I left you plenty of time to solve the problem and I am going to post the solve. None of you maneged to find a single number for sure... I'm dissapointed :p
So: here it is:
Printable View
I left you plenty of time to solve the problem and I am going to post the solve. None of you maneged to find a single number for sure... I'm dissapointed :p
So: here it is:
You will find that there are nine numbers shown:
uruk, gutar, ganal, barwon, omar, farok, babu, donze, hul
and these operators:
i m y o s t
Lets take these two numbers:
39 = ganalibarwonhul
199 = barwoniganalhul
(will call the base numbers G B and H for short)
so you noticed that
39+199 = G + BxH + B + GxH
238 = G(1+H) + B(1+h) = (G+B)(1+H) -> 238%(1+H) =0
then (1+H) is one of these numbers :
2 7 17 34 119 so H is one of these 1 6 16 33 118
also
199 - 39 = B+GxH-G-BxH
160 = G(H-1)-B(H-1) -> 160%(H-1) =0
then (H-1) is one of these numbers :
2 4 5 8 10 16 20 32 40 80 so H is one of these 3 5 6 9 11 17 21 33 41 81
six canot be it because then we'll get negative values fo G and B so hul is 33
then
39 = G + B*H -> 33 >B*H > 39 so b can only be 1
barwon is 1
199 = B+G*H = 1+x*33
ganal is 6
You will have to explain this one, because the system does allow 6 from all my calculations and all the calculations you show.Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
six canot be it because then we'll get negative values fo G and B
And I can't wait for the operators explanation... :)
so lets look at
71 = urukigutarhul
71 = U + 33G
33G<71 so G is either 1 or 2 but barwon is 1 so
gutar is 2
that means that uruk is 5
106 = omarifarokhul
106 = O + 33F
33f < 106 so F is either 1 or 2 or 3. 1 and 2 are occupied so
farok is 3
and omar is 7
what we have by now:
barwon = 1, ganal = 6, uruk = 5, gutar = 2, farok = 3, omar = 7
Honestly men I thought that you'll get at least this far... :D
But I have a question for you. Do you want me to proceed with the solve or do you want to try to slove it by yourselves now?
Yes it's true... I've misscalculated :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by galathaea
You will have to explain this one, because the system does allow 6 from all my calculations and all the calculations you show.
And I can't wait for the operators explanation... :)
But if hul was 6 there wouldnt be way to solve this would it...
Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
Yes it's true... I've misscalculated
But if hul was 6 there wouldnt be way to solve this would it...
Do you see the contradiction? :)Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
Honestly men I thought that you'll get at least this far...
Just put me out of my misery please. I want to see the single letters!Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
But I have a question for you. Do you want me to proceed with the solve or do you want to try to slove it by yourselves now?
But galathaea (and with his permission, I'll say I helped ;)) proved that barwon=1!Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
None of you maneged to find a single number for sure.
Hmmm, maybe I'll give this problem another chance, but I must admit, it was a huge let down that we were just supposed to assume that hul naturally was equal to 33.
With the small assumption that hul = 33 that SeventhStar made (it's a pretty serious assumption 7*, you should have had some clarification there in the problem), the solution comes easily with some thought.
Using the tools Simon and galathaea have provided (the organizations in their posts), I have solved the problem! The method is tedious, so I'll just list the translations.
Assume that xx, and zz are integers (doubled to avoid confusion with operators). Now
xxozz = xxszz = xx + zz - 22.
xxyzz = xxtzz = xx + zz - 44.
xxazz = zz - xx.
xxmzz = xxizz = xx + zz.
babu = 4, and donze =11 from observations made with the numbers 37, 233, and 242 involving the 'm' operator.
Using these solutions,
178 = gutaroganalhul
189 = gutaryomarhul
351 = farokiomarodonzehul
372 = farokiganalidonzehul
although there are many different ways to actually write these numbers.
And the final two questions:
barwonadonzesbarwonhulhul = 1077
omarydonzehul = 326.
These translations of the base numbers and operation symbols work for every number listed in the question, but nevertheless I await SeventhStar's confirmation.
Quote:
Originally posted by SolarFlare
I am currently guessing that each operator does the following:
blahoblahh (blah o blahh) = (some constant)*(blah)+(some constant)*(blahh)+(some constant), where the operator used (in this case, 'o') defines the three constants.
But... my solutions fit this pattern exactly! It just so happened that my above quote was a bit complex, because I intended it to cover all solutions in general. Again, I've been mislead!Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
noooo! then it'd be impossible to solve!
I would say that you solved barwon=1! Your post was up while I was working on it, and though I tried real hard not to think about any of the subsequent posts while I was working on the problem, I'm sure it was there leading me.Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
But galathaea (and with his permission, I'll say I helped ) proved that barwon=1!
And thank you, solarflare, for the solution. I have not had time to work on it since SeventhStar's (incomplete!) posts, but it was driving me a little batty! I finally see the light.
PS: the fact that 'm' = 'i' is alittle annoying, since I had been trying to work it out by assuming (yes, I see the prefix) that the operators were different...
Sory that I couldn't post yesterday but I got a pretty urgent job... Anyway I can explain everything now since the new issue of the magazine that I took the problem from came out today...Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
But galathaea (and with his permission, I'll say I helped ;)) proved that barwon=1!
Hmmm, maybe I'll give this problem another chance, but I must admit, it was a huge let down that we were just supposed to assume that hul naturally was equal to 33.
There you can find the author's solve.
He sais that knowing that the system's idea is the forming of numbers in numerical intervals should've helped us.
because
39 = ganalibarwonhul actually means "6 after the first 33"
if hul was 6 and ganal was 33 that would've been "33 after the first 6" but that's ridiculous (maybe "3 after the 6th 6")
so that why it's 33 and not 6...
Also the question said that base numbers do not alterate morphologically but that's not said for the operators.
The 'after operator' or 'plus' if you prefer is i only between two consonant and 'm' if one of the surrounding lettrs is a vowel. that's also true for 's' and 'o' and 't' and 'y'
Not all of the base number were given, the autor sais and not all of the operators. But the system was really used by some indians in south america and is not just made up.
That's it. Now does anyone have a good quesytion or shall I proceed from my new magazine. (btw the Bulgarian magazine 'Math Plus Plus' is the best - payed comersial)
1. Gabriel 7
2. me :D 6
3. Simon 5
4. Saturno 4
5. Elrond, solarflare 3
6. John 2
7. dimm_coder, Xplorer, galathaea 1
solarflare, galathaea and simon get an extra point for being the only ones trying to answer this :D Dont be mad guys. I didn't know it would be so hard and controvresial...
Aaaarrrrggghhh. Somebody please stop this guy. He's going to drive everybody nuts and psycho dreaming about numbers and operators.Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
That's it. Now does anyone have a good quesytion or shall I proceed from my new magazine.
be cool :cool: Simon! The problem I had in mind isn't from the 'Mathematical Linguistics' part.Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
Aaaarrrrggghhh. Somebody please stop this guy. He's going to drive everybody nuts and psycho dreaming about numbers and operators.
But if you like you can post a probem
I am cool. It's chilly here.Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
be cool :cool: Simon!
Oof.Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
The problem I had in mind isn't from the 'Mathematical Linguistics' part.
No thanks.Quote:
Originally posted by SeventhStar
But if you like you can post a probem
I am not sure whether it is a good idea to post questions from a mathematical magazine, actually. The problems should be solvable by mere mortals like us, you know.