posted
Happy, I didn't understand the title until after I figured out the pattern. But then I realized you didn't actually understand the pattern entirely if you didn't think the name made sense. In my other post, I was also trying to give enough clues to cyruseh to figure it out without Tom beating me over the head for giving it away, but he googled it first. (cheater! )
posted
When I say I'm number-oriented, I don't mean that I look at the number 1729 and think, "Hey, that's the smallest number that can be expressed as the sum of the cubes of two positive integers in more than one way." I mean that I see the numeric relationships in everything, be it music, literature, art, bridge, or just about anything else. It's like synesthesia with numbers, if I correctly understand synesthesia. What I saw immediately in this case was the relationship between the numbers on the dice and the title of the game. It doesn't require cal-cool-us, but it's still math to me.
posted
Don't feel too bad, AJ. I had pulled out my trusty spreadsheet and was starting a combinatorial analysis before I got it.
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It took me about an hour of trying to work out equations and writing down the numbers and comparing results and a lot of muttering under my breath before I stopped. About 2 minutes after I stopped, it came to me and I went and confirmed it. I am a mathematical person, but have never done as well with "Visual Math".
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never had problems with the calculus, but I didn't bother visualizing them most of the time if I could avoid it. I understood how they worked visually, but didn't need to actually visualize things to figure them out most of the time. Sadly, I don't remember much calculus since switching from math to computers as my focus.
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember I nearly kicked one of my physics lab partners butt from here to Saturday, even though he was a windsurfer dude that was twice as big as me and looked like a walking advertisement for Michalangelo's David. He went on this big spiel about how he'd watched on the Discovery Channel that guys brains were wired better than girls to visualize abstract stuff. Well Mr. "my brain's wired correctly" couldn't visualize his way through a circuit diagram and I had to re-wire the entire experiment before it worked. (The whole time he was giving me these "you're doing it wrong" looks as I tried to figure out where he messed up.) I wasn't terribly amused. I managed not to gloat since I knew I had to get along with him for the rest of the semester, and he was eye candy and more intelligent than the lab partner the semester before who had decided that he should stalk me.
posted
I still say that if you don't understand the title you're doing it wrong. Either that or you don't know why you're doing what you're doing which is pretty much the same thing. I'm a numbers/math person but I figured it out fairly quickly.
Posts: 981 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's funny. I don't do nearly as well with visual math, but stuff like circuits I can visualize without much trouble at all. My lab partner for Digital Logic was a female and we were about equal in the class. Together we averaged 99% in the lab portion of the class.
When I took calculus in grade 12 I had no problems, but it was taught in a very formula, numeric method. When I took basically the same course the next year in college (because it was required) it was taught in a graphical way and we were expected to show our answers in that manner. I didn't do nearly as well in the college course almost exclusively due to the visual components.
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Weirdly enough while I didn't mind the electricity in physics, I hated Electrical science in Engineering. It wasn't the teacher either, it was me, I just got bored with it all.
posted
Hmmm, Julie, you insult me. Not that I'm trying to get defensive here, but I felt I had to respond. As I recall, the idea behind the game, as that site states, is to figure out how the answer is calculated. Which is exactly what I did. The answer to the game is not to state what the relevance of the game is to the title. So I did a different way, which happens to be one of the reasons I'm good at what I do. I tend to arrive at solutions to problems via unconventional routes. For instance, once in High School physics I managed to obtain the solution to a problem on an exam by using algebra and backing into it instead of using basic arithmetic. Anyway, I personally think that the solution I came up with was just as valid as anyone's, but I rightfully admit the fact that it took me about 24 hours to realize the significance. What can I say? Posts: 609 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
I mean figuring out the calculation trick is easy and took me all of maybe 2 minutes. But I still don't know the proof behind it. I gave it to one of my friends who has a Master's in math. He said it kept him awake thinking about it for a couple nights. He thought it had to do with subtraction in binary but he isn't completely sure.
quote:Seriously, I think it's because your typical numerically-oriented person thinks in terms of mathematical patterns, and this puzzle doesn't.
Tom gave it away to me. I'd been trying to figure out a mathematical solution based on the fact that the result had to be zero or even, but once clued in on the fact that it wasn't necessarily mathematical, starring at the puzzle worked pretty fast.
Posts: 896 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pop figuring out the trick is easy, like I said it took me under 2 minutes much to my co-workers chagrin because they had no idea how it worked. What I want to know is WHY it works. That part is the proof. Can you make it work with x's y's and z's like you can with ordinary numbers and if so why?
posted
Basically I want to know why a subtraction of two numbers with the same digits in a different order, results in a number whose digits add up to nine or a multiple thereof.
posted
That was fun. Took my mind off heresy for a while. Oh well, back to the stake. . .
(I'm spending a lot of time with the gnostic gospels and Elaine Pagels' stuff in particular. At first, "Petals around the Rose" made me think of "The Name of the Rose" which made me think of church history, heresy, the Knights Templar and things that had absolutely nothing to do with dice.)
posted
Ok, the digits are w,x,y,z. Each is multiplied by a power (from 0 to 3) of ten. Any power of ten minus any other power of ten is evenly divisible by nine. That is, (x-1) is always a factor of (x^m)-(x^n). I can give you a proof for that if you want, or you can just believe me*. So the difference of the numbers will be 9i(w)+9j(x)+9k(y)+9l(z) for some integers i,j,k,l. The sum of the digits of any number divisible by nine will be another number divisible by nine. Proof of that is the same as above, but the destination power of ten is always zero; most people simply accept it as an axiom in base ten. I apologize that this isn't really clear, but I didn't plan on writing an essay, so I'm trying to give only the outline. Is that enough, or do I need to try to explain further?
posted
Actually, I'm not that numerically-oriented. There are a lot of things I prefer to think about visually. It's just that there's not much crossover.
So when I started reading about even numbers or zero, and so on, nothing but algorithms would occur to me.
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
Thanks for the explanation. I'm going to e-mail it to my math friend that couldn't figure it out. I was beating myself up last night for not being able to figure it out. Why hadn't I learned the algebra to figure that out? I then had a minor lightbulb moment. You see, over time I've forgotten how abnormal I really am. I'd completely forgotten that all the algebra I learned (with the exception of linear algebra) was almost 15 years ago and that I taught it to myself while working through textbooks while I was homeschooled, before I went to the community college. So really it isn't surprising that I have gaps in my algebra. What is more suprising was that I hadn't ever really encountered a major one before now!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
