araver
-
Posts
1976 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Everything posted by araver
-
-
-
M I N U S maurice +10 dawh +5 plainglazed +15 araver +14 THANK - 0 BRUSH - 0 STOMP - 0 THINK - 0 FLESH - 0 AIMED - 1 GUISE - 0 MONEY - 2 BLEEP - 0 MOSEY - 1 DONOR - 1 TUNED - 1 ANNOY - 1 MINCE - 3 MINUS - 5 Glycereine - 674 plainglazed - 572 Cherry Lane - 532 Izzy - 386 Vineetrika - 384 Unreality - 284 maurice - 272 dawh - 194 t8t8t8 - 190 NickFleming- 180 Framm - 177 golfjunkie - 170 woon - 141 Fabpig - 106 araver - 98 JarZe - 96 Maquis - 96 Blablah99 - 89 Harvey45 - 77 MollyMae - 46 Hirkala - 36 yuiop - 21 Abhisk - 20 PVRoot - 20 Filly - 19 Prince Marth - 15 DudleyDude - 15 phaze - 15 Kac_cotu - 5 OK, plainglazed, you're next!
-
Hosts: MissKitten and Prince_Marth85 1. Glycereine 2. EDM.... 3. maurice 4. Framm18 5. woon 6. Vipe195 7. araver 8. 9. LJ 10. 11. 12.
-
The challenge is to find one that has 'symmetry /simplicity / "beauty"'. I'm not really good at this type of problem, so I'll wait for the correct answer from the brain denizens. Nice puzzle. It's rare for a puzzle on brainden to be unsolved this long. You are right and also, I know that you are very good (from this and other posts you made in other topics) with linear algebra. Also, I forgot to say that you've probably uncovered However even if the answer is not obtained on this particular path, this doesn't imply that you cannot reach it. As I know from other topics, you're also a very good programmer, so you have very good chances to approach this problem (successfully) from another angle. I believe there are more ways to approach and solve it - either from mathematical specific viewpoints or theoretical computer-science specific viewpoints. OFF-TOPIC Thank you for the (implied) compliment. I was worried at first that no one would try to solve it.
-
Dear Wolfgang, I was pondering what your strategy was in the first place - exactly 3 liars of which (exactly?) 2 are in front of white doors. I think that if you change the assumption that everybody knows everything (about the treasure and/or about the distribution of liars), this might actually force very different strategies than the one suggested by me. E.g. If the black guards only know what other black guards know (i.e. they know where the treasure is only if it is behind a black door and they know which is the black liar) and similarly for the white guards (i.e. they know where the treasure is only if it is behind a white door and they know which are the white liars). This would make it a different puzzle EDIT: "Black guard" is short for "guard standing in front of a black door".
-
-
In case you want to run with the idea ... an external link List of Gremlins
-
I like your thinking very much , but its In the original setting of the problem: "In a future not so far way, Earth archaeologists find on a far away planet a fragment from a long lost civilization. This fragment involves an unknown operation *|*. Unlocking its secrets may lead to a breakthrough in understanding their civilization. " Please allow me to state (and add to the OP) 2 informal assumptions I made when posting the original setting of the problem: 1) We're talking about aliens so they *might* possess different insights than humans. 2) It's a fairly used operation on their world, so one *might* expect the symmetry /simplicity / "beauty" of a human operation (e.g. addition/ multiplication, etc.) Disclaimer: I am not implying the fact that an alien operation is bound to be hard to grasp by humans, just that in worst-case scenarios it might be difficult to translate in human-operations. This may or may not be the case here. Just sayin'. P.S. I'm not sure how sane I am at this hour so if I don't make much sense, feel free to skip these assumptions. Other than the slightest hint possible, there's no real value / necessity in these assumptions. EDIT: grammar
-
OK, first things first: 14 *|* 14 = 14
-
999 *|* 909 = 1359
-
Actually, I think the OP suggests that the Reverse function always works on 4 digits. In the first problem, on 3 digits, it was explicitly stated how to treat numbers with less than 3 digits: Since this problem says that it works as the first problem, that it is an extension of the first problem, I think the natural assumption is to use the same type of function for reverse i.e. put leading zeros before reverse. Formally, Reverse_4 (N) = (N/1000%10)+(N/100%10)*10+(N/10%10)*100+(N%10)*1000. where / is integer division ignoring remainders (aka DIV) and % is modulo operation (aka MOD). For arbitrary n, n-digit reverse can be written as: Reverse_n (N)= Sum_(i=0)^(n-1) [N / 10^(n-i-1) % 10 * 10^i] or in a more human-readable way: n-1 n-i-1 i Reverse_n (N)= Sum [N / 10 % 10 * 10 ] i=0
-
That is a big hint
