Just for fun

Some would recognise this number - 6255456376

However, does this number strike a chord with anyone …

Whitehall 1212?

Sam

.

I bought a secondhand ‘surveillance’ video recorder a few year back, Sam ... only to find that it was password-protected.

It didn’t take me very long to guess 1212

MichaelG.

The telephone number was for Scotland Yard, wasn't it?

I am not one of the "some", though I have a strange suspicion I have seen that number somewhere!

It looks like a concatenated National Grid Reference to 5 decimal places... but I can't imagine I'd have seen that even if of a particular well-known place. It lacks Grid Letters that place the number-set in the right part of the British Isles, though. Not also Scotland Yard?

.

1. Yes, Scotland Yard ... Hence the slightly tenuous relevance to my ‘security‘ recorder
2. The 7 segment display on your calculator contains a cypher

MichaelG.

1212, Many moons ago, I had installed a new digital telephone exchange which necessitated a change of telephone number for the company. As we were early adopters of the new BT circuits, I chose a number for the main switchboard which ended in 1212. I think it was lost on most of the younger sales staff, but us old une had a chuckle or two.

I guess 49 is another of those time related numbers as in Pc 49

Would that have been 71011945 by any chance Michael ? - Its what the Arabs had given us!

Scotland yard was easy.

Your number is not. Something along the lines of 148257, but not quite, as it has a double digit amongst it?

Campanology perhaps?

.

That rings a bell

... but you’re ‘cold’

I won’t spoil Sam’s fun though.

MichaelG.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 11/07/2020 08:29:12

6255456376? Twitter code?

I'm afraid that if it is not my 'last three' then I have no chance of remembering a number these days!

0.7734

710.0553

710.77345

Nice ones, Neil

... 'though my comment was actually intended as a clue to deciphering Sam's number

MichaelG.

.

Edit: Just realised, I was "barking up the wrong tree" 

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 11/07/2020 10:17:28

Hi Neil, only trouble is, they are not so clear on my scientific calculators, as they have a natural display, but they did work OK on the old LED ones years ago.

Regards Nick

You're all sophisticates. I never got beyond 5318008

pgk

Hi pgk, one track mine eh!

Regards Nick.

Sorry about that, small typo error probably made it a little more difficult. It should have read

710.11345

I reckon Sam is letting Snakes play with Matchsticks 

Edited By V8Eng on 11/07/2020 12:47:04

Well spotted
(In Python it would be reticulated)

pgk

Please excuse the stupidity of my previous edit

I was, of course, barking up exactly the right tree !!

MichaelG.

.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 11/07/2020 13:58:58

Try 710.0553

Hi Derick, my point is that the one I showed, you can instantly see that they are upside down numbers. This one is a cheapy calculator.

It's a bit out of focus, but the five looks more like a S, the three more like an E the four makes a really good h and the seven makes a reasonable L, but many of the early LED calculators didn't have the return on the seven (look on the 7 on Speedy Builder5's one) the old LED's used to eat batteries for breakfast, dinner and tea, so all the digits were basic, which keep the power drain low, also the decimal point took a whole section, which made a better gap between the two words you are expressing.

Regards Nick.

Edited By Nicholas Farr on 11/07/2020 15:36:43