mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Fun Stuff > Puzzles

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2007-03-24, 18:44   #133
DJones
 
DJones's Avatar
 
Oct 2006

1118 Posts
Default

202 = ( ( 4 + 4 ) / 4% ) + sqrt(4)
202 = 4 ^ 4 - ( 4! / .4~ )
DJones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-24, 19:02   #134
Andi47
 
Andi47's Avatar
 
Oct 2004
Austria

248210 Posts
Default

203 = gamma(gamma(4)) / √.4~ + 4! - gamma(√4)
204 = (√4 / .4)! / √.4~ + 4!
205 = gamma(gamma(4)) / √.4~ + gamma(√4)
206 = gamma(gamma(4)) / √.4~ + √4

Last fiddled with by Andi47 on 2007-03-24 at 19:09
Andi47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-24, 20:59   #135
DJones
 
DJones's Avatar
 
Oct 2006

73 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andi47 View Post
203 = gamma(gamma(4)) / √.4~ + 4! - gamma(√4)
204 = (√4 / .4)! / √.4~ + 4!
205 = gamma(gamma(4)) / √.4~ + gamma(√4)
206 = gamma(gamma(4)) / √.4~ + √4
205 and 206 are presumably missing '+4!'

207 = (4! * gamma(4) - gamma(4)) / √.4~
208 = 4 ^ 4 - 4! - 4!

Last fiddled with by DJones on 2007-03-24 at 21:20
DJones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-25, 07:14   #136
Andi47
 
Andi47's Avatar
 
Oct 2004
Austria

2·17·73 Posts
Default

*grrrrrr*

catching two loose 4!'s:

205 = gamma(gamma(4)) / √.4~ + 4! + gamma(4)
206 = gamma(gamma(4)) / √.4~ + 4! + √4

moving on:
209 = ((gamma(4) + gamma(√(4)))! - 4!) / 4!
210 = (4! + 4! / .4) / .4
211 = (gamma(4 + 4) + 4!) / 4!
212 = 4 ^ 4 - 44
Andi47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-25, 17:46   #137
PrimeCrazzy
 
PrimeCrazzy's Avatar
 
Dec 2005

1410 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesehead View Post
... and now one of those exciting prime decades!

191 = ((gamma(4))! + 44) / 4
192 = (44 + 4) * 4

May I suggest you start a new thread "Cheesehead prime four" with your rules. Pleasde note that GAMMA IS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL RULES!
PrimeCrazzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-25, 17:49   #138
PrimeCrazzy
 
PrimeCrazzy's Avatar
 
Dec 2005

2×7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wacky View Post
Most of us are not interested in your "change of the rules". If you are allowed to change the rules to suit yourself, then any value becomes trivial.

Please stick to the established restrictions.

Does the useof gamma and % make all numbers trivial?
PrimeCrazzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-25, 18:50   #139
DJones
 
DJones's Avatar
 
Oct 2006

73 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrimeCrazzy View Post
May I suggest you start a new thread "Cheesehead prime four" with your rules. Pleasde note that GAMMA IS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL RULES!
No, it isn't; but surely the fact that gamma (and per cent) has been used by several others as well as Cheesehead suggests that there may have been an amendment to the rules. If you go and read post 104 in this thread, the person who started this thread clearly says;
Quote:
Originally Posted by petrw1 View Post
...fo(u)r the sake of progress I'm game with allowing % and gamma. And I like [Andi47's] recommendation that the preference is to NOT use them and solutions without them will replace solutions with them.
So, in order that the continuation of consecutive numbers being solved does not get bogged down, the person who set up the thread has decided to allow gamma and per cent, although gamma-less and per-cent-less solutions found for lower numbers will supercede the earlier solutions.
The key difference is that gamma and per cent were deemed acceptable only when a point was reached where a number was apparently unobtainable using the initial functions. Sum and subfactorial, on the other hand, were put forward when not strictly necessary by someone who had clearly not bothered to read the thread properly. Looked at in this strictly logical manner, I think it's understandable why Cheesehead may have been a little impatient with you.
Now, if you'd like to join in on this puzzle [1] using the rules so far established I'm sure no-one would object. If you would like to start a new thread using sum and subfactorial, but neither gamma nor per cent, then by all means do so - although, I recommend choosing a different set of numbers as well otherwise people may be discouraged from taking part in something which is very similar to an existing active thread.
Either way, calm down, take a deep breath, and relax.

[1] Is this thread a puzzle or a problem? Is there a technical difference between the two?
DJones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-25, 19:05   #140
cheesehead
 
cheesehead's Avatar
 
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA

22×3×641 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrimeCrazzy View Post
May I suggest you start a new thread "Cheesehead prime four" with your rules. Pleasde note that GAMMA IS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL RULES!
I wanted to facilitate progress of the thread to higher numbers, without using any operator (such as %)* to which I object more strongly than to the gamma. I didn't propose, introduce, or approve the gamma function here. I had previously stated my preference not to extend the allowed operators, and didn't want to repeat that. Also, I admired the simplicity of the 192 solution, and wanted to be the one to post it.

In view of my earlier objections, it would have been a good idea for me to have stated my motivations in order to ward off misunderstanding. I apologize for omitting that.

I was not irritated by your suggestions to add sum and subfactorial. My post #124 suggestion about starting a new thread was punctuated with a to signal that it was intended as a friendly, not hostile, suggestion about how to achieve what you wanted without further modifying the present thread. I wrote "... those of us interested in that set ..." because I was (and still am) genuinely interested in participating in such a thread, but I didn't state my interest explicitly. I wouldn't object to using either the sum or subfactorial if the thread originator specified them. I'd simply avoid participating if I objected to the originator's set of rules in that context.

- - - - -

* I previously objected to % and decimal point equally. I've changed my opinion since then, to accept decimal point (implied division by 10, if followed by a single-digit number) more readily than percent (implied division by 102).

Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2007-03-25 at 20:03
cheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-26, 19:35   #141
DJones
 
DJones's Avatar
 
Oct 2006

73 Posts
Default

213 = (gamma(gamma(4)) + 4! - √4) / √.4~
214 = 4 * 4! / .4~ - √4
215 = 4 * 4! / .4~ - gamma(√4)
216 = 4! * (4 + 4) + 4!
DJones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-26, 23:23   #142
fetofs
 
fetofs's Avatar
 
Aug 2005
Brazil

2×181 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJones View Post
215 = 4 * 4! / .4~ - gamma(√4)
215 = ((4 * 4!) - .4~) / .4~
fetofs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-27, 00:46   #143
cheesehead
 
cheesehead's Avatar
 
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA

11110000011002 Posts
Default

217 = (4 * 4! + .4~) / .4~
218 = 4 * 4! / .4~ + √4
219 = (4! * gamma(4) + √4) / √.4~
220 = 4 * 4! / .4~ + 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJones View Post
213 = (gamma(gamma(4)) + 4! - √4) / √.4~
With single gamma:

213 = (4! * gamma(4) - √4) / √.4~

Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2007-03-27 at 00:48
cheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


All times are UTC. The time now is 09:57.

Sun Jan 24 09:57:33 UTC 2021 up 52 days, 6:08, 0 users, load averages: 2.63, 2.34, 2.18

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.