Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Today’s puzzle

Today’s puzzle

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
18 Posts 5 Posters 148 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by
    #7

    Bumping this in case Klaus wants to revisit.

    Will post answer later if he doesn’t.

    Only non-witches get due process.

    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
    1 Reply Last reply
    • HoraceH Offline
      HoraceH Offline
      Horace
      wrote on last edited by
      #8

      It seems tempting to count the number of disjoint set pairs (which I take to mean not overlapping) available from a set of 10 things, and compare that with the total number of possible different sums, which seems to be around 955 (the possible range being 1 to 955). If that ratio is greater than 1, it's impossible for the guy to win the bet. It still may be impossible if the ratio is less than 1, but greater than 1 is sufficient proof that it is impossible.

      Education is extremely important.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • jon-nycJ Online
        jon-nycJ Online
        jon-nyc
        wrote on last edited by
        #9

        That’s a reasonable starting place.

        Only non-witches get due process.

        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
        1 Reply Last reply
        • jon-nycJ Online
          jon-nycJ Online
          jon-nyc
          wrote on last edited by
          #10

          The total number of possible sums is a bit less than that, since the min is 1+2+3+...+10.

          Only non-witches get due process.

          • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
          HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
          • jon-nycJ Online
            jon-nycJ Online
            jon-nyc
            wrote on last edited by
            #11

            There’s a key insight which makes it trivial to compute in your head in milliseconds.

            Only non-witches get due process.

            • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
            1 Reply Last reply
            • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

              The total number of possible sums is a bit less than that, since the min is 1+2+3+...+10.

              HoraceH Offline
              HoraceH Offline
              Horace
              wrote on last edited by
              #12

              @jon-nyc said in Today’s puzzle:

              The total number of possible sums is a bit less than that, since the min is 1+2+3+...+10.

              We are supposed to consider sets of any size.

              Education is extremely important.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • jon-nycJ Online
                jon-nycJ Online
                jon-nyc
                wrote on last edited by
                #13

                Of course. My bad.

                Only non-witches get due process.

                • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                1 Reply Last reply
                • HoraceH Offline
                  HoraceH Offline
                  Horace
                  wrote on last edited by Horace
                  #14

                  well it doesn't have the nice insight that you're looking for but it's not too difficult to count the number of 10 choose n for n of 1 to 5 and multiply the sum by 2. You multiply by 2 because for every combination of n from 10, for n=1 to 5, you have the complementary set of size 10-n. Each set must sum to a unique number. Except you don't multiply by 2 for the size 5 set, since 10 choose 5 accounts for both the primary and complimentary sets.

                  10 choose 1 = 10
                  10 choose 2 = 45
                  10 choose 3 = 120
                  10 choose 4 = 210
                  10 choose 5 = 252

                  (10+45+120+210)*2 + 252 = 1022, meaning the bet is impossible for the guy to win because that's more than the possible number of unique sums.

                  Education is extremely important.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • jon-nycJ Online
                    jon-nycJ Online
                    jon-nyc
                    wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                    #15

                    The insight is that 'disjoint sets' is a red herring.

                    If you had non-disjoint sets that had equal sums, then you just take out the common member(s) and they still are equal.

                    So you just figure out how many unique sets you can make out of 10 objects, which is 2^10, but subtract 1 because 0000000000 isn't a valid set.

                    So 1023 non-empty sets, which is greater than 955.

                    Only non-witches get due process.

                    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • HoraceH Offline
                      HoraceH Offline
                      Horace
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #16

                      I don't find that insight useful to arrive at the idea of counting unique combinations, but YMMV.

                      Education is extremely important.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #17

                        No, just the easy calc. It's all the 10 digit binary numbers.

                        Only non-witches get due process.

                        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • HoraceH Offline
                          HoraceH Offline
                          Horace
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #18

                          Yes, I like how binary digits map to the idea of including/excluding things from a set.

                          Education is extremely important.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • Users
                          • Groups