He came up with 220,323. My calculator came up with 235,021,878,000. That's 235 billion 😃 I'm no math whiz and even I knew multiplying those numbers would be *way* over 220K. OTOH, easy task to adjust how many numbers/digits you have the spec bring into play to allow for a final number that will be more in the vicinity required.
@@Davidblaine18 He said he multiplied every number. I did the same, and checked it 3 times. No big deal though, just make some minor adjustments in the number of digits the spec can name and all is well. Don't even need to be close, just more in the ball park.
@@swissarmytenor Matt was very quickly telling him to name random numbers. No spectator would ever remember what they said nor say after- hold on-- that final number over 200,000 is too small??!! Unless the outcome was 5, or 100-- the spectator will not be inputting the numbers into their calculator 3 times like you did-- they'd have zero recollection of the numbers they named.
@@DavidM-lj5yv No spectator would ever say the number was too small? And by a GIGANTIC amount? Yet that is *exactly* what happened when I - as a spectator - watched this! I only entered numbers into a calculator after the fact because I wanted to see just how incredibly gigantic the number actually was, haha. Of course, some would not notice, but others will notice, and there is (imho) no reason not to adjust the digits called out so the final number is more realistic, as it is so easy to do! Bottom line: if I want someone to think he is multiplying numbers equaling 220 thousand, I'm NOT going to tell them to multiply numbers totaling 235 BILLION 🙂
Never use the word "force", Matt.
Wow.
I'm more impressed that the date was my Bornday.
What're the odds! Lmao 😂 😅
He came up with 220,323. My calculator came up with 235,021,878,000. That's 235 billion 😃 I'm no math whiz and even I knew multiplying those numbers would be *way* over 220K. OTOH, easy task to adjust how many numbers/digits you have the spec bring into play to allow for a final number that will be more in the vicinity required.
Uhhhhhhh what?
@@Davidblaine18 He said he multiplied every number. I did the same, and checked it 3 times. No big deal though, just make some minor adjustments in the number of digits the spec can name and all is well. Don't even need to be close, just more in the ball park.
@@swissarmytenor Matt was very quickly telling him to name random numbers. No spectator would ever remember what they said nor say after- hold on-- that final number over 200,000 is too small??!! Unless the outcome was 5, or 100-- the spectator will not be inputting the numbers into their calculator 3 times like you did-- they'd have zero recollection of the numbers they named.
@@DavidM-lj5yv No spectator would ever say the number was too small? And by a GIGANTIC amount? Yet that is *exactly* what happened when I - as a spectator - watched this! I only entered numbers into a calculator after the fact because I wanted to see just how incredibly gigantic the number actually was, haha. Of course, some would not notice, but others will notice, and there is (imho) no reason not to adjust the digits called out so the final number is more realistic, as it is so easy to do! Bottom line: if I want someone to think he is multiplying numbers equaling 220 thousand, I'm NOT going to tell them to multiply numbers totaling 235 BILLION 🙂
What is the phone trick?
What is the name of the iPhone effect?
Can’t explain to you in this toxic TH-cam environment
Awesome performance Matt!!!
Why isnt that calculator trick on Android?
It is
@@Davidblaine18 Name?
@@MavisRileyJunior If you want to do it on someone else's phone it needs to be an iphone, it's not an app.
@@MichaelLawrenceMagic Yeah Ive found the info now,thanks
@@MavisRileyJuniorit’s toxic
lol, love the fast count 1-6..4 PERFECT!
Disagree Metal Die deserves more it such a great rep builder to blast past it so quick you will lose the spectators attention .
Geez…..get to it already
Yea