[–] reidjs 5y ago ↗ That goes from sort of understandable to completely cryptic in about 3 pages [–] wizardofdos 5y ago ↗ TLDR: You can't tell by looking (if your rule holds for all or only a small set of numbers).You will need a maths degree for actually telling. [–] techbio 5y ago ↗ "Capricious coincidences cause careless conjectures." [–] danuker 5y ago ↗ > It will be proved by intimidationSounds like it worked! [–] France_is_bacon 5y ago ↗ Heh. You mean sort of understandable for part of the first sentence, ending with '35 examples of patterns." After that, no.
[–] wizardofdos 5y ago ↗ TLDR: You can't tell by looking (if your rule holds for all or only a small set of numbers).You will need a maths degree for actually telling. [–] techbio 5y ago ↗ "Capricious coincidences cause careless conjectures."
[–] France_is_bacon 5y ago ↗ Heh. You mean sort of understandable for part of the first sentence, ending with '35 examples of patterns." After that, no.
[–] jostylr 5y ago ↗ Example 5 has long been a favorite of mine. So easy to investigate, so geometrical, and there is a pattern, just not the obvious one.
8 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 35.1 ms ] threadYou will need a maths degree for actually telling.
Sounds like it worked!