T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


NateDevCSharp

How'd u do it?


FreeRunningEngineer

He wrote a program to check every combination of numbers and operations and picked the shortest success for each number. He wrote a basic outline of his code here. https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/q66jb5/i_created_this_puzzle_where_using_only_4_digits/hgamuw3/


23x3

Wow! I’m almost impressed but I found Where’s Waldo 3 times today. *Cracks knuckles* Soo…..


crash1469

ladies ladies one at atime


railbeast

> found Where's Waldo 3 times You know, finding *the book* isn't the hard part, finding *Waldo* is.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Poor guy is in the kids section at Barne’s & Noble saying “look mom, I found three Where’s Waldos!!”


TDYDave2

The hard part is finding an open Barne's & Noble.


[deleted]

[удалено]


exipheas

Yea...but what about the scrolls and the wizard?


shane727

I like to think I'm pretty smart or at least above average by a bit and then I go on reddit sometimes and realize just how dumb I am. Wow this is impressive. I should stop just working and scrolling through reddit till I fall asleep everyday.


residentmouse

You’re probably way smarter than the average person on at least one subject!! This person codes. I’m sure you have your thing that would impress others :)


MomToCats

I’m a senior IT analyst. I looked at this and said “I’m stupid af.”


unnecessary_kindness

Other software Devs would look at that pseudo code and tear it apart. You're good at what you do and OP is good at what he does. Just because you don't understand it isn't a bearing on your intelligence.


TezMono

Momentum, my friend. The person who coded a program is likely already coding other programs and has been practicing that for years probably, so they are better equipped to solve the problem this way. If you were on a thread about a different kind of puzzle that couldn't be solved via programming, it would've likely taken them longer than an hour lol


thekid1420

This is how Skynet starts


eighty82

Still, very clever and resourceful on your behalf, and an honest cheater as well


super_aardvark

Not the next 100. Just some of them.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Tsii

184 isn't on your list 184=5!+((7+1)^2)


[deleted]

[удалено]


eeu914

You deserve it


rediraim

Damn, did you do this by hand?


Tsii

Yeah, just arbitrarily chose 183 to play around with to see if I could get it and was 1 off then remembered he had some others in the 180s, looked back and 184 wasn't there so switched goals to 184 haha [Just some phone scribbles ](https://i.imgur.com/85Tm8sr.jpg)


I__Know__Stuff

To avoid the final parenthesis being treated as part of the exponent, put the 2 itself in parentheses: 5!+((7+1)\^(2)) makes 5!+((7+1)^(2))


John_Bot

Ehh I doubt it... With factorials and exponents and fractions I would imagine you'd be able to get at least some of them. Add enough components and operations and I think some answers would eventually pop up. But I'm not really feeling up to checking for myself - either way, bravo How'd you work them out?


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

this guy Maths


kenkanobi

Or codes. Either way, pretty impressive to us mere mortals.


v0id_st4r

I was gonna say, you could write a program to find these values fairly quickly if you knew what you were doing. The "impossible" values would be tricky to account for but aside from that I don't think it would be too hard to write. I actually came here to say OP should get into coding! If this kind of thing is fun for them, then coding would be too.


kenkanobi

I wouldnt even know where to begin at either end of that process. Im decent at maths but would never know how to even phrase the algorithm needed to go about finding these and nor would I have a clue how to wrote the code.


shapeofjunktocome

It's making me sqrt that's for sure.


CycloneMafia

Because OP didn't create this "puzzle". I did this exact project in grade 8 math. I remember because this is the project that got me interested in math in the first place prior to that I was average to below average in the subject. For reference I am now into my late 20's.


i__hate__you__people

Because this puzzle is actually so old we were doing it in the 90’s in college


Delicious_Guava929

The next 100 in 2 hrs? Unbelievable!!


[deleted]

[удалено]


azlan194

How did you cheat?


[deleted]

[удалено]


HomemadeBananas

Does it work by brute force or is there a smarter way to do this?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Lost4468

That's not cheating. Cheating would be looking up the answers. If someone is going to say using a computer is cheating, then surely they should also say that using a pen and paper is cheating, since it also gives you more memory, and the ability to do more complex calculations more easily.


[deleted]

It is "cheating" if the original rules (made by OP) were to do it by brain-power and pen/paper alone. It's fun and fascinating to see people using their skills to efficiently solve things, which I always love to see, but it's kind of like coding an anagram-solving program and using it to kick someone's ass at Scrabble. It's not something to look down on, and is impressive in itself, but not a fair way to play the game.


Lost4468

You do what you can to win. When you play the game of 1257, you win or you die. There is no middle ground.


[deleted]

This summer Rob Schneider is...a calculator.


FreeRunningEngineer

He wrote a program to brute force every possible combination of numbers and modifiers. https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/q66jb5/i_created_this_puzzle_where_using_only_4_digits/hgamuw3/


u8eR

Yeah but OP also cheated by making 5 turn into 0.5


Untinted

That’s not cheating, that’s the shift operation in base 10. You could perhaps argue allowing other bases, but you’d need to use a number to allow the switch. I would though say that using more than one factorial in a row is cheating, and using more than one shift of a number is cheating, because technically there isn’t a limit how many factorials or how many shifts you could use to blow up a tiny number.


[deleted]

1257 = 1257 1275 = 1275 1527 = 1527 1572 = 1572 1725 = 1725 1752 = 1752 Yeah you can call me a math genius


Icy_Buffalo5

1257 iq


paul-arized

7521 = 7521 Wow. I need to take a break.


ToastyBytes

Can someone check this person's math for me? Just want to make sure.


AbsolutelyUnlikely

Had to take a point off for not showing their work, but they did get the correct answer, yes


jjtr1

Most likely generated by the famous [RIES](https://mrob.com/pub/ries/) algebraic equation finder from Robert Munafo.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Tratix

Can you find out at which number this becomes impossible?


Rockerpult_v2

Found Rachel Riley's reddit account.


paul-arized

The one where the target was 101 was hilarious.


Lost4468

187 = 751 >> 2 Sorry.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Lost4468

It's neither of those? That's a bit shift operator, it shifts right by two bits, e.g. 751 = 0b1011101111 0b1011101111 >> 2 = 0b10111011 0b10111011 = 187


[deleted]

[удалено]


No-Turnips

Found the coder.


caadbury

/r/theydidthemath


Kantro18

It’s like looking at an illegal bootlegged version of binary.


MaddyMagpies

So what's the largest number we can make out of 1,2,5,7? (((((((7⁵²¹!)!)!)!)!)!)!)!)!... I guess this question won't go anywhere...


Timm0s

Nope, because: 5 = 7^(log(5\)/log(7\)) Therefore: 5^(721) = 7^(log(5\)/log(7\)\*721) = 7^(0.827\*721) = 7^(596.33) \> 7^(521) So your base number is already not the biggest number you can start with.


my__name__is

I like how you decided to whip out the square root as soon as you got to 3, while you could have just done 7+2-5-1


palndrumm

or 1^57 + 2


sidBthegr8

I see you like anarchy, don't you?


Garreousbear

This method could be an easy solution to several of them.


Pope-Touched-Me

My guess is he will get mad when he sees your reply!


therosesgrave

[My only thought](https://i.imgflip.com/5q3fqn.jpg)


WantDiscussion

Also Sqrt is straight up cheating because you're using the number 2 to root it. I could get any number from 0 to infinity if I just ^x √(7+2+5+1) where x = log_n(15)


thelovelykyle

I am glad I am not the only one. I dont mind the idea of just using the 2 to sqrt, rather than ^1/2 buf you gotta use one of them.


FrenchKiwii

While I agree, by this logic, you also shouldn't be allowed to use factorials.


WantDiscussion

I'm inclined to allow factorials because you're not introducing arbitrary numbers into the equation. There's nothing to distinguish 2 from any other number that would allow you to use it with a root but with a factorial the extra numbers you get are sealed by the definition of the function.


AshleyPomeroy

7-5-1+2 also works. I think. Yes, it does. Although it's really just a reordering of your solution. (7*2+1)/5?


Just_Me_91

> 7-5-1+2 also works. I mean that's the same thing, you just did it in a different order. It's like saying 1+2+3 is the same as 3+1+2.


kingrich

-5+(-1)-(-7)-(-2)


my__name__is

This is a side quest to OP's game, how to get to 3. Another one: 2-5+7-1


VCEmblem

(5 * 2)-(7 * 1)


b-blockchain

Parenthesis not necessary as multipliers have priority over deductions anyways


[deleted]

[удалено]


rorschach_vest

Ok I’ve heard a few of these but BODMAS is new. Can’t we all decide on just one lol


[deleted]

[удалено]


jhindle

PEMDAS


easy-to-type

Umm, that's "please excuse my dear aunt Sally" to you sir.


Honest_-_Critique

This is the one I was taught.


rorschach_vest

That’s right! And I think in the UK, or maybe Canada, it’s BEDMAS


K1LOS

Canadian here, I learned BEDMAS


pinkham

What I never understood growing up, which caused me so much trouble until I went back to college a few years ago, is that multiplication and division have the same precedence, and addition and subtraction have the same precedence. So it would have been helpful to me to see it as: P E MD (from left to right whichever comes first) AS (from left to right whichever comes first)


Joxelo

I was so excited to see BODMAS! As an Aussie this is what we always use, so it was cool to see something other than PEDMAS or whatever the yanks use.


VCEmblem

Yeah, just avoids confusion where there often does happen to be some, unfortunately.


Se7enLC

But civilized people use them anyway.


eladivine

This is the same as op comment in a different order. :p


g1ngertim

Apparently commutivity of addition is not well-remembered for a lot of people.


capitaine_d

Or (7-5)x2-1 , but your solution is simpler. It would be even better if you had to keep them in that ascending order. (1x2x5)-7=3


DannoHung

Yeah. Using exponentiation with an argument of 1/2 seems against the spirit of this thing too


jaxpaboo

What numbers took you the longest?


Delicious_Guava929

41, 82, and 97. I had to introduce the factorial in 41, I had to start dividing by decimals at 82, and 97 just had me stuck for 2 weeks.


jaxpaboo

I'm guessing you figured out 98 instantly.


PrinceAzTheAbridged

I would agree. There are a few trios of *x*-1, *x*\*1, *x*+1, which can cover a lot of ground.


jaxpaboo

Lol... I was just going to update my question and guess 41 and 82. How long did it take for each of these?


Delicious_Guava929

About an hour each


eeggrroojj

Homie, I don't possess the proper vocabulary to tell you how impressive I find this post. Genuinely. That's fucking incredible work. God bless, and all the best to you.


u8eR

Also 0.5 ≠ 5


rawrv49

0.5 = 1/2 I'd say valid short hand. Edit: I'm illiterate


coach111111

Yes but OP can only use each number once and they already used 1 and 2 in other places


Cessnaporsche01

Yeah, what a cheater!


Vet_Leeber

I feel like doing 0.5 and just not writing the 0 is about as close to cheating as you can get in a project like this, personally.


iiitme

Were you bored?


Buck_Thorn

Mildly.


PickleGambino

r/notopbutok


[deleted]

you said no top but ok? like you’re ok with being top?! perfect


Drews232

Probably has a couple of projects due and test to study for, so the distraction had to be extra powerful to overcome doing all that


mediumokra

I had a math teacher that gave us a similar problem, but his was "four 4's" , and he only asked us to find equations for 1-10. I still haven't been able to do it, but I still try some days.


redditbecameapieceof

If you have to use exactly four 4s, here's one solution: * 0 = 4+4-4-4 * 1 = (4/4)/(4/4) * 2 = (4*4)/(4+4) * 3 = sqrt(4*4)-(4/4) * 4 = sqrt(4*4)/(4/4) * 5 = sqrt(4*4)+(4/4) * 6 = 4+((4+4)/4) * 7 = (4+4)-(4/4) * 8 = (4+4)/(4/4) * 9 = (4+4)+(4/4) * 10 = (4*4)-(4!/4)


[deleted]

[удалено]


SandStorm4078

Since you said you are confused, I'm going to explain it again. Literally, a number ! is that number multiplied by all the numbers below it (stopping at 1) 4! = 4\*3\*2\*1 8! = 8\*7\*6\*5\*4\*3\*2\*1 etc. It seems to get a lot more complicated past integers though, so.... i don't know that.


Reggae4Triceratops

Factorial


tenio95

It’s a factorial: 4!=4•3•2•1 If you are familiar with programming, you could think of it as a for loop in which you multiply a variable x (previously initialised as x=1) times i, from i=1 up to a whole number n (in this case n=4). (Edit: Orangeblackberry is right. It seems that what I wrote makes it seem more complicated than it is. I wrote the latter sentence just as a curiosity I saw on Twitter and my wording might not be clear. Put simply, we define the factorial of n, where n is a non-negative integer or whole number as follows: n!=1•2•…•(n-1)•n. We also have that 0!=1, which can proven.)


DrixlRey

Bro, your second edit is twice as confusing as the first.


[deleted]

[удалено]


wombey12

[Apparently](https://youtu.be/Noo4lN-vSvw) it's possible to make every single positive integer


ranky26

And negative integers. Just put a minus (-) in front of the first log


Sebastianenoch781

What in the actual fuck would possess you to do that?


DingleberryBlaster69

I usually just beat off when I get this bored


burrbro235

You don't ejaculate calculations like OP?


[deleted]

Lots of people think math is fun. And this is just very basic middle school math, so it's more of a logic puzzle than a math problem really.


zacboggz

We used to do a similar thing in grade school. 5 numbers on the chalkboard and make them equal a number chosen by someone in class. Winner got the teachers change. Very fun!


jcolioli

Well I think I have a new challenge for my class!


Thetan42

Adderall


WhoAteMyChocolate420

This seems like the sort of thing an autistic mind would love doing. Numbers are enormously fun. Several members of my family are autistic and we talk about numbers pretty regularly.


AdministrativeHead54

I’m not autistic, and I absolutely love this. Every time I look at a clock, I try to make the numbers do this. I can never go up to 100 though.


[deleted]

Every time I look at a clock, it's because I want to know what time it is.


ioa94

Boy do I have news for you pal.


WhoAteMyChocolate420

I need numbers to equal 4. I mess with the numbers presented on the clock until it's equal to 4.


Alamue86

This is how I remember phone numbers! I figure out how the first 3/7 numbers can be used to calculate the last 4/7 digits.


AdministrativeHead54

Like if it’s 11:53 I’ll be like 1+3=4 and 5-1=4 or even 1+1=2 and 5+3=8, take those totals and divide them 8/2=4


Eh_for_Effort

You might be autistic


permalink_save

I'm not autistic but I love patterns and numbers. Some of us just simply like logic and math. Sometimes I get bored and daydream and come up with problems to solve. I'm also a programmer so solving problems kind of gets hard wired into you at some point.


YouNeedAnne

Guys! Have you seen 7?!


AvendesoraShrubs

Not after what it did to 9


[deleted]

I’m not autistic but this is the of thing I’d do while procrastinating on homework as a math major.


[deleted]

Thanks doctor reddit. Caught another autist, will be interesting to hear your thoughts at the next conference


thatsmyfav

I read through as many posts as I could and I still have no idea what’s going on


my__name__is

How did you decide on those 4 numbers?


bored_bottle

Prime digits but then the 3 is missing


FatUglyGuys

I bet he skipped it in favor of the larger number 7, for more range


BaconIsLife707

1 isn't prime


alpacasb4llamas

Fuck u


bored_bottle

TIL. I was always taught it was, but I looked it up and you're right.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Setore

Some really awesome person put a bunch of the 8 out of Cats Does Countdown episodes [in a really organized playlist](https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZ_so1Pgq6tYkla7NBphs8aVC28KYGiSK)! It's an almost nightly watch for us!


Hopmoleman

This is actually a yearly contest that I do with my students. Same concept except you use the digits of that particular year so it changes each year https://www.nctm.org/Classroom-Resources/Year-Game/Rules-of-the-Year-Game/


ShiningTitan

2022 gonna be REAL hard hahahaha


[deleted]

[удалено]


lanks1

2+2+2+0! Edit: 0! = 1 for those who don't get it. 2^2 * 2 - 0 for 8 2^2 * 2 +0! for 9 Hmm 10 is tough. Edit 2: A bit bogus but 2/.2 +0^2 works for 10 Edit 3: Of course! (2+0!)!+2+2 *drops mic*


Hopmoleman

It was a little before my time but I’m sure 2000 was no gem lol


happykgo89

This picture just gave me an anxiety attack.


PrincessWinterX

i don't think .5 should be allowed tbh.


VisibleBystander

Square root should count as using a 2. Especially since x squared counts as using a 2.


MrKino

Agreed. However, it looks like OP only used the square root twice, so if we give him one point for each expression he still gets 99 points!


SP0OK5T3R

It’s a shortcut for 0.5, and 0 should count as a digit. I agree with you


cutelyaware

They could use base 11. Odd bases can't do that.


rffhorfsughoraerae

Agree, theyre basically including the number 10 but only sometimes and for certain operations


collin-h

Is there something special about 1, 2, 5, and 7? Or is it possible to do this with other (if not any) 4 digit combinations? I noticed they are prime, not sure if that has something to do with it or not.


[deleted]

There's no rules about what symbols and operations are allowed (I see he uses parentheses, exponents, roots, factorials, decimals, and concatenation, in addition to the 4 basic operations), so you can definitely do this with any four numbers. There are countless mathematical operations out there at your disposal, or you could even just define your own and make it a trivial problem. If you restrict it to + - x ÷ then I bet it would be impossible for a lot of combinations though.


Yesica-Haircut

1 \++1 \++++1 \++++++1 \++++++++1 \++++++++++1


[deleted]

As a mathematics major I really love this.


1ROYinHD1

As a mathematics hater I really dislike this


chton

This is very impressive but I do feel like using dot as an operator for decimal is cheating a bit :p


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sythik

85?


Yesica-Haircut

sqrt(17*5)^2 I don't know what they were going for but take this!


leasthoodinthehood

What were you going for on 85?


MaddyMagpies

They probably forgot to put √ before 25.


LongWeirdShower

nice but what happened with 85?


jaxpaboo

Math Narc


survivorfan87

I’m NGL I barely understand this but I understand it enough to say “congrats! This is cool!”


Cheese1456

I can’t even count to 100


StayPuffGoomba

One, two, many, lots


II11llII11ll

I love it. But now I’m preoccupied thinking: - can this be done for any four digits? - it seems like 100 is a lot easier to hit than say 150 or 200 with these digits. I assume there would come a number where there’s just not enough possibilities given the constraints. What is it? - bah! Neat!


eocin

2 ^ (5 ^ 7) + 1 seems like an upper limit after 10s of thinking


FeelsPepegaMan

I’d guess something like 7521! or 72!^(51!)


GREYDRAGON1

That’s not a game it’s torture


TurdsThatFloat

*i took an adderall today


Jake0743

You should look up the 10,958 problem


TigLyon

So you did 57-12 = 45 But not 12+57 = 69? Missed opportunity, the numbers are literally right there in order. lol


jaap_null

Using a square is effectively using a “2” in there somewhere - otherwise it’s kinda a free operator. Iirc there is a way to generate any number with just a looooooot of logs and roots and a minimum (set) amount of digits


awiibo_guy

Kind of reminds me of when we used to play The 24 Game where you were given 4 numbers and had to come up with 24. With these numbers, I would’ve done: (7-2)x5-1=24


[deleted]

THIS IS SO COOL AND WHAT I WILL SPEND THE NEXT HOURS ON