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. Puzzle time - integers

Puzzle time - integers

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
18 Posts 2 Posters 98 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 Offline
    jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by
    #9

    :::

    On the right track but not quite there

    :::

    Only non-witches get due process.

    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
    1 Reply Last reply
    • KlausK Offline
      KlausK Offline
      Klaus
      wrote on last edited by
      #10

      So you are saying my last statement is wrong, or are you saying it's not precise enough?

      1 Reply Last reply
      • jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nyc
        wrote on last edited by
        #11

        Depends on how one defines ‘noise‘. But what I really mean is “from what I infer from your words you’re still missing an insight here”

        Only non-witches get due process.

        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
        1 Reply Last reply
        • KlausK Offline
          KlausK Offline
          Klaus
          wrote on last edited by
          #12

          OK, here's a precise version of the statement:

          :::

          There is a number N, such that for all n >N, n is not in S if and only if the last digit of n is 0 or 5.

          :::

          Is that correct?

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

            Yes but tell me N. You’re missing something or you would know what N is.

            Only non-witches get due process.

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

              N is smaller than or equal to 2915. Now don't tell me you want me to worry about selecting a particular number between 1 and 2915!!!

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

                Yes I do.

                Only non-witches get due process.

                • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                1 Reply Last reply
                • jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nyc
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #16

                  What Klaus missed:

                  :::

                  The only ‘noise’ (besides all multiples of 5) is the number 1.

                  • 2 is granted which gets you all numbers ending in 2 or 7.
                  • 7^2 is 49 which gets you all the numbers ending in 9 and 4 above that
                  • after 49 is 54. 54^2 is 3136 which gets you all the numbers ending in 6 or 1 above it.
                    BUT
                  • once you have the *6s, you’ll get to 6^8 which gets you back to 6 and 11, etc.
                  • that gets you to 16 which gets you back to 4 and 9
                  • that 9 gets you back to 3 and 8

                  So we have 2,3,4,6,7,8,9 covered plus any number that is a multiple of 5 above them.

                  So only 1 is missing, along with all multiples of 5

                  :::

                  Only non-witches get due process.

                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • KlausK Offline
                    KlausK Offline
                    Klaus
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #17

                    Nice!

                    54^2 is 2916 and not 3136, though - that was the source of the 2915 bound I was giving above. So my bound was pointing in the right direction 🙂

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • jon-nycJ Offline
                      jon-nycJ Offline
                      jon-nyc
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #18

                      My math buddy at CS pointed out that Fermat’s Little Theorem could help here too rather than finding actual paths back to the lower numbers.

                      Only non-witches get due process.

                      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                      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