• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Peach's puzzle - two solutions?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
PrincessPeach said:
Hmmm.... That seems a little convoluted, BKB. I see your point, but it seems to me like you're trying to force a square peg into a round hole to make this work. BB pointed out one flaw already, though from the rest of your solution, subtracting 6 from 20 rather than 5 doesn't really matter, since you aren't using that side of triangle 1 anyway. Your solution actually makes many of the numbers in the puzzle completely arbitrary and pointless. By your reasoning, I could put any random number in the bottom left corner of the first triangle, since 14-5 = 9 is the only side you used. Same, of course, goes for the bottom right corner of triangle 2 and the top corner of triangle 3.

Also, the introduction of a fourth or fifth triangle seems suspect to me. My reasoning on such matters is that you may use only the information on the page, and that you should use all of the information on the page.

I'll have to give this some more thought later, as I am a little busy today, but my inclination is to apply Occam's razor here. You seem to be making too many assupmtions. Usually, the simplest, most elegant solution is the correct one. And, of course, since Buckguy's solution is the solution I intended, it must be right! :)
Click to expand...

The errors Bill has correctly pointed out are inconsequential to the solution.

I don't see any reason why a code can't have meaningless numbers - afterall, it makes it harder to crack, doesn't it? Even if I want it cracked, I may not want EVERYONE to crack it, yes?

The addition of the 4th and 5th numbers isn't suspect, but rather an intellectual excersize, it makes no difference to the resolutuion of the puzzle you actual set forth.

However, if you want a better puzzle, or one with only 1 answer, you should use 1 as one of your triangles. (That is, if you used, say 1, 10 and 2, I would be very hard pressed to call the ONE triangle a "Key" to the other two, since I wouldn't know what T4 is and thus would not be able to find a pattern (Unless you used both +1 triangles, then I could argue the T = 1 triange is a Key)

I should mention, I don't disagree that Buckguy's answer is tidier and correct. I'm simply saying we can't know 100% for sure what result was intended by the puzzle you posed.
 
Upvote 0
"we still can't say for sure based on only 4 Triangles whether my explaination or his is what was intended."

bkb, not to be boasting, but i'm rather certain that my path to the solution is the intended correct path to the solution. again, no offense, but my path to the solution is less befuddling than your path to the solution. let's imagine that my way is not the intended way. what then you are saying that it is just by chance that each letter corresponds perfectly with the letters that spell the words. you are also saying that it is just by chance that the same order is kept for each of the triangles: bottom left to top to bottom right. for your first triangle, you subtract 5 from 14. okay. how does one know to subtract 20 from 23 in the second triangle? why not subtract 23 from 20, getting -3. in the third triangle, how does one know to subtract 19 from 24? why not subtract 24 from 19, getting -5? there is no discernable order in deciding which number gets subtracted from which.
 
Upvote 0
OSU_Buckguy said:
"we still can't say for sure based on only 4 Triangles whether my explaination or his is what was intended."

bkb, not to be boasting, but i'm rather certain that my path to the solution is the intended correct path to the solution. again, no offense, but my path to the solution is less befuddling than your path to the solution. let's imagine that my way is not the intended way. what then you are saying that it is just by chance that each letter corresponds perfectly with the letters that spell the words. you are also saying that it is just by chance that the same order is kept for each of the triangles: bottom left to top to bottom right. for your first triangle, you subtract 5 from 14. okay. how does one know to subtract 20 from 23 in the second triangle? why not subtract 23 from 20, getting -3. in the third triangle, how does one know to subtract 19 from 24? why not subtract 24 from 19, getting -5? there is no discernable order in deciding which number gets subtracted from which.
Click to expand...

I still don't disagree that your answer is tidier and correct and probably what was intended. I'm merely saying it could well be what I've described. And we can't REALLY know.

I'm kinda thinking about using my strategy to write a sentence and see what kind of triangles I need and whether anyone can break it.

Witgh regard to your questions on the order of the triangles - yeah, it's by chance, but THAT WAS the order that was given, no? Perhaps the whole sequence is the Key (and the T4 "ONE" triangle a key within a key for a "double layerd" encryption)

With regard to wondering why choose to go one direction over another, or subtract one from the otehr in a particualr order - because doing it incorrectly DOESN"T crack the code, doing it correctly (Assuming intent) does.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
I still don't disagree that your answer is tidier and correct and probably what was intended. I'm merely saying it could well be what I've described. And we can't REALLY know.

I'm kinda thinking about using my strategy to write a sentence and see what kind of triangles I need and whether anyone can break it.
Click to expand...

to be blunt, bkb, i think that the path to the solution that i offered has to be the intended path to the solution. it just appears too implausible that the solution that i offered fits only due to chance. all things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the correct one. again, again, again... no offense.

furthermore, i'm also certain that if we plug in the numbers to a supercomputer, several convoluted solutions will be spat out. the point of these puzzles is to provide the most simple solution, the one that makes the most sense. that's not to say that i don't see the sense in your solution. obviously, it works based on how you approached it. as i wrote in a previous message, i'm still not seeing the order in determining which number gets subtracted from which. just choosing the smaller number to be subtracted from the larger loses the focus of a code encryption.

"and we can't really know"

that sounds like a metacognitive discussion. i'd rather not stray there.
 
Upvote 0
OSU_Buckguy said:
to be blunt, bkb, i think that the path to the solution that i offered has to be the intended path to the solution. it just appears too implausible that the solution that i offered fits only due to chance. all things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the correct one. again, again, again... no offense.

furthermore, i'm also certain that if we plug in the numbers to a supercomputer, several convoluted solutions will be spat out. the point of these puzzles is to provide the most simple solution, the one that makes the most sense. that's not to say that i don't see the sense in your solution. obviously, it works based on how you approached it. as i wrote in a previous message, i'm still not seeing the order in determining which number gets subtracted from which. just choosing the smaller number to be subtracted from the larger loses the focus of a code encryption.

"and we can't really know"

that sounds like a metacognitive discussion. i'd rather not stray there.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying my solution is more or less correct. Fact is, we were given a puzzle, and it was set up in a particular way, as far as we know. It could well have been "Chance" that it was set up that way (And, frankly, I'm pretty sure you're right) but, it could also just as likely have been set up the way it was precisely because it HAD to be for the solution I've posited to be correct. We don't really know for sure, and thats the point. Since we have two explainations, both correct, there are two ways to solve this puzzle. So what?

I wholly agree that your solution conforms to occums razor. Doesn't mean it's intended and the sequence is Not, in fact, still a code.
 
Upvote 0
Okay... let's try this in another example.

Here is the clue:

1, 3, 5, 7...

What is the next number? Most would agree that it is 9 because it is a string of all odd numbers. However, an argument could be made that it should be 11, because the numbers given are both odd and prime. This would also be "correct", but it is probably not what the creator intended, nor is it what most people would see as the correct answer.

I'm on BKB's side that his answer is correct, but that the other answer is "more correct", whatever that may mean.

You guys are such nerds! :tongue2: I'm glad that I'm not! :!
 
Upvote 0
Bucky Katt said:
Okay... let's try this in another example.

Here is the clue:

1, 3, 5, 7...

because the numbers given are both odd and prime. This would also be "correct", but it is probably not what the creator intended, nor is it what most people would see as the correct answer.
Click to expand...

Sorry but 1 is not a prime number.

A prime number is any # greater than one that has only 2 factors.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top