bonanova

Rotating and flipping is OK.

I won't post. I looked in my play book. Actually I have a couple of them. PT nice to see you again.

You unwrap a giant Hershey bar. The type that is scored, so that it can be broken into smaller pieces. You note the bar has exactly m squares along its length and n squares along its width. You wish to break the bar up into all small squares. How many breaks are required? Stacking is not allowed, and the breaks are always made along a straight line.

Time Out, not sure where you're going, but nope.

I think I did this with Derek Jeter and the Core Four a while back. It's a nice puzzle.

You nailed it.

Alex painted a letter on each of nine cans and set them on a fence rail. There was one duplicate letter. Using them a target practice, he shot the cans in the following order: 5 6 3 4 2 9 1 8 7. Amazingly, before and after each shot, the letters on the cans still on the fence spelled an English word. The initial was was ... ?

1. It was she who composed the diminutive article. 2. Displaying a jelly roll in gastronomic splendor. 3. No surprise; the best ones are rarely inexpensive. 4. You can usually find Jane singing at her studio. 5. She's the sister of an old friend. 6. Was Amos smoking, again, outside?

You're exactly right. The leftmost number needs another leading digit. V W X Y 7 Z Then it should be solvable. I've edited the OP as well.

Sorry. It's division this time.

This thread deserves a rest.

Yup.

Alex, Davie and Jamie each tossed 6 darts last night in a friendly game at Morty's, and surprisingly, each of them scored exactly 71 points. Alex's first two shots scored 22 points while Davey got only 3 on his first toss. Who hit the bull?

Got it. Nice.

The was solved quickly. Congratulations to curr3nt and Rob_Gandy, the early solvers. These may pose a better challenge; a three-pack! Letter clues constrain the substituted numbers: same digit for every A, etc. Asterisks are wild cards, can be any digit. 1. Easy as A-B-C. . . . A B C . . . B A C . . ------- . . * * * * . . * * A * * * B ----------- * * * * * * 2. Four Aces. . . . * * * . . . * 2 * . . . ----- . . . * * * . * * * * . * 8 * ----------- * * 9 * 2 * 3. Lucky 7's. . . . . . . . . . . . * * 7 * * . . . . . .-------------------- * * * 7 * / * * 7 * * * * * * * . . . . . . * * * * * * . . . . . . ------------- . . . . . . * * * * 7 7 * . . . . . . * * * * * * * . . . . . . ------------- . . . . . . . . * 7 * * * * . . . . . . . . * 7 * * * * . . . . . . . . ------------- . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * . . . . . . . . * * * * 7 * * . . . . . . . . --------------- . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * Edit: the leftmost number needs a leading asterisk. It should read: * * * * 7 *

That's it. Curr3nt by a nose!

formatting is fun =/ It's unique. Good job. Coveted bononova gold star for speed! Formatting tip: use Courier new font and alternate spaces and white-colored dots for multiple spacing.

Replace the *'s with single digits to make this multiplication work. . . * * * . . . * * --------- . * * * * * * * * --------- * * * * * I know, I know, usually you get one or two numbers filled in as a clue. But given that each * represents a prime digit, 2,3 5 or 7, you probably don't need further help.

Still not convinced. Anyway here's a formal proof.

I'm not convinced. So the primes can be assembled in increasing order, with each prime greater than its integer index, and you would conclude the primes are bounded? If there is no infinitely large prime (if that even has any meaning: infinity is not a value) then there certainly is no "infinitely large" integer. Every integer is "of course" finite. But that does say there is a largest one. Each of Bushindo's sequences has finite length, but that does not mean there is a longest one - one that is only as long as the greatest integer.

Rainman, if a sequence can have its elements placed in a one-to-one correspondence with the natural numbers then the sequence and the natural numbers have the same cardinalities. The cardinality is Aleph null. I think Bushindo has done that. Each individual natural number is finite. Each term in Bushindo's sequence has a finite index. But saying that each integer is finite is different from saying there are a finite number of integers. The integers, and sequences with corresponding terms, are countably infinite.

Edit: Ah, you said real, not natural. The crossroads derailed my thinking. Does OP distinguish between countably and uncountably infinite?

Impressive. Good puzzle, great solve!

It is cool, indeed. It is of the same type as Both involve English phrases that describe numbers. One form of Berry's Paradox asks: What is the smallest number not specifiable using fewer than twenty-three syllables? Let's say that number is 1,777,777. One mil-ion sev-en hun-dred se-ven-ty sev-en thou-sand sev-en hun-dred sev-en-ty se-ven -- that's 23 syllables. And there doesn't seem to be a smaller number that requires that many. But that number is specified by the phrase in red above. And that phrase contains fewer than 23 syllables. So 1,777.777 is specifiable by fewer than twenty-three syllables. The usual work-around for paradoxes of this type is to segregate statements that use verbal descriptions from statements that are numerical.

I started with ANDing the binary representations, but it worked only for the first two. Good puzzle.