 |
|
| Hobby Forum Index » Puzzles » Four old puzzles #2... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| James Dow Allen... |
 Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:12 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I'm not the only one whose puzzles have gone
ignored. I looked at the next one, but gave up,
waiting for another hint:
On Sep 9, 5:53 pm, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Quote: [Subject: Sequins]
What follows is a series of "equalities" that follow a simple, but
rather strange, rule. If you can determine the rule, you may be able
to determine how I've chosen the numbers, at which point you should
be able to extend the sequence with no difficulty. But determining
the rule may not be very easy. On the other hand, this /is/
rec.puzzles, so I suspect that someone will find it very quickly.
In case it's too astoundingly obscure, however, I have posted a
(very) small hint ...
... Computer programmers may have an advantage.
Uh, Richard: If it's *astoundingly obscure* then
a *very small hint* isn't going to help much.
Quote:
So... here are the "equalities":
72 = 9
85 = 26
111 = 48
190 = 65
107 = 20
Hmmm, no takers. Okay, let's see if a few more terms will help.
...
126 = 0
116 = 1
122 = 27 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Richard Heathfield... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:38 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[Former puzzle text left as introduction - simpler puzzle, but of the
same form, follows, together with another hint, this time of the
in-yer-face variety.]
In <Xns9CAACD9818B5jamesdowallen at (no spam) news.albasani.net>, James Dow Allen
wrote:
Quote: I'm not the only one whose puzzles have gone
ignored. I looked at the next one, but gave up,
waiting for another hint:
On Sep 9, 5:53 pm, Richard Heathfield wrote:
[Subject: Sequins]
What follows is a series of "equalities" that follow a simple,
but rather strange, rule. If you can determine the rule, you may
be able to determine how I've chosen the numbers, at which point
you should be able to extend the sequence with no difficulty. But
determining the rule may not be very easy. On the other hand,
this /is/ rec.puzzles, so I suspect that someone will find it
very quickly.
In case it's too astoundingly obscure, however, I have posted a
(very) small hint ...
... Computer programmers may have an advantage.
Uh, Richard: If it's *astoundingly obscure* then
a *very small hint* isn't going to help much.
So... here are the "equalities":
72 = 9
85 = 26
111 = 48
190 = 65
107 = 20
Hmmm, no takers. Okay, let's see if a few more terms will help.
...
126 = 0
116 = 1
122 = 27
Okay, let's try this again, this time with much easier numbers. What
we're looking at is pairs of numbers that can, in a strange sort of
way, be considered equal. If you can find out /why/ they are (or
rather, might be considered) equal, in that process you will discover
some other numbers. You will recognise these numbers as forming a
pattern, and will thus be able to use them to extend the sequence of
comparisons.
Additional hint: think logically, by George!
What I forgot to say last time, but will add this time, is that
publishing the rule itself (or the pattern) will be considered infra
dignitatis. Instead, when you work it out, please add an "equality"
to the sequence.
4 = 1
5 = 0
14 = 1
8 = 2
8 = 1
13 = 0
16 = 1
12 = 1
5 = 2
12 = 0
8 = 2
10 = 4
6 = 3
--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh at (no spam)
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| James Dow Allen... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:48 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 21, 4:38 pm, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Quote: 4 = 1
5 = 0
14 = 1
[snip]
Between this one and its predecessor I've stared for almost
an hour and, although I see *some* pattern (and am
pretty sure I know who George is) I'm still mystified.
I'll invest another half-hour after Richard admits to
spending half an hour on "Four old puzzles #1".
(As you might guess from the titles, I'd prepared
a #3 and #4, but the silence is too deafening.)
Quote: Sig line vacant - apply within
How about: "... one ought never to be satisfied that
there was not something imperfect about it until it
also gives the impression of being beautiful."
James |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Richard Heathfield... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 5:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In
<904bc687-5b96-4c88-938e-6f939119e2f0 at (no spam) i12g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
James Dow Allen wrote:
Quote: On Oct 21, 4:38 pm, Richard Heathfield wrote:
4 = 1
5 = 0
14 = 1
[snip]
Between this one and its predecessor I've stared for almost
an hour and, although I see *some* pattern (and am
pretty sure I know who George is) I'm still mystified.
Va rnpu "rdhnyvgl", gur ahzore gb gur yrsg bs gur rdhnyvgl fvta vf gur
erfhyg bs na bcrengvba vaibyivat gjb vachg ahzoref. Gur ahzore gb gur
evtug vf gur erfhyg bs n qvssrerag bcrengvba ba gur fnzr gjb ahzoref.
Gur gjb bcrengvbaf ner pyrneyl abg gur fnzr, nf gurl tvir qvssrerag
erfhygf. Arireguryrff, gurer vf n pbaarpgvba orgjrra gurz - nygubhtu
lbh jvyy unir gb guvax yngrenyyl vs lbh ner gb rfgnoyvfu gung
pbaarpgvba.
Quote: I'll invest another half-hour after Richard admits to
spending half an hour on "Four old puzzles #1".
Well, I've spent a little while on it - long enough to falsify five
theories, anyway. But I can't confess to spending half an hour on it
yet. I think you might need to leak a hint that doesn't merely
consist of further examples.
<snip>
--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh at (no spam)
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Richard Heathfield... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 1:35 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[Quoted text is spoiler for full answer]
In <8b6dnTQ9MNKG1X3XnZ2dnUVZ8qCdnZ2d at (no spam) bt.com>, Richard Heathfield
wrote:
Quote: [quoted text is spoiler space for right-side data to match James's
left-side data]
In
c7a6d2b3-55ae-4cea-b9f3-5faa35d46625 at (no spam) z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
James Dow Allen wrote:
4 = 1
5 = 0
14 = 1
8 = 2
8 = 1
13 = 0
16 = 1
12 = 1
5 = 2
12 = 0
8 = 2
10 = 4
6 = 3
Partial spoiler. (Partial because I only show leftsides.)
The sequence continues
11 = ?
9 = ?
14 = ?
2 = ?
16 = ?
5 = ?
Well done so far. More precisely:
11 = 0
9 = 2
14 = 1
2 = 0
16 = 8
5 = 0
Here's a bit more help. Note that the left side never exceeds 18,
*and* the right side can never exceed 9. Does that help a bit?
In case it's too astoundingly obscure ...
"Astoundingly obscure" seems like an understatement.
How about "amazingly astoundingly obscure"?
It is evident that you already know the underlying sequence. The rule
for producing "equalities" is as follows:
Take the next two consecutive digits from the sequence, and then ask
any six-year-old child to add them and tell you the full answer
(including the inputs). The two most obvious ways in which he might
respond are:
(a) W plus X is Y
(b) W and X is Y
But as any computer programmer knows, W and X is actually Z. Hence:
Y = Z
--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh at (no spam)
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:09 pm
|
|