Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ π -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

That is going to be true regardless of whatever fifth term he puts there.

What is the next term in the sequence

1, 2, 4, 8, 16...?

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

Well, it is, but it is the most likely that the 6th term they want is 3/16.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

Why do you like 3 / 16?

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

I do not. It just looks like something that the question setter might like.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

In what manner do you arrive at it?

By the way do you know about the demonstrations?

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

I noticed that the numerator of the terms with odd indexes are the same as their indexes, and the ones with even indexes were 1, so, I tried multiplying both the denominator and the numerator of those by the required power of 2. After that it was easy.

What demonstrations?

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

Wolfram of course! They have thousands of them.

http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/

Pick a topic and look around.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

Is there a way to make this in M?

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

Why not just download the notebook?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

I have. There is no code in it.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

Hi;

There is code in there.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

That is an animation. I cannot see any actual M code.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

On the sides are cell grouping lines click them and you see some code.

But that is an authored version. The code is incomplete, I have another source notebook.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

Try here for the source code.

http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/versi … rsion=0026

If you can not get that then here is what you want:

```
Manipulate[
Module[{m1 = {Reverse[pt1], {-1, 1} pt1},
m2 = {Reverse[pt2], {-1, 1} pt2}},
Graphics[MapIndexed[{Thickness[0.01 th^#2[[1]]], Line[#]} &,
NestList[
Flatten[Map[{{#[[2]], #[[2]] + m1.(#[[2]] - #[[1]])}, {#[[
2]], #[[2]] + m2.(#[[2]] - #[[1]])}} &, #],
1] &, {{{0, -1}, {0, 0}}}, gen]],
PlotRange -> {{-3, 3}, {-1, 5}}, ImageSize -> {500, 400}]], {{gen,
7, "generations"}, 3, 10, 1}, {{th, 0.7, "thickness ratio"}, 0.01,
1.2}, {{pt1, {-0.25, 0.75}}, {-3, -1}, {3, 3},
Locator}, {{pt2, {0.25, 0.75}}, {-3, -1}, {3, 3}, Locator}]
```

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

Actually, you were right. When I clicked on an unexpanded cell, the code was shown.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

I have provided the code for you in the previous post. Cell grouping is a way to hide many cells. They appear as one. Also, it is a way to arrange work together.

Nothing beats M.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

Thanks, anyway.

I am going to look at some more of them.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

That is why I sent you the link. There are thousands with dozens coming in everyday. Did you drag on the branches as well as move the slider? What other language other than a CAS could program that in 5 lines of code?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

Yes, I have moved them. I will try and change their code to get the tree from one of the eulerproject problems.

Oh, have you seen my solution of phro's "bobbym's YOB" puzzle?

*Last edited by anonimnystefy (2013-05-08 09:09:17)*

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

I worked on that one for Agnishom and solved it.

No, I have not seen your solution. I have been busy working on a full solution to the sudoku thread.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

I do not remember your solution.

Sudoku thread?

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

It might not be the same problem but I worked on a projecteuler problem. I think it was #300? It should have me on the solution list.

Yes, the one you and phrontister are working on. There are two questions that need answering.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

I do not remember working on a sudoku problem...

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,000

It is sort of a combination of sudoku and a rubiks cube.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,883

Oh, that one. Well, I haven't worked on it much.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline