Several people emailed me that September 16, 2025---written as 9-16-25 in the US---represents the integer side lengths of a right triangle.
9-16-25 is the only such triple that is also a valid date. This kind of mathematical alignment only happens once every 100 years. The next occurrence will be September 16, 2125.
Since this is such a rare event, let's explore some more math-themed dates.
1) Pythagorean Triples That Work as Future Dates
Note that 9-16-25 is not a Pythagorean triple; however, 3-4-5 is.
Here are some future dates that are both Pythagorean triples and valid calendar dates:
March 4, 2105 is 3-4-5
May 12, 2113 is 5-12-13
June 8, 2110 is 6-8-10
July 24, 2125 is 7-24-25 (Darn---July 24, 2025 was recent and I missed it!)
August 15, 2117 is 8-15-17
I think that's it. Recall that we need the month to be in \(\{1,\ldots,12\}\) and the day to be in \(\{1,\ldots,31\}\) with some exceptions:
Thirty days has September, April, June, and November
All the rest have thirty-one,
Excepting February, fun!
And that has twenty-eight days clear
And twenty-nine in a Leap Year
There are 24 versions of this poem at a website which is here.
2) Why Didn't Anyone Email Me About Earlier Dates?
I wonder why nobody emailed me on, say, March 4, 2005 (3-4-5). That's a Pythagorean triple, but maybe it just looked like three consecutive numbers. Oh well.
And what about May 12, 2013 (5-12-13)? That's a really cool Pythagorean triple. Oh well.
3) Other Math-Related Dates Using Month, Day, and Year.
So dates like Pi Day don't count---we want the full date to be interesting mathematically. Side note---I looked up how Pi Day is referred to and its Pi Day, not \(\pi\) day. Probably because not all typesetting systems can easily produce \(\pi\).
Every year divisible by 4 is a leap year.
That is the end of my post. A bonus for my readers: a mini meta post. Long time reader and fellow SUNY Stony brook math major David Marcus (he was class of 1979, I was class of 1980) has been proofreading some of my posts before I post them. Lance suggested I used chatty instead. Instead of using chatty instead, I used chatty and then used David. David still found mistakes. I give an example here by pointing to all three versions:
Given the typical number of mistakes, I'm surprised to hear that there is any proofreading at all...
ReplyDeleteThanks for the heads up. AFTER David M proofread it I made some changes----more than usual after my final proofread---whi ch indroduced errors. So the errors not being found are NOT chatty's fault and NOT David's fault.
DeleteUpon reading your comment I ran it through ChatGPT and found some errors, that I corrected. I am curious if there are any left- I suspect yes but I am curious- and I am also curious if Chatty caught the errors you found. So please read and leave a comment with the errors you found.