Joined: 18 Feb 2007 Posts: 11 Location: Canada
Hooray!! No longer a lurker, but a Kilroy now.
Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:11 pm
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 Posts: 281 Location: South Yorkshire, England
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?
Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:41 am
Joined: 03 Jun 2006 Posts: 79
The person who linked me to this just said that "a paper was released", so this paper probably hasn't been formally published yet.
Watching A World Without Oil and Perplex City
PXC Trades | You, too, can edit the PXC Wiki!
Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:22 pm
Joined: 15 Aug 2005 Posts: 1089
Looks like something to keep an eye on (also, stickying this post so that its with the other unsolved season 1 cards so that it can be kept an eye on.)
Sat Mar 17, 2007 5:07 am
Joined: 28 Sep 2002 Posts: 3372 Location: Far Far Away. Nowhere Near You. Really.
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.
Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:33 am
Joined: 11 Nov 2007 Posts: 34
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:
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.)
Mon May 25, 2009 9:42 pm
Silver #238 Factors 1020030004000050000060000007 factored =
while both 127 and 9721 are primes...
looks like apples and oranges
but I'm not bored enough to proceed
Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:39 am
Display posts from previous: Sort by: All Posts 1 Day 1 Week 2 Weeks 1 Month 3 Months 6 Months 1 Year Post Time Post Subject Author Ascending Descending