Talk:Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

1

The external link provides a truly conclusive & definitive answer to the question of Adam's intent. It's the kind of answer many undergraduates wish they had when their professor waxes long about the deep symbolic meaning demonstrated by the subtext inscribed in the whatchamacallit of the novel they had to read for today's class -- yet no one was able to finish. (And is usually something written by Homer, Dante, Shakespeare, Milton, Joyce, or Derrida.) -- llywrch 04:37 Mar 28, 2003 (UTC), who has suffered thru too many instances of this.

Meh. I understand your concern, but people don't write anything in a vaccuum. Thus: semiotics. Semiotics in this context amounts to: "We know what you wrote, now sit down and let us tell you what you meant." I forget who said that. Sigma-6

An ultimate Answer

The entire world terminates at the street address #42, Club Beta, owned by Stavros Mueller. Everything, and I do mean everything, comes to a complete, utter, crushing, and total halt at #42. I've reinserted the idea of the Question being "so, where does it all end?" because the number 42 quite beautifully wraps up the entire series and all possible interpretations of the Question with that one.

The ultimate Question.

It turns out that Marvin the Paranoid Android knew the ultimate question all along. Unfortunately just as he's about to spill the beans, something blows up (it's been a while since I've read the books) and he doesn't get a chance to put Zaphod / Arthur and all the readers out of their misery.

Later, Marvin is talking to a mattress called Zem (They're all called Zem). In order to prove how much more intelligent he is than the mattress, he asks the following...

Marvin: "Think of a number"

Zem: "Er - five"

Marvin: "Wrong".

Which to me implies that the Ultimate Question is "Think of a number" and the Ultimate Answer is "42".

Regards,

Myles Kelvin

You might be on to something there, since it coincides perfectly with what Douglas Adams have said about this subject. He just thought about a number. - Jugalator 01:25, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Further evidence for this point of view is given by the fact that one of Marvin's favorite complaints when he's given a menial task is "brain the size of a planet". This corresponds nicely with the Earth (a planet, if you can imagine) being the computer to figure out the Ultimate Question. R Harris, Sep 15, 2004

Ah yes, but when I read the books, when coming across Marvin's statement that he has a 'brain the size of a planet', I assumed that he meant if his electronic brain could be converted in terms of intelligence to an organic one, it would have to be the size of a planet. The Earth was a computer, with an electronic brain, the size of a planet: so to convert it into an organic brain it would probably be an imcomprehensible size. So the link between Marvin's statement and the Earth falls down. I'm not very good at arguing and explaining things am I. --195.92.67.69 3 July 2005 19:14 (UTC)

According to this (1.5 meg png) Marvin poster (which appears to be directly taken from the animations of the book from TV series, so seems somewhat canon), his brain probably physically is the size of a planet, linked to his body from hyperspace. Random interjection. Splarka 4 July 2005 08:24 (UTC)

Thanks for linking that PNG file :) The poster is NOT from the TV series, but it IS by one of the animators who did the "Guide Animations" FOR the TV series, namely Kevin Davies. It was done for Marvin's fan club (The Marvin Depreciation Society) in 1981, and the bit about his brain being linked to a planet in hyperspace WAS (if I remember Neil Gaiman's Don't Panic correctly) accepted by Douglas to be part of Hitchhiker's canon! --JohnDBuell | Talk 02:50, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

An on-board computer(I think it's Eddie,on the heart of gold) says something similar to Zaphod(or Arthur). Computer: "pick a number" and Zaphod gives it the phone number of some dance/party club or singer. Klixovann 16 November 2005 07:36 (UTC)

---

At the end of the third book, I believe, Arthur encounters a man who can only tell truth. He asks him if he knows the answer to life, the universe and everything. The man says he does. He continues to say that if the question is ever discovered that the universe would be instantly destroyed and replaced with something even more illogical. (Maybe it already has.) At any rate, is is completely impossible for a valid question to the answer to exist in this plane of existence. (I'm paraphrasing here, I don't have the book, I've only heard this from the new BBC radio 4 show.) --James 16:46, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

Metasyntactic variable

I know what the article's trying to say, I think, but 42 can't be the name of a variable in any language I'm aware of. Not sure how to reword it, though. Marnanel 21:07, Apr 2, 2004 (UTC)

The number 42 isn't used as a metasyntactic variable. It's used in a manner similar to a metasyntactic variable. Consider this JavaScript example: "var foo = 42;". Here 42 has no purpose other than to provide a meaningless initial value to the variable "foo".

R Harris, Sep 15, 2004

It's used as a metasynctactic constant, of course. Shreevatsa 15:56, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

---

Letters

Note the CAPITAL letters

Answer to LIFE, the UNIVERSE, and EVERYTHING

LIFE=4 letters

UNIVERSE=8 letters

EVERYTHING=10 letters

LIFE*UNIVERSE+EVERYTHING=42=4*8+10

4 times 8 is 32

32 plus 10 is 42 right??

• And your point is? If this is an actual theory about the meaning behind 42, let me point out that you could have made just about any number you wanted that way. rspeer 18:17, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Spoiler Mistake

I just thought it would be a good idea to point out that the "Spoilers End Here" thing is wrong because the number "42" is mentioned after it as the Ultimate Answer. I can't come up with a way to fix it, because it would mean getting rid of the quote that's better left there.

Other interpretations

Tautology

Isn't this just a tautology? The ultimate question is (by definition) the last question, and when the last question is answered then there aren't any more questions or answers. Right?

For tea, two

Wasn't there something about a pun on fourty - two (for tea two) - tea for two? Adams was a tea fan, tea for two was a suitable attitude to take to the universe? Not sure about this.2toise 10:41, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Check the external link on this article to see Douglas Adams saying that it was not. - Jugalator 01:25, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

it's worth noting, however, that in his dedication for the original H2G2 book he thanks two people 'for tea, sympathy, and a sofa'. Note how he thanks them 'for tea' and then for two other things.

Base 13

This is kind of interesting. 6 x 9 IS 42, in base 13. User:droth6

The article mentions that (and cites Adams saying it's not the reason). Marnanel 15:12, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

6 x 9 in base 13 IS NOT "forty-two", it's "FOUR-TWO". The same way it's not "twenty-A" in hexadecimal, it's "two-A". So this "base 13" theory is way off. [Dan] 17:38, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

And why is it "fifty-four" instead of "five-four" in base 10, then? Just because that base happens to equal the number of appendixes at the end of our hands? — JIP | Talk 13:20, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Actually yes. I remember Adams being quoted saying something in the bases of "one does NOT make jokes in base 13" anyways, so this is way off. --Lacrymology 03:41, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

this is "fifty-four" in base 10, because 10 is "ten", and "-ty" means "base 10) (At my opinion). Nimportnawak 16:16 GMT+1 11 December 2005

Base 13 and deck of cards

In Adams' conscious thought it was just a number plucked out of the air. But who knows the way of the subconscious? He knew he had to come up with an answer to the question so may have subconsciously thought about it for quite a while. The connection between 42 and a deck of 54 cards (which I've posted in the Wikipedia) is just too strong to dismiss.

Many a person has had a profound conscious thought that has seemed to spring from no-where. Every creative person has been asked where their ideas come from - and all say many ideas just pop into their head. Many people looking for a solution for a problem have "slept on it". Many scientists see an answer but then have to figure out how.

I believe it's quite acceptable that even Adams thought it was just a number but in reality his sub-conscious was providing him the "desk of cards" answer to the meaning of life. (As a sometime writer myself, I do find that I get story ideas "out of no where", that clearly have come from some subconscious thought process. It's quite freaky and exhilarating when it happens)

So, for example, put yourself in Adams' shoes...

I am writing a story, and it will reveal the meaning of life. Should I use some old cliches like "Life is what you make it" or "Life is like a deck of cards" etc etc?

(Now the idea of the deck of cards has been planted in his subconscious)

No, no, too bland. Want something quirky. How about a number? Hmmm...

(Subconscious thinks cards... 54... 4 suits plus 2 jokers... 4.. 2... 42)

I know... 42!

(Subconscious then throws in the 6x9 reference just for good measure)

So, in the greatest of ironies, Adams, who thinks he's outsmarting us, is outsmarted by his subconscious.

--ChrisOz 01:53, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

As I recall, the story of 42 was that Adams and John Lloyd sat down and for about three days considered a whole load of numbers to try and figure out which was the funniest possible number to use, and they eventually decided it was 42. He didn't pluck it out of thin air, although at this point in time he was practically writing the radio series week-to-week with no plan. He knew he was going to reveal what the Answer was, and that it was going to be a number, and so (in keeping with his writing style, where although he was writing week-to-week he wrote and then re-wrote and re-wrote and re-wrote every episode to make it absolutely as funny as possible) he sat down with John Lloyd to make sure that not only was the concept funny, but the number itself would be as funny as possible. It wasn't something he just suddenly thought of one day.

(By the way, my information comes from the BBC documentary about DNA and the Hitchhiker's story that was produced shortly after he died.) Hig Hertenfleurst 17:58, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Actually that's only Griff Rhys Jones getting it wrong. Adams himself said in an interview that 42 was a funny two-digit number that had come up for one of John Cleese's Video Arts training films, so Adams re-used it. From the versions I've read, Lloyd had NOTHING to do with picking out '42'. --JohnDBuell | Talk 17:51, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Number of letters

If you count the letters of "The Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything." including the punctuation you'll come to the number "42".

This however, is just coinsidence (or something to that sense). —kooo 19:29, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

or, as the previous section says, it could be the most funny number due to this

I have also seen people say that the scrabble board he uses is 13x13 (not a normal board) can anyone confirm this?

--155.246.74.11 16:28, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

err forgot to log --HTL2001 (Talk|Contrib) 16:29, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think anyone counts letters, skipping punctuation, to determine whether something is funny. rspeer 16:40, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Cricket

There are 42 laws of Cricket. Given the relation of that sport to later matter in the book, and the way that it arises, this seems an awful coincidence. Given his apparent distaste for the game, this may have been an injoke, but there is also the distinct possibility that Douglas Adams was unaware of this also.

"But that's not cricket!" *cough* Sorry. There DOES exist a radio interview, available on CD, where Adams FINALLY admitted that his influence was John Cleese, who'd tried to work out a 'funny number' for one of his Video Arts training films in the 1970s. Adams admits he didn't remember if 42 WAS the number Cleese arrived at, but thought that was it, and included it. What most people miss by fixating ON 42 is the more subtle joke that the ENTIRE Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything, can, according to Deep Thought at least, be boiled down to ONE two-digit positive even number. --JohnDBuell 02:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC) (Funny how I'm echoing myself, a couple of sections down, almost exactly four months later).

C++ code?

I removed the C++ version of the programmer's joke, because it essentially doesn't add anything to the joke, and wasn't explained as being a C++ version of the joke; it was simply pasted in after the C code. Someone unfamiliar with C/C++ might not be able to tell that the two aren't actually just one big program, thus further confusing them when they attempt to decipher the code.

Furthermore, while I'm not too fond of C++, there's nothing very C++-ish about the version added here. Sure, it uses iostream for output, but I/O is not the joke here: SIX * NINE is. In order to have the same effect, the C++ code essentially is using its C underpinings -- in other words, minus the cout bit, this code is really just C. A C++ programmer would have prefered a const declaration.

Also, C++ was never mentioned. Like I said before, there is no way for a non-programmer to know that this was C++. We could add a little heading, but given the above, is it really worth it?

As a disclaimer, I added the C code bit back in Feb '02, under a different IP.

"const int foo = 5 + 1;" would just result in a const int with a value 6, and it would indeed be logical instead of textual. It doesnt really matter though, only one language is necessary, but would C++ be more readable? 'cout << "What you get if you multiply six by nine:" << SIX * NINE << endl;' might be more readable than the printf-syntax. --kooo 22:53, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)

RalphB 2005-04-08 09:50 CET:

The C code is a good joke, but could someone please add a page number & edition to the "C Programming Language" reference, because I can't find this code in either my 1st or 2nd editions. Thanks.

I think the statement is a bit ambiguous. "The following code in the C programming language" could mean either literally writtien in the book series itself, or just writtien using the language. I believe the author means the language. Perhaps a rephrasing to "The following code, written in C," or "The following code (in the C programming language)". Also, I think there should be a mention (but not an addition to the actual code) that a more accurate version of "Deep Thought" could be made by adding a sleep(236520000000000); to the code. Splarka 01:18, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I Use TURBOC 2 is OK. :P 67.15.34.248 07:49, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Hebrew Numerology

According to Hebrew Numerology, 6 is the number of man [and woman] and 7 is the number of God. Realizing that the word 'of' often refers to multiplication, one could argue that "men of God" is an alias for 6 X 7, or 42. Therefore, if you want to be spiritual about it, the answer to life, the universe, and everything is for every man and woman to find a relationship with God.

As I'm sure the Jugalator will be quick to point out, though, this goes against Adams's own definitive answer.

And seeing as how Adams was a "radical athiest," in his own words...

I like that answer better then dna's though. :-) --James 16:49, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

"Pick a number, any number."

I figure the only thing thought of so far that can possably work is "pick a number, any number" in the form of a question. If any of the others were correct, the universe would cease to exist. I fugured out a way to explain this. If there are an infinate amount of numbers and an infinate amount of universes, every universe can be assigned to one and only one number, and vise versa. Using this system, by picking a number, any number, you would end up with a specific universe. By this system, forty-two ends up with this universe. Daniel 23:04, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

42nd prime

What does the external link to a prime number have to do with Hitchhikers? Granted, it's the 42, but it's irrelevant. I'm not going to remove it yet, as there might be some purpose to it, but what? 68.32.134.140 01:10, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Lies, all lies.

Douglas Adams himself provided the answer [1] himself at one time.

Someone should integrate this into the main article.

I removed it. No relevance. If I am mistaken, well... you know what to do. —kooo 18:14, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

What is the answer to the question of life, the universe and everything?

Mabey the question of life, the universe and everything is "what is the answer to the question of life, the universe and everything?" Another way of saying that is "what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'what is the answer to 'are you still reading this?''''''''''''" Daniel 21:54, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

About the "Oh, yes, I could have told you that" section

I'm not familiar with Adams' works at all, but the "Oh, yes, I could have told you that" section that was created [[2]] by anon user 152.163.100.11 sounds bizarre to me. Could someone with knowledge on "The Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything" have a look at it? If the information contained in that section is indeed correct, I think it would be a good idea to change its heading in order to make it more explicit and comply with the Wikipedia guidelines. Thank you. --Audrey 00:08, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• As far as i remember the books, it's not a direct quote but a paraphrase of something that appears now and then in the novels. In any case, it's not really appropriate material for an enbcyclopedia article (Wikipedia is not a collection of in-jokes), so I removed the section for now. -- Ferkelparade π 10:19, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What is relevant, and what is not

I think too many things have made it onto this page. E.g., a recent addition stating that Jesus was the 42nd generation is perhaps an interesting piece of trivia, and might go onto the page 42 (number). But what is it doing here? Does anyone seriously see it as a possible reason why Douglas Adams chose the number 42?--Niels Ø 18:50, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

• I just purged most of them. All the stupid theories, numerology, puns that don't even work, and "OMG 42 is in this book too!" items made a mockery of Wikipedia's standards. RSpeer 04:11, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I agree about the standards bit, but sometimes I get tired of deleting the stupid crap that people keep adding on a daily basis. If you want, you could watch fuck and nigger as well, since they also seem to be magnets for everybody's two cents. --Yath 09:11, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Spoilers?

Does anyone else find it amusing that the the answer to the basic question is shining from the image right next to the spoiler warning? 62.245.66.40 01:25, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) me

Another Possibility

This opinion, shared by many I have discussed the books with, is, I believe, valid. Rspeer jumped the gun to revert it, as if it were vandalism, but the fact that it is "original research" is not at all a credible argument.

Here goes:

A final possibility reveals itself near the very end of the last book in the series, Mostly Harmless, as Ford Prefect asks:

"Concierge? You want to own the hotel? It's yours if you can find out for me in five minutes which clubs Tricia McMillan belongs to. Just charge the whole thing to this room."

There is then one final reference to the number 42.

"Just there, number forty-two," shouted Ford Prefect to the taxi-driver. "Right here!" The taxi lurched to a halt, and Ford and Arthur jumped out.

It is possible, therefore, that the ultimate question to Life the Universe and Everything is:

What is the address of the night club which Tricia McMillan belongs to?

This is the only occurrence in all five books where the number 42 is mentioned without qualification, that is, without making reference to the fact that 42 is the answer to the Ultimate Question. This had led some fans to regard the question that logically follows, "What is the address of the night club which Tricia McMillan belongs to?", as the true Ultimate Question.

It is possible that this instance of the number 42 was meant to be a randomly-selected address number, an oversight on the part of Douglas Adams, and therefore a coincidence. Furthermore, skeptics charge that such a question is meaningless or nonsensical, and that readers may be guilty of over-scrutinizing the text.

Supporters of the claim respond that a nonsensical question is hock to the tune of Douglas Adams' literary style, but otherwise contend that such an obscure question may be meaningful when considering the fact that the question "What is the address of the night club which Tricia McMillan belongs to?" is inextricable from the work. Adams may have wanted a question which is only meaningful in the context of the characters, of all five books, and of the entire history of the planet Earth from its orgins on the factory floor of Magrathea.

• Those who are watching and maintaining this page have decided long ago that there is not room for everyone's personal theory of what the question is, why 42 is the answer, or everyone's favorite sighting of 42. The list used to go on for pages. This is a Wiki phenomenon called "two-centage", in which everyone pitches in their two cents, and the only fair way to deal with it is to remove it every time. This has no relation to how valid your theory might be, though I would definitely agree with the "skeptics" in saying that you are way overanalyzing the text. Douglas Adams was a humorist, not a qabbalist. RSpeer 05:32, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

More nonsense being added

First of all, this page is not for random facts about the number 42; it's for writing about a certain gag/plot element in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Maybe you think you're funny or clever with your observations about 42, but this article is about Douglas freaking Adams. He is funny and clever, and any attempt at humor that you try to make on his behalf ends up looking sad.

Now for specific things that have been repeatedly added to the article that don't go there:

Since when is 101010 a "computer error"? What kind of computer outputs 101010 on an error, and where does this output go? Even if we were collecting random facts about the number 42 here, this would just be a completely made-up fact.

Why should it say "Assuming this is indeed correct..." under the C code? It's not correct. There's an explanation why it's not correct. The only reason the C code should stay in the article at all is that it's mentioned enough in the fan culture for HHGTTG.

The thing about letters and spaces is pure numerology. Whenever you're looking for a kind of "coincidence" like that, ask yourself: Is there any way for this to not be true? I assume you counted letters in other phrases first, didn't get 42, and then kept fudging what to count and what not to count until you got 42.

By counting the letters in "[what is] [the] [answer to] life, the universe, and everything", choosing whether to include the phrases at the beginning, and whether to count commas and spaces, you could get any of these numbers: 28 32 34 35 38 42 44 46 48 53 55

Is it at all surprising that 42 is in there somewhere, in the very contrived case where you leave out the commas, include the spaces, and begin the phrase with "answer to"? No. You've stumbled across why people believe numerology - it takes very little effort to make numeric "coincidences" happen.

Can we revert this now?

RSpeer 14:51, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Reverted. I'm not too sure it stays that way for long. —kooo 18:07, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, I also fixed the "Assuming [...]"-sentence a bit too. I hope it's better. —kooo 18:18, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

I have nothing to add. I just want to give props to RSpeer props for the finest rant I've seen in a long time. (Hey, there's four letters in "four" and three letters in "two". 4 minus 3 is 1, and if you subtract 1 from 43, you get 42!) -- Coneslayer 19:23, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)

Spoiler

The 42 needs to be moved down below the spoiler warning.

Quote from which book?

Please check if this edit is correct or not, currently it is reverted by me, I'm not too sure if it correctly so. Thanks. — kooo 04:04, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

In my copy of the "More than Complete" collection of the first 4 books (ISBN 0-681-40322-5), the opening to book 2 "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe" starts with some dedications and thanks, and then that quote (Previous to chapter 1 or any prologue). Someone might want to check one of the individual books however. Splarka 05:17, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's now "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe" in the article. If that's false information, press that button... ;-) —kooo 17:52, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Do we need the "Miscellany" section at all?

The "Miscellany" section just encourages random two-centage. Of the four facts left in it, one (Doug's actual reason for choosing 42) was mentioned in a more accurate form earlier in the article, and the rest aren't particularly interesting. Why don't we just remove the section? (I do think the comment is useful, and should remain to discourage two-centage on the page in general.)

Some day, the "Story lines" section will need to be reorganized, too. It's rambling and has an extremely vague title.

RSpeer June 30, 2005 22:40 (UTC)

I vote: no — trash it. —kooo July 1, 2005 14:03 (UTC)

—Second this. Consider for example the after-effects of the slashdotting of a popular article about number theory where a fairly technically defined number is conjectured to be 42. —WLior 23:51, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

The answer is Increase

Hello,

I would like to state a comment that the answer to it all is increase. I found this answer by looking up the number 42 in the I Ching, a Chinese oracle system. It makes sense: everybody wants increase. If you believe in religion, you have e.g. God and Satan who each want to increase their domains and gather as many followers as possible. If you are an atheist, you would agree that everybody wants to increase their income, their happiness, etc. In addition, life strives to let everybody increase, or stated in more common language, grow - as in grow up, become better, improve oneself, etc. (M. Scott Peck, "The Road Less Travelled.") The Universe corresponds to increase too, as it expands.

Best regards,

Vidar Jensen,

[email protected]

No, it's not. The real reason behind "42" reads in the article, please read it there. —kooo 14:58, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Lewis Carroll section

Like all writers of surreal fiction, Adams has some indebtedness to Lewis Carroll. It may or may not be a coincidence that 42 was Lewis Carroll's favorite number - see 42 (number).

Does this comment really add anything? All the rest of the theories are gone, isn't this just another theory? Loggie 14:56, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

I'd say yank it. I could make a point about 42 popping up in things like Rocky and Bullwinkle, which would be even more rediculous. The only proven Carroll connection is Geoffrey Perkins convincing Adams to use "Fit" instead of "Episode", coming from "The Hunting of the Snark." --JohnDBuell | Talk 17:56, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

The answer is quite simply...

Now, assume a = 1, b =2 [a = 1st letter, b = 2nd letter of the alphabet] and so on.
Hence forth,
f = 6
e = 5
m = 13
a = 1
l = 12
e = 5

Now if we add up these numbers we get this sentence: 6 + 5 + 13 + 1 +12 + 5 = 42
and so, The Meaning of Life is equal to the sum of female(s).

TheSeer 00:14, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

• Get help. RSpeer 04:48, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Now that wasn't very nice at all Rspeer, was it? --Konstantin 22:36, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

• I guess not. But what kind of response does this merit? RSpeer 23:38, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

Ah... so THAT must be the REAL "DaVinci Code"

---

Using that same logic, if you take "Meaning of Life" and this formula M+e-a+n-i+n-g+o-f+L-i+f-e = 42 or 13+5-1+14-9+14-7+15-6+12-9+6-5 = 42

-Shane Reeves

---

Google Calculator

Google knows the answer: see here http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=answer+to+life+the+universe+and+everything

Similarly, just insert "answer to life the universe and everything" without quotes into Google and hit search. Maybe we should include a reference to that as part of the pop-culture aspect of the answer?

This is already noted in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy cultural references. --JohnDBuell | Talk 14:35, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Dice Theory?

Actually that's not a bad one. I'm wondering though, if I should rip the part from the 1998 interview in the H2G2 collector's CD set from the BBC where DNA says that the idea was inspired in part by John Cleese using 42 as a funny answer in a Video Arts film, convert it to .ogg and claim fair use? :P --JohnDBuell | Talk 12:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I removed it from the article, it conflicts with what Adams has said. It was already removed earlier if I remember correctly. —kooo 15:33, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

The scrabble joke

As I recall it, Arthur draws random letters from a sack and it turns out to spell "what do you get if you multiply six times nine". Then there are just no more letters, there is no indication that this was indeed the complete question.

Which is part of the whole point. Ford, Arthur and the Golgafrinchans (Golgafrinchams?) arriving on Earth, killing off the cavemen (probably with some disease for which the cavemen had no immunity, though this is never said) and replacing them screwed up the whole dang program. --JohnDBuell | Talk 22:38, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

About the scrabble joke, one thing that is not mentioned is the lack of the letter Q, which is definitely included, as references are made to its existence in "Exquisite on a triple word score." Perhaps I am the only person who has noticed this, but I cannot really see any reference to this here, and it deserves to be mentioned. --The1exile 21:33, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

"Exquisite on a triple word score?" I don't see the relevance to Q in this joke, and what's your point of reference for that quotation? --JohnDBuell 00:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

The only mention of "Q" I know of is that it was thrown into a bush, killing a rabbit which polluted the water and poisoned a girl who Ford rather liked. IainP (talk) 13:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Let me explain. "Exquisite on a triple word score" proves the existence of the letter Q in the scrabble set. If the letter Q is thrown into a bush, kills a rabbit pollutes the water etc. then this is definitely not the entire question; see the first comment in this section. --The1exile 19:15, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it was ever implied that Arthur was pulling out ALL of the letters from a scrabble set to generate the question - where is 'Z' then? In the TV series, Arthur only uses those letters that had not already been used in his game with the "caveman." --JohnDBuell 19:29, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

It is implied; in the book after the question has been spelled out ("what do you get if you multiply six times nine") Ford asks what comes what other letters are there, and Arthur replies that there aren't any more. Thus, this implies that Arthur has actually pulled out all the letters to generate the question. And also, I have not seen the TV series, I was not born then! --The1exile 17:32, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

My point still stands, 'Z' was never used (and what about the blank tiles, if we're going to get pedantic? :) I think we're reading a bit too much into the joke here, and I don't think it needs to be brought up in the article. - The TV series is readily available on VHS or DVD, many libraries have copies. --JohnDBuell 17:37, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes your point still stands, and it is exactly the same point as I was trying to make with Q. Don't add it into the article; I brought it up to prove the person who first added this section right, that this is not the full question. And I think I will just stick with the books for now, they are easier to find. --The1exile 17:54, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

THAT is precisely the point - it's not the full, correct question, nor was it meant to be. It's an error, a misleading one, and above all, another joke. This is pointed out, with other interpretations in the article. :) --JohnDBuell 18:01, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

42 should be in the the intro

I think "42" should be mentioned in the intro, as it is a very important p[art of this article. It can't really be considered a spoiler since it is so commonly known. Also, there is a big picture showing 42 anyway. --Apoc2400 07:29, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

But that graphic was moved DOWN to its present position, precisely because it was/is a spoiler for some folks. --JohnDBuell | Talk 11:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

since I can't get this verified elsewhere, does anyone know if the scrabble board used is 13x13? I heard that somewhere but it would be nice to know if its true or not (reference to the base13 thing) --HTL2001 (Talk|Contrib) 17:21, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

It's hard to tell in the TV version, partially because the board is rounded on its edges (made to look like it was carved in a tree stump), and partly because the actors' heads obscure it, but it looks like 15x15 to me (which is the size of a standard Scrabble board). --JohnDBuell 04:14, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Some thoughts on 42

I was brought up with the radio series of the hitch hikers, and the subsequent TV series, and I always was amused by the whole concept of 42. It was some years later while I was ironically travelling around, that I reached into my backpack and took out my copy of the I-Ching. This book contains 64 items of wisdom which inferior man uses for divination, whereas the wise take it for exactly what it is, a book of wisdom. So this book has a limited number of answers, but an infinite (or what may appear as infinite from our finite position in the space time continuum) number of questions. Thus when one understands the 'cosmic' forces that brings us to ask questions; our lives, socialisation, opinions, and of course position in space and time. In one of Adams' later books containing a character 'Dirk Gently' who does in fact refer to the I-Ching, so the book was known to Adams. If one looks in the book the number 42 corresponds to the hexagram 'increase' which has the measning thus,

'Wind and thunder: the image of Increase. Thus the superior man: If he sees good, he imitates it; If he has faults, he rids himself of them.'

It may well be that Adams knew of this connection, he may not have. As I ponder the number 42 and the base 13 'joke' I cannot help of thinking of qabbalah wherein 13 has deep significance, its double 26 also being deeply significant. Personally I like to consider the number 42 in base 16, certainly a base from beyond our stellar system. Surely this hexidecimal number by the decimal has a deep significance to people who know and as The Book says 'Can those who know be compared to those who know not?'

--Nehustan 00:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

error

a mistake was made on the page. In later books earth was not actualy distroyed. on the page it said that we might know the real question had earth not been distroyed.

Was it? I thought "so long and thanks for all the fish" and "Mostly harmless" were about the alternate universe in which differant things happen such as: What if Trillian did not go with Zaphod? What if the world Had Not blown up? etc.

The "Earth" that Arthur returns to in the fourth book is much like the original, only his house had been restored as well. It's revealed that the Dolphins led a "Save the Humans" campaign and got that Earth put back. Arthur meets Fenchurch there, but in Mostly Harmless they never make it back, Arthur just finds himself on a series of parallel Earths, including one called "NowWhat." --JohnDBuell 18:36, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Goedel

The fact that the answer and the question can't coexist is a riff on Goedel's theorem.

Had a search and Wikipedia prefers the name/spelling "Kurt Gödel", but if you think it's relevant... add it in somewhere! :) IainP (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

That's probably the only semi-relevant suggestion I've seen made on this page in a while ;) --JohnDBuell 01:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Eek! obIrrelevant - it's cold this morning. Should we make the page "bluer" to reflect this? ;) Actually, I was just wondering if the Gödel reference was something DNA had ever brought up, or if the whole "Answer" thing is just a coincidental example of his theorem. But I'm sad like that. IainP (talk) 08:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Monty Python

Apparently, Douglas Adams' first Monty Python appearance was on episode 42 of Monty Python's Flying Circus. Maybe that has something to do with something... Klixovann 17:05, 20 December 2005

Yep, it was a complete coincidence. The story about Cleese giving Adams the idea for '42' as the funniest two-digit number would have happened after that episode was recorded as well. --JohnDBuell 23:50, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe Cleese wrote a sketch (possibly as a training video for bank clerks) where he had to pick a "funny" number as some part of it. He decided that 42 was the most humourous sounding number that fit with the scenario and used that. IainP (talk) 08:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

There are also numerous references to the number 42 in a BBC radio comedy called The Burkiss Way, which was written in part by Andrew Marshall (the model for Marvin, according to Gaiman's Don't Panic!). Adams also wrote a few sketches for the show. However, The Burkiss Way aired around the same time as the original Hitchhiker's radio series, so it may be a tribute, not a possible source.

Knowing Marshall (thought not personally, but judging from what I've read about his sense of humor), and hearing the clips included on Douglas Adams at the BBC it was more likely a parody than a tribute or homage. --JohnDBuell 00:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Binary Thoughts

If you consider that computers think in binary, and that grouping the binary bits in groups of 4 is the basis of hexadecimal, one can truly understand the significance of "42". You have 4 fingers on each hand (not counting your thumbs), so each hand of fingers is a hexadecimal digit. Now looking at your two hands, manipulate your fingers to form "42hex". It is clear to me, from this excersise, that the computer was highly annoyed by the question, and was flipping the mice off.

Frank Cosentino Bothell, Washington

That utterly and totally misses the point of the joke. The first aspect is that the entirety of life, the universe, and everything could be reduced to a number. The second aspect is that it could be reduced to a humorous sounding two-digit even number. Any other 'analysis' reads FAR too much into the joke. --JohnDBuell 02:15, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Not just shark-infested custard

"What's yellow and dangerous?" (a commonplace riddle whose answer, not given by Adams, is "shark-infested custard").

This could also be a canary with a machine gun, an exploding banana or yellow fever. Me lkjhgfdsa 21:43, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

What about Vogon Constructor Ships (or is that too obvious to be [intrinsically funny]? They're yellow, and I wouldn't like to fight one, unless I had a Heart of Gold, a Starship Bistromath or perhaps the defense missiles on Magrathea. 88.109.219.14 22:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

ASCII

Perhaps it should also be pointed out somewhere in the article that 42 in the ASCII table is an asterisk, or splat (*), which anybody with a little technical knowledge will be able to tell you essentialy means "everything". Yes, it's probably a coincidence, but a fitting one at that. Cparker 20:33, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Please let's not add it. --Yath 02:49, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Bad article title.

I propose that this page be moved to The (Ultimate?) Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe and Everything.

I'm damned sick of people referring to 42 as The Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything, which it isn't. Or worse, referring to 42 as The Meaning of Life.

Edit - Okie dokey, that page redirects to here. I still think that's a bad idea, personally.

88.105.122.117 01:27, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but in the context of Douglas Adams's Hitchhiker's series, which this page serves as a part of (a guide to The Guide, yes, another one), the title that Adams chose should be the title that the article observes. There's every indication right from the introduction that this article deals with an aspect of a science-fiction series, and not "actual" philosophy, or a "real" Answer. --JohnDBuell 04:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm almost certain that when it's referred to most often by Adams by it's full title, TATUQLUE, and rarely referred to as TALUE. How can it be the Answer to Life, the Universe and Everything, unless Life, the Universe and Everything suggests a question?

Edit - Uh... the article even begins:

----

'The Answer to The Ultimate Question Of Life, the Universe and Everything is a concept taken from Douglas Adams' science fiction series The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. In the story, the Ultimate Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything is sought using the supercomputer Deep Thought.

----

So.. I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, heh. 88.105.122.117 04:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Using an introduction with a longer phrase or some other variant of the article title is neither new nor uncommon on Wikipedia. Adams's own article starts with his full name: Douglas Noël Adams. "The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe and Everything," as a phrase, is first spoken in the fourth episode of the radio series. Later in the same episode it's mentioned as "The Ultimate Answer to Life, the Universe and Everything." Given the inconsistency, I think an abbreviated title suits the purpose, and would further fit in under such things as the WP:MOS. --JohnDBuell 04:35, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

There's only one thing for it. I propose a duel. Either that, or you could count the references in the books and shows and the winner takes all... all of the title... yes. If it's worth anything though, I agree with the first guy/gal. MrD 09:13, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Untitled section

The reality is that Douglas Adams came up with the whole concept as a parody of travel guides. Surely he is a witty and intelligent author, but his point is simple and is not summed up by 42. The message from God is the heart of his tale - "Sorry for the inconvenience". The universe does seem to present some order to it - but that order has been written and rewritten so many times so that we can make sense of the universe for ouselves.

For example - Scientific classifications of animals, our limited understanding of the periodic table of the elements (and it's missing components), our constant and ever evolving notions about light, physics and other related sciences.

My point - there isno grand answer. At least not one that we can understand on this plane. We are meant to question, not to answer. "Sorry for the inconvenience" is the only thing 'god' could ever say to us. The fact is that there is no rhyme or reason to our existence, and it is this notion that Adams so cleverly delivers in what I would argue is one of the most amazing literary achievments of ours, or any time.

Jack — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.83.155.89 (talk) 19:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)