|
On October 10 2014 21:54 TheYango wrote: 2*5*4/2 = 20 3*6*7/2 = 63 5*8*2/4 = 20 4*8*9/4 = 72?
I thought possibly that but where on earth does the /2 and /4 come from and how do we know the last one is /4 instead of /2. Arg I hate this kind of pattern shit, don't really understand the purpose of it.
edit: Actually now that i look at it I think it's /2 as the last one.
|
Ah, bumping it up to 4 instead of 2. I knew we could count on Yango.
@numy kinda why I thought it may be something stupid like 63 (20,63,20, 63 etc.) and that was all there was too the pattern.
|
On October 10 2014 22:01 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 21:54 TheYango wrote: 2*5*4/2 = 20 3*6*7/2 = 63 5*8*2/4 = 20 4*8*9/4 = 72? I thought possibly that but where on earth does the /2 and /4 come from and how do we know the last one is /4 instead of /2. Arg I hate this kind of pattern shit, don't really understand the purpose of it.
Well, you derive the relationship from the first one, confirm it with the second one, use that thought process for the third to get the /4, and then apply it to the 4th for the answer.
|
On October 10 2014 22:03 jcarlsoniv wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 22:01 Numy wrote:On October 10 2014 21:54 TheYango wrote: 2*5*4/2 = 20 3*6*7/2 = 63 5*8*2/4 = 20 4*8*9/4 = 72? I thought possibly that but where on earth does the /2 and /4 come from and how do we know the last one is /4 instead of /2. Arg I hate this kind of pattern shit, don't really understand the purpose of it. Well, you derive the relationship from the first one, confirm it with the second one, use that thought process for the third to get the /4, and then apply it to the 4th for the answer.
I get what you saying but the problem is we don't know the logic for the /2 so not really deriving it for the 3rd one. Just kind of throwing a number out there and making it work. Actually looking at it again I think it's /2 because you have 4/2 then 6/3 so with the 3rd one you got 8/2 for /4 and the last one would then be 8/4 for /2. Every other division gives you not a whole number that's why I discarded it.
So A is 4*8*9/2 = 144. Ok that seems large. Whatever screw this.
|
United States47024 Posts
It could actually also be 144, which is annoying.
|
yayyy ambiguous math problems!
edit - inb4 the answer is 36
|
I'd go with yanger's first guess but this shit be retardo
|
|
|
That's just mean, making it look easy until the last bubble D: Also, that's really cool, wonder how long it took to come up with that series if it wasn't done by computer.
|
|
|
On October 10 2014 21:07 justiceknight wrote:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/miOFPkx.jpg) some1 solve this problem for me Here's the best I can come up with: Sides are A B C. Product of A with gcd(B,C)^2, then B with gcd(A,C)^2, and so on rotating around. This rule works for all 3, but I feel like it shouldn't be the solution. This gives: 5 * gcd(2,4)^2 = 5*2^2 = 20 7 * gcd(6,3)^2 = 7*3^2 = 63 5 * gcd(8,2)^2 = 5*2^2 = 20 8 * gcd(4,9)^2 = 8*1^2 = 8 or if we use a different rule and only take the gcd of the sides with a common factor, we get 144. Either way the answer seems like it should be 144 or 36.
|
Hahaaaaaaaa math
American education
And other funny things~
|
Interesting. Nice Tooplark.
|
Or you can take the biggest prime factor of each corner and multiply them. Then the answer is 12.
|
this is not a well-constructed puzzle
|
Those kinds of puzzled are universally dumb anyway.
|
Maybe the point is that there are a bunch of possible solutions and the goal is to see you apply reasoning to find one, doesn't matter which, as long as you explain said reasoning?
|
On October 10 2014 23:33 Alaric wrote: Maybe the point is that there are a bunch of possible solutions and the goal is to see you apply reasoning to find one, doesn't matter which, as long as you explain said reasoning? NOT A SATISFYING ANSWER ALARIC
|
On October 10 2014 23:33 Alaric wrote: Maybe the point is that there are a bunch of possible solutions and the goal is to see you apply reasoning to find one, doesn't matter which, as long as you explain said reasoning?
This isn't a hippy question. It's just a dumb maths one.
|
On October 10 2014 23:24 Sufficiency wrote: Or you can take the biggest prime factor of each corner and multiply them. Then the answer is 12.
That's what I thought before I read some of the other ideas, now I'm not sure which I think it is anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|