while both 127 and 9721 are primes...
looks like apples and oranges
but I'm not bored enough to proceed
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:39 am
Finally getting round to some of my harder cards a few years later than everyone else and just waded through 47 pages (it's nearly 5 a.m. ... I need sleep!).
cthrag yaska wrote:
The only real difference between this and, say, Shuffled or 13th Labour, is that MC don't know what the answer is at the moment. However, just because nobody today knows what the answer will be, doesn't mean that the card cannot be solved; only that it cannot be solved YET.
This is not true. What if the Riemann hypothesis were false? Then, given that Mind Candy have said on a number of occasions "In order to solve the card you need to prove the Riemann hypothesis", the card would be unsolvable.
It is possible that if this were the case a counterexample would suffice, but Mind Candy have NOT said "prove or disprove", they've said prove, and when they said the possible options you have for inputting solutions to the card, they listed them as
- a mathematical proof inputted using LaTeX
- the name of an accepted proof of the RH
- the author of an accepted proof of the RH
Seems to me people have been completely overlooking the fact that the Riemann hypothesis might be false.
Edit: I was on page 40 when I read this and on p.41 some other people are discussing the same thing. I feel I should add that "prove" never means "prove or disprove" - it means "prove". In all of my maths exams and exercises when they want to be ambiguous over whether a statement is true or false the standard wording is "Give a proof or counterexample."
By the way, as justification of my mathematical knowledge (or not ) I should say I'm in the third year (going into fourth soon) of a maths degree and I've just finished a module on the Riemann Zeta function. (Admittedly, a key motivation for taking the module was that I had Riemann (the card, not the dude) hanging around at home somewhere and wanted to try and give it a solve. That's my geekery for you.)
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 9:42 pm
If you watch the video of Adrian's presentation at a conference you will see at the end where he discussed the unsolved cards. Including this one. Which was put in as a joke. And so they could point out the $1M prize.
The person who linked me to this just said that "a paper was released", so this paper probably hasn't been formally published yet.
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:22 pm
The new answer page for this card is very interesting, it has no mension of proof but only says:
"If the message contains more than one word then separate them by using spaces, and no punctuation."
Message, what message? Could there be a hidden message as proposed way back at the start?
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:41 am
Hooray!! No longer a lurker, but a Kilroy now.
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:11 pm
Being a late joiner to PXC, I haven't had anything worthwhile to add to these forums yet that hadn't seemed to have already been written; but I don't like being labelled a lurker, so decided I had to write something, anything, and hopefully that will change my posting tag.
"What is the secret message? (The reward is the satisfaction of knowing the answer)." That said, I have to believe that there is an answer to this puzzle and that MindCandy didn't sneak an unsolvable card into the game.
The quote, by the way, is from the Clay Mathematics Institute website, in a section called Prime Numbers and Cryptography. On the same page they have their own puzzle: http://www.claymath.org/posters/primes/
1234567 = 127 x 9721
1020030004000050000060000007 = ? x ? x ? ...
public key = 5, 519208104502047440191322024032 461128846299254256408973265508 51544998255968235697331455544257
How do you know if your answer is correct? Use the algorithm and the table for converting text to numbers and vice versa. If the result makes any sense at all, you almost certainly have the correct answer.
Could CM and MC be in on this one together somehow? Maybe the solution to this Clay Math puzzle (and not the Clay Math Riemann challenge) is the answer MC is looking for.
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:10 pm
Why would you spend more than 10 minutes researching this card?
Why bother researching any of the cards then? Wouldn't you expect to have to do research to find out answers even if the answers are that there isn't one like in this case.
Back when i originally made a stink with some others over the validity of this card as a puzzle, and its solvability. This was my original point. No matter what people say, this IS a puzzle in a big game of puzzles. Which means people would logically work on it. ... The idea is this puzzle was set before us to solve, just like the other 255 cards. So SOMONE is spending more than 10 minutes wracking their brains against this puzzle. AND if thats the case AND there is no solution today to be entered, then SOMONE is wasting their time.
Sirichj is right. Why work on any of the cards rather than this one? IS this "puzzle" a puzzle? or just some worthless piece of paper they threw into the deck of puzzles to confuse and annoy us, and ultimately make us waste a lot of time trying to do the so called impossible puzzle.
The props to mathmatics is nice and all, but this is a puzzle game, ... Ill repeat... ITS A GAME. Games do not imply a lifetime of wasted years on brutal math. Thats the realm of Doctorates in Mathmatics, people who are paid lots in grants to keep them working on these problems for their whole lives.
Either say this card isnt a puzzle and its a waste of time. Or let whoever wants, to work on this endlessly in whatever way they see fit. ... Thats all i can say. Either its part of the game, and people should be wracking their brains, or it shouldnt be part of the game. ... Simple as that.
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:15 am
I think at the time this card came out MC was aware of Louis DeBranges' work and the possibility of him solving Riemann. The fact that DeBranges' work failed to pan out, kind of left the question unanswerable for now if not for the forseeable future.
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:41 am
Why would you spend more than 10 minutes researching this card?
Why bother researching any of the cards then? Wouldn't you expect to have to do research to find out answers even if the answers are that there isn't one like in this case. Anyone can look on the forum and read someone elses hard work, and in this case conclude that it can't be solved but it still takes research to do that doesn't it?
I know a lot of people just go on the forums to get answers to the cards but the whole point of the game is doing research yourself and helping others until you achieve the answer together, not just to take the glory from someone elses work.
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:10 pm
Why would you spend more than 10 minutes researching this card? I agree re 13th Labor and Shuffled which actually HAVE solutions that have not been found. The endless chatter about Riemann's, which has no solution, is effort better spent elsewhere.
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:18 am
I hope there are no cards like this in season 2, it's a little demoralising spending hours researching something that has no solution !
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:09 am
There might still be a solution, I think MC want us to think that there is no solution.
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:08 am
But why would they want a card not solved? It doesn't interfere with the cube finding so I don't see the logic behind giving us a puzzle that will never be solved, unless Clay have paid them to feature it ?? Who knows.
Personally I don't like puzzles with no solution, it seems a little unfair especially as the cards are now selling for £50 plus with no solution? Come on MC at least give us a fighting chance