Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) The Atomic Puzzle (1.0)

03-17-2017 , 11:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristy
I already answered that above?

It seems like you enjoyed drawing those and tried to reverse engineer a reason to draw them for us...but your original problem seems like a mess...even after the 5-->12 mistake.
what happened was i watched a youtube video on prime numbers, and then realized the set for "atomic shape permutations" was essentially prime, so it seemed meaningful to share.

there is also a set for cubes in 3-d space, of course. i think together these numbers could be important for a.i. programs in deducing optimal structures in chemistry and architecture.

also, i don't like drawing things. i was pretty much forced to in this instance.
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-17-2017 , 11:50 PM
why in the hell would a time machine be limited to 3 dimensions?
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-18-2017 , 12:09 AM
I'm gonna wait for v1.1 or v1.2 when you get all the bugs worked out.
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-18-2017 , 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
why in the hell would a time machine be limited to 3 dimensions?
it wouldn't. but solving the riddle might show that you have mastered all that is embodied by dimension #2, thus ready for exploration of dimension #4.

note: i haven't solved it yet, it appears some random guesses were made so yeah you can just etch into the stone whatever number you ****ing want and there's like a 10% chance of being right, but this is a time machine which is serious ****ing ****. gotta show your work on the strategically placed 'generic lined paper' ldo.
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-18-2017 , 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
why in the hell would a time machine be limited to 3 dimensions?
Slow your roll, Einstein

...our scientist hasn't even discovered 45 degree angles, yet!
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-18-2017 , 01:26 PM
is euclidean space out of fashion now or something?
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-18-2017 , 02:06 PM
Easiest solution:

Sequence follows formula f(n)=(2**(n-1))-(n-1)

ex. f(4)=(2**3-3)=8-3=5
so
f(6)=(2**5-5)=32-5=27

so the missing number is 27

lets all plug it in to the machine and discuss this yesterday

Last edited by Pokerlogist; 03-18-2017 at 02:07 PM. Reason: have a fever
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-18-2017 , 02:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pokerlogist
Easiest solution:

Sequence follows formula f(n)=(2**(n-1))-(n-1)

ex. f(4)=(2**3-3)=8-3=5
so
f(6)=(2**5-5)=32-5=27

so the missing number is 27

lets all plug it in to the machine and discuss this yesterday
how is bolded derived?
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-18-2017 , 02:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pokerlogist
Easiest solution:

Sequence follows formula f(n)=(2**(n-1))-(n-1)

ex. f(4)=(2**3-3)=8-3=5
so
f(6)=(2**5-5)=32-5=27

so the missing number is 27

lets all plug it in to the machine and discuss this yesterday
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristy
If 5-->12, it's 27.
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-18-2017 , 02:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuma
how is bolded derived?

Experience with sequences, trial and error, observation, algebra training

The SMP subforum loves these puzzles.
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-19-2017 , 07:14 AM
it's 22 people. come on!
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-21-2017 , 07:33 PM
i worked it out and it's 30

Quote:
1 --> 1
2 --> 1
3 --> 2
4 --> 5
5 --> 12
6 --> 30
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-21-2017 , 09:28 PM
found a 31st lol god damn **** this time machine.
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-21-2017 , 10:12 PM
When I was a little kid my mother told me not to stare into the sun. So once, when I was six, I did.
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-22-2017 , 12:39 AM
it's 34
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-22-2017 , 01:39 AM
Tuma,

Do you still live next door to HOCKEY?

How do you feel about your chances in the Superb Owl prop contest?
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote
03-22-2017 , 01:58 AM
feels pretty bad man. there were some gimmes at the end i should have capitalized on.
The Atomic Puzzle (1.0) Quote

      
m