it certainly isn't a stupid number like 42. What about numbers that actually mean something on a consistent basis, like pi, phi, 1, 0, e, they mean more than stupid 42.
    • eddywolf, on 10/11/2007, -7/+0I agree, buried for being dumb
      • sabach, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Perhaps someday both of your wretched selves will grow a sense of humor.
    • xister, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Yes, and while we're at it, I'd like to take a minute and bitch about how I hate the number 82. Wow does it suck! Stupid 82...
  • thailand1972, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Without the obesity problem in the west, the answer would have been to the power of 41
  • tybris, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2So after years of searching someone finally finds a very rough estimation of something fairly irrelevant to the universe which sort of has the number 42 in it and then incorrectly associates it with a story of which the author has repeatedly told that the number was just the first thing that came to mind. Douglas Adams must have been genius.
    • royall64, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Douglas Adams must have been genius."

      We don't need you to tell us that.
  • Iccanui, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Hmm.

    Weight is caused by gravitational force. I wonder if once you reach the boundries of the expanding universe, if there is a force outside of it that exherts itself on the universe. My guess is no and that weight is only reletive to our own existence here on earth and that the universe weighs nothing actually. Infact you cant even say that if you condensed it and brought it here and weighed it that this is how much, cause if you condensed it we would be inside.

    Perhaps a example of how science can lead you down a illogical path ?
    • xister, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Dude- Seriously, you lead yourself down that illogical path.
  • zanvann, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I weigh 160 pounds.
    The meaning of my life is 160 pounds? =[
    • d3lta, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4No, the meaning of your life would be;

      160/2.2 = 72.7272 kg = 7.2 x 10 ^ 1

      So the meaning of your life would be 1!

      Wa-hey singularity!
    • Mendeley, on 04/28/2008, -1/+0lol ur fat
  • P5ycHo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Prove it.
  • MurrayHill, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Dude, You do realize that our galaxy doesn't include "Life, Universe & Everything" right?
    (but i guess,it's kinda nice too)
  • modpancake, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Too bad this is only the Milky Way galaxy. There's a ***** lot more out there. Like, 200 trillion other galaxies...
  • DeathnLife, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Why has nobody questioned the use of kg?
    Why has kilograms been used here? To make the number ^42? Why not single grams, that seems more logical, even tonnes would seem more logical, a smaller number is easier to deal with, right? If grams were used, the weight would be 3 x 10^45 , which doesn't look like the number everyone wants to see. Neither does 3 x 10^39.

    This is a load of coincidental crap.
  • gann, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Although not accurate (and actually quite lame for some), these jokes about 42 are mostly harmless.
  • rmeddy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1I thought it was 23?
  • flightgamer, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Now that I think about it........The number "7" is very significant in the Bible.
    7 X 7 =49 Then subtract 7 and BOOM = 42 !!!!!
    I have chills. ;)
  • Arwin101, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0I always knew the universe just didn't make sense.

    :)
  • ommadawn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Yes and the metric kilogram is in any way absolute.

    Hey, we could adjust the basic mass unit for a kilogram to equal 42 :)
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 92 of 92 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.