EPTRiddle me this, Riddle me that: - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
nAi.PrOtOsS
Canada784 Posts
| ||
|
Murlox
France1699 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i43.tinypic.com/1609awp.jpg) Same value. They omitted the "0" in an effort to make it clearer for non mathematicians, resulting in making it stupid for mathematicians though. Edit : Woot 500 ! ![[image loading]](http://www.gamer-source.com/image/media/artwork/high-res/218.jpg) | ||
|
reachfortherings
63 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On February 23 2009 02:03 Murlox wrote: Same value. They omitted the "0" in an effort to make it clearer for non mathematicians, resulting in making it stupid for mathematicians though. well then it's a misleading lie because that isn't how numbers work for anyone | ||
|
Cpt Obvious
Germany3073 Posts
each number apart from the 1 is bigger on the left side. If I take a bunch of numbers where every single one is bigger than the corresponding number on the other side, and add them up, I know the left sum will be bigger without even calculating. When will people stop taking maths as a game and start taking it seriously? Those guys make a failing grade school student seem smart... | ||
|
Juicyfruit
Canada5484 Posts
On February 23 2009 05:13 Cpt Obvious wrote: wtf? those sums are so not the same value... each number apart from the 1 is bigger on the left side. If I take a bunch of numbers where every single one is bigger than the corresponding number on the other side, and add them up, I know the left sum will be bigger without even calculating. When will people stop taking maths as a game and start taking it seriously? Those guys make a failing grade school student seem smart... Don't you think that has occurred to all of us already? We're saying it's equal only if the numbers on the right side have invisible 0's added to the end. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11554 Posts
On February 23 2009 05:22 Juicyfruit wrote: Don't you think that has occurred to all of us already? We're saying it's equal only if the numbers on the right side have invisible 0's added to the end. That's like saying 1 = 10 because there's an invisible zero behind the 1 | ||
|
Juicyfruit
Canada5484 Posts
On February 23 2009 05:29 FragKrag wrote: That's like saying 1 = 10 because there's an invisible zero behind the 1 The invisible 0's are so that the numbers line up properly the way they are written down. Staggering the digits like that isn't exactly conventional, so how the hell am I suppose to interpret the intention of that? | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11554 Posts
On February 23 2009 05:38 Juicyfruit wrote: The invisible 0's are so that the numbers line up properly the way they are written down. Staggering the digits like that isn't exactly conventional, so how the hell am I suppose to interpret the intention of that? You don't, you call whoever made it a fucking retard, and leave. | ||
|
SonuvBob
Aiur21550 Posts
On February 23 2009 05:13 Cpt Obvious wrote: wtf? those sums are so not the same value... each number apart from the 1 is bigger on the left side. If I take a bunch of numbers where every single one is bigger than the corresponding number on the other side, and add them up, I know the left sum will be bigger without even calculating. Thank you, Captain Obv- oh, it is you, welcome back. | ||
|
Deleted User 30223
3104 Posts
On February 23 2009 05:54 SonuvBob wrote: Thank you, Captain Obv- oh, it is you, welcome back. lolol. was gonna say the exact same thing | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
obviously left is larger. It's not the responsibility of the reader to interpret, it's the responsibility of the writer to be clear, and as written it's pretty clear that the left side sum is significantly bigger than the right side sum | ||
|
Cpt Obvious
Germany3073 Posts
| ||
|
Hittegods
Stockholm4641 Posts
On February 23 2009 05:54 SonuvBob wrote: Thank you, Captain Obv- oh, it is you, welcome back. God I love you. | ||
|
terr13
United States298 Posts
| ||
|
Nytefish
United Kingdom4282 Posts
On February 23 2009 07:37 terr13 wrote: I think it is meant to be followed by 0's, using just a bit of common sense. There is no way that riddle would ask you that question otherwise, and if you complain about it, you should complain about the other riddles as well. They even lined up all the digits for you like it's supposed to be added. The answer should be that they are the same, since 9 1's is the same as 1 9. Some of these riddles have been pretty strange. Why can't it just be their way of tricking you? | ||
|
nosliw
United States2716 Posts
On February 21 2009 09:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: + Show Spoiler + On February 21 2009 09:30 Pr0sPeCt wrote: 9 minutes correct. use 4 cuts to cut log into 5 pieces, use 5th cut to cut horizontally, turns 5 into 10 Q2: Duncan Drivel was asked how many ducks he had. "well," he said. "they just walked down the path and I didn't actually count them, but I remember one duck in front of two ducks, another duck behind two ducks and another duck between two ducks." how many ducks does Duncan have? | ||
|
AcrossFiveJulys
United States3612 Posts
Guys... I think you missed the "point" of this riddle. When it asked to sum the numbers, you aren't supposed to assume that 987654321 is a number, it wants you to do 9+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1, so that's why the sums are supposed to be the same. Yeah, it's stupid. | ||
|
antiq
Slovakia191 Posts
Say .. Jimmy walks into the classroom and sees a set of numbers on the blackboard: 1,2,3,4,5, .. etc .. N Now, he is a bit goofy, think Rainman, so he starts to play with the numbers: He picks a number, say R - then adds together the first R numbers from the set in his head, deletes them and writes their sum at the end of the whole set (after the initial N). (If there are no more R numbers in the set, he just takes all that are left) And he decides to do this K-times .. so, what is the last number in the set now (the K-th number which he writes)? If you have N=5 (that means 1,2,3,4,5); R=2, K=3, it's obvious, you get 7,8 -> so the answer is 8 But say you have a range of numbers 1-1^9 (1-billion) for N,R and K ... How would you get the answer if the input was N=92312386, R=432765 and K=87397? Write a computer program that does the whole procedure fast, yes.. but no, not really the hard way you would expect. The thing is, the numbers get too huge even for normal computers - and the limit for this program was set at 64MB used and 1sec time anyway. Any mathematically gifted among the TL-netters? Btw, I don't know the answer and the number doesn't interest me that much, the interesting thing is the algorithm, how did you get the result (I don't know the algorithm either :3) | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
| ||
