| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 659.1 | 17 | CHOVAX::YOUNG | Back from the Shadows Again, | Tue Jan 27 1987 13:47 | 1 |
| ANNNI FS B@(1,1)
|
| 659.2 | and then 18... | CLT::GILBERT | eager like a child | Tue Jan 27 1987 15:14 | 0 |
| 659.3 | | TLE::BRETT | | Tue Jan 27 1987 16:54 | 3 |
| 17 18 19 20 22 ...
/Bevin
|
| 659.4 | multiple choice? | SSDEVO::LARY | | Tue Jan 27 1987 20:42 | 9 |
| While I believe the sequence given in .3 is the intended one, the partial
sequence given also supports the continuation:
17 18 19 20 21 23 ...
(i.e. sequences of 1, 2, 4, 8, etc consecutive numbers then skip one)
Richie
|
| 659.5 | 6? | VINO::JMUNZER | | Wed Jan 28 1987 09:15 | 6 |
| Re .4: "The logic of sequences can also be tricky. The Sloane
[Sloane is the expert] handbook lists no less than 22 different
sequences that begin 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ...."
(from the article of .0)
John
|
| 659.6 | Exclude the trivial cases! | SQM::HALLYB | Are all the good ones taken? | Wed Jan 28 1987 11:12 | 1 |
| And which perfect square is NOT in the sequence?
|
| 659.7 | 1 | CHOVAX::YOUNG | Back from the Shadows Again, | Wed Jan 28 1987 12:17 | 1 |
|
|
| 659.8 | | CLT::GILBERT | eager like a child | Wed Jan 28 1987 13:47 | 1 |
| I understand .4, but *not* why .3 is a reasonable answer. Help?
|
| 659.9 | >1! | SQM::HALLYB | Are all the good ones taken? | Wed Jan 28 1987 14:23 | 12 |
| Re: < Note 659.7 by CHOVAX::YOUNG "Back from the Shadows Again," >
"1" is a trivial case, try something with a bit less fluff.
No, "0" is even fluffier.
|
| 659.10 | !!! | CHOVAX::YOUNG | Back from the Shadows Again, | Wed Jan 28 1987 17:37 | 11 |
| Re .9:
Fluff! Don't blame me just because your question got cooked! ;^)
Seriously though, I'll try it out when I get home.
-- Barry
PS. Re .8: It works for me. We must have different series. Should
we give it away yet?
|
| 659.11 | not | JON::MORONEY | Legalize Liberty | Wed Jan 28 1987 17:55 | 3 |
| re .8: Hint: Think in opposites...
-Mike
|
| 659.12 | reading helps... | CHOVAX::YOUNG | Back from the Shadows Again, | Wed Jan 28 1987 22:34 | 15 |
| Re .6:
Set face/red
Now that I am home, and have taken the time to actually read
your note, John, I do in fact see that your title requests
non-trivial cases. I am properly abashed. Please forgive,
<grovel, grovel,...>
Set face/normal
In other news, I think that the (an?) answer to your question is
144.
-- Barry
|
| 659.13 | got it finally (before reading .12) | CLT::GILBERT | eager like a child | Thu Jan 29 1987 11:55 | 0 |
| 659.14 | A gross of crumbs, | SQM::HALLYB | Are all the good ones taken? | Thu Jan 29 1987 20:48 | 4 |
| The answer in .12 is the one I was looking for. A prize of
(1 - phi) cookies. Hope it won't get as stale as Gilbert's!
John
|
| 659.15 | On collecting cookies... | CHOVAX::YOUNG | Back from the Shadows Again, | Fri Jan 30 1987 02:12 | 4 |
| * sigh *
I live in Cherry Hill, NJ, and I can count on one nose the times
I have ever even been in Mass.
|
| 659.16 | My complements on your subtlety! | ZFC::DERAMO | Daniel V. D'Eramo | Fri May 08 1987 18:30 | 15 |
| Hi! I'm fairly new to MATH notes, so I didn't read this
until yesterday. I must admit that I had no idea what the
solution was. Then, this morning, the answer suddenly came
to me (Eureka!) when I was in the shower. (I'm not fibbing,
I sometimes solve math problems in the shower.) The hint
that popped into my mind along with the solution was ...
>> .14 The answer in .12 is the one I was looking for.
... but looking back at all the replies, they must have all
helped without my realizing it at the time.
This one was fun! I like this conference.
Dan
|