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: 81,656

Of course, I changed post #49.

**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: 14,840

It still looks the same.

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: 81,656

You must have seen it after the edit...

This is barebones skeleton code. No frills or amenities added.

Initialize and define the function.

```
p={300,250 ,175,100,75,50 ,25,15,7,3,1};
fubar[n_] := Module[{},
h = n/c;
c -= n;
h]
```

Some more initialization, pck is the draft pick.

```
pck = 5;
s = Permutations[p, {pck}];
```

This is what runs. I pick 75 because it is 5th in p as the number of balls the fifth player gets.

```
ans = Select[s, #[[pck]] == 75 &];
Product[k, {k, #}] & /@
Table[c = 1001;
fubar[#] & /@ ans[[k]], {k, 1, Length[ans]}] // Total
```

**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: 14,840

I think I understand it. It is very, very messy, though.

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: 81,656

Hmmm. It is a model of efficiency and originality. Pennypingdon, he walked on his hands to spare his feet.

**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: 14,840

Well, I do not know how efficient it is, but one thing is sure - it looks nasty.

Anyway, how does it do on picks no. 9, 10 and 11?

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: 81,656

Functional style always looks nasty.

Combinatorial explosion - it is nasty. I will do one.

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: 14,840

It does not always look nasty.

Hey, I just remembered. It's been a long time since we last used quantum math! Maybe we should try that?

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

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,656

When it is done right, it looks nasty.

What the heck is quantum math?

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: 14,840

You are supposed to know. You cane up with it. But it was for a geometry problem, so I am not sure if it is applicable.

Try P(team 1 picks 11th).

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

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,656

I have never heard of it.

The program is not fast enough for the last couple.

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: 14,840

What can we do about those?

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

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,656

Combinatorial explosion is the enemy of everything we do. We can:

1) Come up with a method of permutation generation that does not generate them all, just the ones we need.

2) Compile the function or write part of it in some other language.

3) Use the first couple of values to figure out an analytical answer or an asymptotic one.

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: 14,840

I will go with 3.

By the way:

bobbym wrote:

My solution consists of using geogebra with an increment of .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 at this small increment quantum math takes over and even though that is over 10^43 points it is done instantaneously. Then I put the 10^43 values into the spreadsheet and curve fit. Because in quantum math 10^43 equals infinity the fit was exact. Got the same answer you did.

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

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,656

Kaboobly doo! I was obviously hacked,

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: 14,840

Should we report it to MIF, then?

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

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,656

I do not see why. I do not like quantum computing or any quantum qaboobly doo.

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: 14,840

Well, if you were hacked, it might be an issue.

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

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,656

I do not even remember the post.

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: 14,840

Well, you said you were hacked. Should we report that to MIF?

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

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 81,656

Could be those darn reptilloids...

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