Puzzle

[WuRunZhe]

1 Reason is like that? 11*11=4 means (1+1)*(1+1)=4 22*22=16 means (2+2)*(2+2)=16 so 10*10=(1+0)*(1+0)=1. :)

[Max Methot]

Smart thinking! I saw it differently, but I don't know if it would have applied for all cases: 11*11 -> (1+1)*(1+1) -> 2*2 = 4 22*22 -> (2+2)*(2+2) -> 4*4 = 16 10*10 -> (1+0)*(1+0) -> 1*1 = 1

[Lost User]

You've got the first two wrong and you want me to solve the third one for you?

[Lost User]

I'm sorry, my responses are limited. You must ask the right questions.

Peter Wasser "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

[glennPattonWork3]

Quote:

10*10=(1+0)*(1+1)=1.

should that be (1+0)*(1+0) = 1, as I'm pretty sure (1+0)*(1+1) gives 1*2 = 2 or am I missing something?

[Lost User]

ok, where did you hide MH370?

[Lost User]

Which proves the problem is underspecified.

One day I aspire to having a signature.

[ZurdoDev]

:laugh: :thumbsup:

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

[Simon_Whale]

Is it home time yet?

Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians. Help end the violence EAT BACON

[Rob Grainger]

My thought exactly, there must be dozens of possible answers, and without further information we can just regard all of them as correct.

"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough." Alan Kay.

[Bassam Abdul Baki]

No solution. Programmatically, the computer should detect that the second character in 10 is not the same as the first and thereby fails the pattern that you had previously established. Ergo, aa*aa is the only established pattern here.

Web - BM - RSS - Math - LinkedIn

[glennPattonWork3]

No, looking busy while dealing with nothing very much aside from applying for other jobs, isn't really time occupying :zzz:

[Dennis_E]

Right. There are several paths to a solution. We can only speculate about the intended solution.

[Roger Wright]

Nonsense. It is only underspecified if there isn't sufficient informatino to reach a solution. The existence of multiple paths to a correct solution does not imply a lack of specification, else the entire concept of OOP would fail.

Will Rogers never met me.

[Rob Grainger]

I disagree, a puzzle should have just one correct solution, and sufficient clues to infer the correct solution. The problem presented has too many correct solutions, and not enough rules specified to determine the answer. Imagine a jigsaw puzzle with multiple solutions, or a crossword, or Sudoku, or a chess problem, or ... (Unless the problem is to find all correct solutions - but in this case I suspect that could be pretty close to infinite).

"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough." Alan Kay.

[WuRunZhe]

Sorry, I've written wrong. I've just modified my answer. :)