posted
Yes, I just now got it -- and only after I finally read the part of the page where it said that name of the game was significant. Then it made sense.
posted
This game makes no sense. Petals around the rose? The only way that could be significant would be if the numbers were possible numbers of petals on a rose, and that still doesn't help calculate. *sigh*
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't worry, Saxon. The story tells me nothing except that the smarter you are the more impossible it gets.
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Macc, I took no such oath as I haven't figured it out yet, and this is what I think I have so far:
It has something to do with doubles When there are two sets of doubles, the number goes up When there are three fives, the answer is sometimes twelve and sometimes fourteen.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then you might not have figured it out. I thought that too and it turned out that my "pattern" was a coincedence that lasted a surprisingly long time.
Posts: 981 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was showing my dad with real dice. He gave up and asked what the secret was. I told him I couldn't tell him but I gave him the link. Posts: 981 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe I'm too math-oriented, but I got it as of the first try. For me it was incredibly easy, but you can ask Mama -- that's just how my brain works. I went ten for ten, so I assume my reasoning was correct. Or I need to hit Vegas really soon.
posted
I think I took longer cos I'm too math orientated. I had a really nifty indices system going for a little while.
Needless to say, it didn't work.
I guess it is one of those things that looks so obvious when you get it - whether that's on the first or fiftieth role.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
i tried it five times. then i searched on google for the answer. so, needless to say, i figured it out.
Posts: 1658 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Searching on Google does not count as "figuring it out" -- particularly not after a whopping five attempts. *rolls eyes*
I don't know whether I'm more ashamed of those of you who caved -- on what is, after all, actually a very easy puzzle; more than one of us got it on literally our first guess -- or the traitors who posted the answer online.
posted
Oh, I got it all right. I verified my solution (not by googling, or getting the answer outright, but another way). I guess I just don't get the meaning of the title. Regardless. My mathematically inclined mind figured it out relatively quickly. Not on the first try mind you, as I needed a sample set to work from without any prior knowledge.
Posts: 609 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The "traitors" were little kids who probably did not realize they were letting the secret slip. Ah, the innocence of youth. They didn't say it in so many words, but they gave me the clue.
I would never have associated the "petals around the rose" with the solution--quite possibly not if I worked on the problem my entire life. I just don't think that way. I was trying to remember what I learned in botany about what kinds of flowers have multiples of what number of petals.
So yeah, I cheated. I don't see it as any different than, say, turning off clipping when you see how to get through a video game puzzle but no matter how long you practice you just aren't dextrous enough for it.
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I don't see it as any different than, say, turning off clipping when you see how to get through a video game puzzle but no matter how long you practice you just aren't dextrous enough for it."
Yeah, but I see THAT as cheating, too. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom> There was a time when I did, too. Then I began playing Doom (until I beat it; I forget which iteration it was). Every single puzzle yielded relatively easily except for one spot where you had to run over these columns sticking up over the acid. If I turned early, I toppled in. If I waited and turned a bit later, I skidded off the columns and toppled in on the other side. If I walked instead of running, naturally I fell in between the columns.
After going over and over this many many times I finally concluded the game had been misdesigned, there was no way of doing it "right", and the only way through was to just turn off clipping and go. I did take a big hit from the acid, which I considered payment.
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've been getting it semi-correct, but that is only because I read the Bill Gates story and am doing exactly what he did as far as remembering previous rolls.
Grrrr. I'm too stubborn to google it though it is tempting!
posted
I have tried googling it banna, and havent been able to find any answers. All I can find are people who are sworn to secrecy! Posts: 879 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cyruseh, after whining (I played it most of yesterday) I went back and played it today.
Actually what I did was I went and looked at that thread about Bill Gates, and I studied those rolls since there were more on the screen at once. Once you see it, it IS stupidly easy. I think I've got the algorithm figured out too which isn't a hard one, once you know the premise. I'm amazed that Happy could figure it out only mathematically though without actually looking at the dice.
I wonder if it is actually harder or easier for people who are numerically oriented compared to visually oriented. I know I was too caught up in trying to pull wild equations out of my rear to actually see the obvious. It wasn't until my eyes caught the visual patterns of several rolls next to each other that I got it.
posted
I'm sure it is. But that's only because numerically-oriented people can't see the obvious. j/k
Seriously, I think it's because your typical numerically-oriented person thinks in terms of mathematical patterns, and this puzzle doesn't.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry tom, I edited my first post to change it. If you think your average numerically oriented person doesn't get it as often, then how does that explain you or Moose?
posted
*smacks forehead* now I understand the title. And normally I do get the whole visually oriented thing. Posts: 609 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, it's amazing how few numbers are actually required in order to administrate a computer. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:I know I was too caught up in trying to pull wild equations out of my rear to actually see the obvious.
What is it about the human rectum that makes it such a powerful generator of wild equations and random theories? Simply amazing.
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
j/k![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
So you are a non-numerical nerd then Tom?![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
