Puzzle
-
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. :)
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?
-
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
-
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
-
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
Is it home time yet?
Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians. Help end the violence EAT BACON
-
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.
-
11*11=4 22*22=16 ' ' ' 10*10=?
-
Is it home time yet?
Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians. Help end the violence EAT BACON
No, looking busy while dealing with nothing very much aside from applying for other jobs, isn't really time occupying :zzz:
-
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.
-
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.
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.
-
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?