Why do numbers on a phone go down while the numbers on a calculator go up?
485767
To basically distinguish between a phone pad and a calculator pad. :)
624572
Your question does not make sense, but the multiplication sign and the addition sign are not always interchangable. Life is not fair, life is  B!TC#
174192
Because it's 1089 everytime you add the difference and the difference in reverse from a 3 digit number minus it's reverse.  Simple.
1052848
For numbers greater than one, the square root of the number is less than the original number. (e.g. square root of 9 is 3.)\nBut for numbers between zero and one, it is the other way around. \n\nThink of it this way. When you square a number larger than one, e.g. 3*3 = 9, the result is bigger. When you square a number between zero and one, e.g. 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4, the result is smaller. \n\nTaking the square root is like undoing the squaring operation. So when you take the square root of a number larger than one, the result is smaller than the original number. (e.g. square root of 9 is 3). And when you take the square root of a number between zero and one, the result is bigger than the original number. (e.g. square root of 1/4 is 1/2.)
65826
one sided only has the upper limit and anything below/lower limit and anything above\n\n2 sided gives both the upper and lower range for the value to fall in between
1033912
It's actually pretty easy.  When you take a number, jumble around it's digits and then subract the new number from the old, you are always going to get a difference divisible by 9.  Since 9 divides the sum of the digits of all numbers divisible by 9, then nine divides the sum of the digits of the difference.  When you give all but one of the digits (and knowing that the last one is not 0), the computer just takes the sum of the digits you gave it, and subtracts it from a multiple of 9 (so that the remainder is between 1 and 9).  The number that you picked will always be the remainder.
152443
It may mean the computer is trying to divide by 0
989383
Great question!  I saw the answer to this several years ago, but I can't remember what the answer was.  I'm putting this on my watch list, because I'm curious, too.\n\nEdit:  Okay, I think I found it.  This excerpt is from "Why do clocks run clockwise) written in 1987.  I read this book a long time ago and I have it on my coffee table.  I knew I wasn't going crazy.\n\nA theory we have often heard is that the phone company intentionally reversed the calculator configuration so that people who were already fast at operating calculators would slow down enough to allow the signals of the phone to register. It's a neat theory, but it isn't true. Even today, fast punchers can render a touch-tone phone worthless. \n\nBoth the touch-tone key pad and the all-transistor calculator were made available to the general public in the early 1960s. Calculators were arranged from the beginning so that the lowest digits were on bottom. Telephone keypads put the 1-2-3 on the top row. Both configurations descended directly from earlier prototypes. \n\nBefore 1964, calculators were either mechanical or electronic devices with heavy tubes. The key pads on the first calculators actually resembled old cash registers, with the left row of keys numbering 9 on top down to 0 on the bottom. The next row to the right had 90 on top and 10 on the bottom, the next row to the right had 900 on top, 100 on the bottom, and so on. All of the early calculators were ten rows high, and most were nine rows wide. From the beginning, hand-held calculators placed 7-8-9 on the top row, from left to right. \n\nBefore the touch-tone phone, of course, rotary dials were the rule. There is no doubt that the touch-tone key pad was designed to mimic the rotary dial with the "1" on top and the 7-8-9 on the bottom. According to Bob Ford, of AT&T's Bell Laboratories, a second reason was that some phone-company research concluded that this configuration helped eliminate dialing errors. Ford related the story, which may or may not be apocryphal, that when AT&T contemplated the design of their key pad, they called several calculator companies, hoping they would share the research that led them to the opposite configuration. Much to their chargin, AT&T discovered that the calculator companies had conducted no research at all. From our contacts with Sharp and Texas Instruments, two pioneers in the calculator field, it seems that this story could easily be true. \n\nIt has also been suggested that if the lower numbers were on the bottom, the alphabet would then start on the bottom and be in reverse alphabetical order, a confusing setup. This might have entered AT&T's thinking, particularly in the "old days" when phone numbers contained only five digits, along with two exchange letters. \n\nFeldman, David (1987),Why do clocks run clockwise?, New York: Harper & Row.
874650
Well first if one number is negative & the other is positive, then no matter what the positive number is bigger.  If you have a 2 and a 588 obviously 588 is going to be bigger.  If you are talking about a higher level then if it has absolute value signs ( I45I)  Then you totally ignore the negative signs and just look at the digits inside.  If you want to compare two negative numbers the higher the digits the smaller the actual number. \nFor example:\n-7>-10  because if you are down 10 dollars, you are down more money than if you are down 7 dollars.  If you had 10 dollars to both sides then it will still be true.\n-7 + 10>-10 +  10\nyour new equation would read\n3>0\nSo no matter what as long as you add or subtract the same thing to both sides the problem will stay true.
944997
you divide or multiply by a negative numberand the sign of inequality flips
289570
Absolutely.  I find that the numbers 0-9 are extremely common in my life.  In fact, almost all the numbers I encounter are 0-9 or larger numbers made up with 0-9 as the digits.  That's so totally wierd, isn't it?  It's like I'm psychic or something.
999326
If you start with a number bigger than one, then the square root will always be smaller than the number, but bigger than 1.  So every time you take the square root, the number gets smaller, but never gets smaller than one.  Eventually it's so close to one that the calculator just displays it as 1.
1133787
Wow, I'm getting old, I can actually remember this one, as I was a kid back in the 1970s when touch-tone keypads came out for telephones in widespread use.  (yes, they were invented earlier, but note the words "widespread use" please)  :p\n\nThe way the numbers are arranged on electronic calculators was copied from the way they were on older, electric and mechanical cash registers and calculating machines that had been in widespread use in stores and business for several decades before touch-tone phones and their keypads came along.  It was a fairly logical and effective way to arrange the numbers, and a *lot* of folks in accounting and cashiering and old-school keyboarding businesses like bank telling were very VERY quick with this layout, able to crunch numbers as quickly with a mechanical system as some do with the electronic ones today.\n\nWhich didn't sit well with the phone companies in the 1970s because this touch-tone technology was new and at the time it actually had have a) a bit of a time delay between individual tones, and b) each tone had to be selected for close to a full second, in order for the older phone-line switching systems to keep up and get numbers dialed accurately, especially in parts of the country that converted to touch-tone later than others, or parts of the world that had held on to not just pulse dialing, but literally *mechanical* rotary dialing well into the mid-1990s (not the U.S. so much as places around the world you could *call* from the U.S.).\n\nIn other words, in the beginning the touch-tone phone dialing system coudn't keep up with some of the speedier keypad operators that had worked for a living running keypads all day on cash registers and mechanical calculators.  So the phone company (and back then it was all Bell) had to come up with a way to slow folks down across the board, in much the same way and for much the same reasons that the QWERTY key layout for mechanical typerwriters had been designed the way it was over half a century earlier....\n\nThey inverted the keys so that folks wouldn't freeze up the phone system and annoy customers to the point of giving up on touch-tone and refusing to use it.   And like QWERTY on keyboards, we are still stuck with it to this day.
101785
It's a curvy line with 3 bumps, the 2nd bump is higher than the 1st or 3rd, but the 3rd is kinda squished in.  Too bad you can't see my calculator.
517854
This may seem obvious, but you may try to see if number lock or caps lock is on/off on the either computer.  This happens more often than you would imagine.
747484
Press Alt+1+5+6 (All numbers on the number pad, with Num Lock turned on). The result is this: £
201652
Maybe because we're in base 10 and 9 is the highest base10 one-digit number? Try other bases, and you might get the same conclusion^_^(E.g. 1 in base2, 2 in base3, 3 in base4, 4 in base5, etc.) Just remember that when you sum them up you are still in that base!!!^_^