PDA

View Full Version : New Logic Game



Dreadful Scathe
13th-January-2006, 12:04 PM
Just came across this.

Really Complicated Game (http://crux.baker.edu/cdavis09/roses.html)

Read it and see if you can figure out the answer for every roll of the dice. You have to figure out how the answer is derived. If you get it DO NOT POST 'HOW' HERE as it will spoil it for everyone else.

It took me about 5 mins, I have 'that' sort of mind. Whatever 'that' is :)

LMC
13th-January-2006, 12:23 PM
You missed a bit DS: people are also allowed to know that the answer will always be zero or an even number.

murphy
13th-January-2006, 12:23 PM
Just came across this.

Really Complicated Game (http://crux.baker.edu/cdavis09/roses.html)

Read it and see if you can figure out the answer for every roll of the dice. You have to figure out how the answer is derived. If you get it DO NOT POST 'HOW' HERE as it will spoil it for everyone else.

It took me about 5 mins, I have 'that' sort of mind. Whatever 'that' is :)

Got it straight away. What sort of mind do I have?? :eek:

LMC
13th-January-2006, 12:30 PM
OK, took me a bit longer - about 8 minutes total - and I confess that I cheated and followed the link to Fraternity of Petals of the Rose - and then to "What happened when Bill Gates was introduced to PotR (http://www.borrett.id.au/computing/petals-bg.htm)" - which is where I got the even number clue.

DavidB
13th-January-2006, 12:48 PM
Got it straight away, without reading the zero or even bit.

It would be more interesting if they didn't tell you the name of the game - just the "zero or even".

Dreadful Scathe
13th-January-2006, 12:52 PM
Its not my fault, its not my website. The even number clue wouldnt have made a difference to me getting it i dont think and its quickyl obvious thats all you get if you try it a few times :).

LMC
13th-January-2006, 12:55 PM
Its not my fault, its not my website. The even number clue wouldnt have made a difference to me getting it i dont think and its quickyl obvious thats all you get if you try it a few times :).
Sorry DS, should have made it clear that it was the website missing the information and not your fault - I'm impatient, so I got frustrated enough after about 4 goes to go hunting :blush: (the 8 minutes includes reading through the article I linked) - and I needed the even number clue, dunno what that says about my (lack of) creativity :rolleyes:

murphy
13th-January-2006, 01:36 PM
..."What happened when Bill Gates was introduced to PotR (http://www.borrett.id.au/computing/petals-bg.htm)" ...

Ok, so I was reading this quickly the first time and didn't see the very last letter.
:rofl:
Would have made an interesting article???

TheTramp
13th-January-2006, 01:46 PM
Got it straight away, without reading the zero or even bit.

It would be more interesting if they didn't tell you the name of the game - just the "zero or even".

:yeah:

Seemed pretty obvious to me too from the name of the game...

foxylady
13th-January-2006, 02:01 PM
Got it straight away. What sort of mind do I have?? :eek:

Me too - first go..

Dreadful Scathe
13th-January-2006, 03:30 PM
Are the people who didnt get it keeping quiet ? :)

LMC
13th-January-2006, 03:36 PM
It would be more interesting if they didn't tell you the name of the game - just the "zero or even".
I actually found the name of the game a distraction - it seemed a bit Zen and set my mind off on torturous ramblings...

Dreadful Scathe
13th-January-2006, 05:33 PM
of course bear in mind "smarter people take longer" to solve this ;)

LMC
13th-January-2006, 05:39 PM
Well, thank goodness I'm not as "smart" as Bill Gates :eek:

ducasi
13th-January-2006, 05:47 PM
of course bear in mind "smarter people take longer" to solve this ;)
I think that might be because smarter people tend to look for more complex patterns based on experience from puzzles they've met before, while "normal" people take the question at face value, and just say what they see...

And I guess that's why it took me (I think, it was a while ago...) a couple of attempts to figure it out.

stewart38
13th-January-2006, 05:55 PM
I think that might be because smarter people tend to look for more complex patterns based on experience from puzzles they've met before, while "normal" people take the question at face value, and just say what they see...

And I guess that's why it took me (I think, it was a while ago...) a couple of attempts to figure it out.

5 mins and i still havent got it :sad:

-------------------------

I was introduced to "Petals Around the Rose" by Dr. Richard Duke at the University of Michigan . Dr. Duke used to begin each of his gaming/simulation courses with this exercise. While some students would solve the problem right away, others would struggle all semester. It had taken Dr. Duke well over a year himself, and he would always explain that the smarter you were, the longer it took to figure it out.
-----------------------

TheTramp
13th-January-2006, 06:09 PM
of course bear in mind "smarter people take longer" to solve this ;)

Says who*... :devil:













* Probably all the 'smart' people who didn't get it! :flower:

Tessalicious
13th-January-2006, 06:27 PM
of course bear in mind "smarter people take longer" to solve this ;)That'll be me then... :( I'll come back to it later.

S'not fair, I used to be good at this stuff - my latest theory is that a degree de-educates this part of your brain.

EDIT:scratch that, got it now - duh!

Andy McGregor
13th-January-2006, 06:37 PM
I had a quick look earlier, spent 5 minutes on it and didn't get it. Got it in a few sconds on my second look. Maybe my mind was working on the problem at a different level while I wasn't thinking about it :confused:

Now I need to think of a few more problems I can solve by not thinking about them.

Dreadful Scathe
13th-January-2006, 09:18 PM
I was introduced to "Petals Around the Rose" by Dr. Richard Duke at the University of Michigan . Dr. Duke used to begin each of his gaming/simulation courses with this exercise. While some students would solve the problem right away, others would struggle all semester. It had taken Dr. Duke well over a year himself, and he would always explain that the smarter you were, the longer it took to figure it out.


I can see what he means, people who are mathematically smart would perhaps have more trouble. Maybe people who dont assume anything will do better ;)

ducasi
13th-January-2006, 09:53 PM
Maybe people who dont assume anything will do better Yeah, and some of these folks are the smartest of all.

Gadget
13th-January-2006, 11:44 PM
I can see what he means, people who are mathematically smart would perhaps have more trouble. Maybe people who dont assume anything will do better ;)
:rofl: Took me longer to count than it did to work out what was asked. - must be true. :whistle:

pjay
14th-January-2006, 02:25 AM
ok so it took a few minutes... but then I was testing a few similar theories as options... I think it'd be easier if was called "petals around the roses" (if it needed to be easier)

stewart38
18th-January-2006, 05:43 PM
I didnt get this can someone PM me the ans:mad: :mad: and ill rep them :angry: :angry:

LMC
18th-January-2006, 05:44 PM
I would just like to say here that Stewart PM'd me for the answer on 13 Jan and I told him I wasn't allowed to tell him :innocent:

Stewart - as others have said, the name of the game is relevant.

Msfab
18th-January-2006, 05:49 PM
I didnt get this can someone PM me the ans:mad: :mad: and ill rep them :angry: :angry:

Think centre of flower and now look at whats around it

See how simple :rolleyes:

I dont think ive totally given it away:innocent:

stewart38
18th-January-2006, 05:49 PM
I would just like to say here that Stewart PM'd me for the answer on 13 Jan and I told him I wasn't allowed to tell him :innocent:

Stewart - as others have said, the name of the game is relevant.


Lets face facts im too intelligent. I thought it might be some form of dimensional thing to do with 'charges'

Charges are either sources of space or sinks of space with the dimension of L^3/T (Length cubed divided by time). i.e. a source and sink represents a flow of a volume of space per unit time. There are only two types of stable charged particles, the proton (sink) and the electron (source). All other stable matter is composed of protons and electrons including the neutron.

GIVE ME another week :sad:

LMC
18th-January-2006, 05:53 PM
Dr Richard Duke at the University of Michigan took over a year to get it (according to the website).

But a five year old child who has learned to count could get it.

Which I think should give you a clue that it isn't anything to do with that weird stuff you copied from some random website somewhere? :what:

stewart38
18th-January-2006, 05:55 PM
Think centre of flower and now look at whats around it

See how simple :rolleyes:

I dont think ive totally given it away:innocent:

I've got it now :whistle:

Ill read that web site again sometime

Cruella
18th-January-2006, 06:03 PM
Didn't have a clue the first time i looked but only had a couple of goes. Came back and read a few posts and could see it straight away.:rolleyes:

Dreadful Scathe
18th-January-2006, 06:08 PM
MsFab spoilt it slightly :(


I thought it might be some form of dimensional thing to do with 'charges'


That was my first guess too, then i thought it "perhaps it has something to do with ears of corn and number of cows". I got it soon after that :)

stewart38
18th-January-2006, 06:11 PM
MsFab spoilt it slightly :(



That was my first guess too, then i thought it "perhaps it has something to do with ears of corn and number of cows". I got it soon after that :)


I looked at it didnt get it and did that again, about 10 mins each

I felt better that the more intelligent you are the less likely you are to get it :whistle:


I dont associate petals and roses with dice dots :sad:

stewart38
19th-January-2006, 12:30 AM
I looked at it didnt get it and did that again, about 10 mins each

I felt better that the more intelligent you are the less likely you are to get it :whistle:


I dont associate petals and roses with dice dots :sad:

I got -ve rep for this

How does this help anyone out :mad: :mad: :mad:

Tessalicious
19th-January-2006, 01:17 AM
I got -ve rep for this

How does this help anyone out :mad: :mad: :mad:Yes Stewart, I gave you negative rep for this post. I'm not ashamed of that, although I don't think that giving me negative rep back just to get revenge on me is appropriate, or for that matter particularly adult behaviour, but that's life - you've done it to me and others before, and I'm sure you'll do it again - some people just never grow up.

My reasoning was this (do not read this if you don't want more clues) : this is a problem for which there shouldn't be any clues, or it defeats the purpose of looking at how you solve problems, and dulls any sense of achievement from figuring it out. If I had not already worked out the answer, your post would have instantly given me the nudge I needed to solve it, and then I would have been extremely annoyed that I hadn't been allowed to work it out in my own time. Anyone else who had not solved it might feel the same way.

And if you feel aggrieved at receiving negative rep for spoiling a perfectly good test, I'm sure one of the girls who regularly rep you 'just for being you' will make it up to you - I, on the other hand, prefer that any rep I may receive is earned because I have contributed something useful, interesting or funny.

stewart38
19th-January-2006, 02:03 AM
:mad:
Yes Stewart, I gave you negative rep for this post. I'm not ashamed of that, although I don't think that giving me negative rep back just to get revenge on me is appropriate, or for that matter particularly adult behaviour, but that's life - you've done it to me and others before, and I'm sure you'll do it again - some people just never grow up.

My reasoning was this (do not read this if you don't want more clues) : this is a problem for which there shouldn't be any clues, or it defeats the purpose of looking at how you solve problems, and dulls any sense of achievement from figuring it out. If I had not already worked out the answer, your post would have instantly given me the nudge I needed to solve it, and then I would have been extremely annoyed that I hadn't been allowed to work it out in my own time. Anyone else who had not solved it might feel the same way.

And if you feel aggrieved at receiving negative rep for spoiling a perfectly good test, I'm sure one of the girls who regularly rep you 'just for being you' will make it up to you - I, on the other hand, prefer that any rep I may receive is earned because I have contributed something useful, interesting or funny.

I didnt give out any clues :mad:

If you want to -ve rep me for no reason then you will get it back, sorry thats the way of the stewarts world, if you also going to write something nasty with the rep then thats not fair to. I've got -ve rep before and dont always give it back thats just silly

If you can show how Ive spolit a good test im happy to rep you 3 times

If you want to -ve rep all these girls that routinely rep me go ahead , maybe name and shame but again thats nasty comment without fact

Now dont run on ice or you will slip, thats got to be useful

Ice forms at 32f 0c thats interesting if you want an ice lolly

Its also cold when dropped down someone back thats funny

ducasi
19th-January-2006, 09:01 AM
I didnt give out any clues You so did. The association you make in the offending statement would be enough for most people to suss it out.

Can't you see that?

stewart38
19th-January-2006, 11:19 AM
You so did. The association you make in the offending statement would be enough for most people to suss it out.

Can't you see that?


No i didnt see it and it certainly wasnt intentional, if it was I apologise to everyone

I dont even care re the -ve rep its the horrible comments that went with it and then the 'assumptions' i have a possy of people that will + rep me anyway

last time i looked i was on 498 :sad:

Tessalicious
19th-January-2006, 11:36 AM
last time i looked i was on 498 :sad:And the fact that you're now on 520 without having said anything particularly helpful since is speaking volumes to me. However, I'll leave it at that - I've said my piece, it wasn't intended as a horrible comment, just to point out that you had spoiled the game for everyone. But no matter.

stewart38
19th-January-2006, 11:38 AM
And the fact that you're now on 520 without having said anything particularly helpful since is speaking volumes to me. However, I'll leave it at that - I've said my piece, it wasn't intended as a horrible comment, just to point out that you had spoiled the game for everyone. But no matter.

they were all related to Storm weekender :flower: