Augie Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 interesting I did it as ((a+b) x a) - a = c Interesting...I copied off the guy to my left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 3.5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv's Neighbor Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 2+3=8 3+7=27 4+5=32 5+8=60 6+7=72 7+8=? Bite me!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Bite me!! Now, now....use your words! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Again, 15. Since when and why did "+" become "make up some weird equation to create math puzzles"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Again, 15. Since when and why did "+" become "make up some weird equation to create math puzzles"? I think you could get a meadcoin, you should be respectful! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 I think you could get a meadcoin, you should be respectful! ...why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 ...why? I'm told they will become worth..........something? Possibly a fraction of a Stromboli! (I've already done enough math, so that's out.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Get enough meadcoins and you can get a whole Stromboli. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 (edited) Get enough meadcoins and you can get a whole Stromboli. I'm concerned about how many digits and comas are involved. Is this yen or pesos, or Berkshire Hathaway stock? Edited October 16, 2017 by Augie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 7meadcoin+8meadcoins=? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 7meadcoin+8meadcoins=? 3.5? Maybe 98....I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinceThe70s Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 a+b=c (a+b-1) x a = c if a = 7 and b = 8, c=98. FWIW, I looked at it using a sequence: 1. 2+3=8 2. 3+7=27 3. 4+5=32 4. 5+8=60 5. 6+7=72 6. 7+8=? Using the sequence number, this equation works: a*b + seq*a = c 7*8 +6*7 = 98 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 FWIW, I looked at it using a sequence: 1. 2+3=8 2. 3+7=27 3. 4+5=32 4. 5+8=60 5. 6+7=72 6. 7+8=? Using the sequence number, this equation works: a*b + seq*a = c 7*8 +6*7 = 98 Same equation. In each case, seq = a - 1. So a*b + seq*a = a*b + (a-1)*a = (a+b-1)*a. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinceThe70s Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Same equation. In each case, seq = a - 1. So a*b + seq*a = a*b + (a-1)*a = (a+b-1)*a. I was assuming the order of the equations mattered and was independent of a: 3+7 = 3*7 + 3*1 = 24 2+3 = 2*3 + 2*2 = 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 I was assuming the order of the equations mattered and was independent of a: 3+7 = 3*7 + 3*1 = 24 2+3 = 2*3 + 2*2 = 10 Well, I just disproved your assumption, didn't I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinceThe70s Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Well, I just disproved your assumption, didn't I? ...or there's more than one possible solution. If we can assume a '+" somehow relates to a*b + (a-1)*a no reason we couldn''t also assume the sequence of the equations has significance. In truth, I like the a*b + (a-1)*a solution better, just thought it was interesting that I came at it from a slightly different angle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 ...or there's more than one possible solution. If we can assume a '+" somehow relates to a*b + (a-1)*a no reason we couldn''t also assume the sequence of the equations has significance. In truth, I like the a*b + (a-1)*a solution better, just thought it was interesting that I came at it from a slightly different angle. Except I already demonstrated that, if sequence is important, it reduces to the previous solution. Or, to put it a different way: if you create a solution for a specific case (where a specific sequence matters), and that solution can be generalized (to a solution that's sequence-independent), the general solution is considered the correct one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinceThe70s Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Except I already demonstrated that, if sequence is important, it reduces to the previous solution. Or, to put it a different way: if you create a solution for a specific case (where a specific sequence matters), and that solution can be generalized (to a solution that's sequence-independent), the general solution is considered the correct one. . ..or if your sample set is too limited you could arrive at the wrong solution for all the right reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 . ..or if your sample set is too limited you could arrive at the wrong solution for all the right reasons. Which is why the general case is preferred to the specific case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts