KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 15 = 2 ^ (plustorial(0! + 0!)) + 7 25 = 20 - 0! - 0! + 7 26 = 20 - 0! - 0 + 7 27 = 20 + 0 - 0 + 7 28 = (2 + 0! + 0!) * 7 29 = 20 + 0! + 0! + 7 30 = 20 + plustorial(0! + 0!) + 7 31 = 2 + 0! + 0 + plustorial(7) 32 = 2 ^ (-0! - 0! + 7) 33 = plustorial(2) + 0! + 0! + 7 34 = plustorial(2) + plustorial(0! + 0!) + 7 35 = (plustorial(2) + 0! + 0!) * 7) 36 = 2 * 0 + plustorial(0! + 7) 37 = 2 / 0! + plustorial(0! + 7) 38 = 2 + 0 + plustorial(0! + 7) 39 = 2 + 0! + plustorial(0! + 7) 40 = plustorial(2) + 0! + plustorial(0! + 7) 41 = plustorial(2)! - 0! + plustorial(0! + 7) 42 = plustorial(2)! + 0 + plustorial(0! + 7) 43 = -2 + plustorial(0! + 0! + 7) 44 = -floor(sqrt(2)) + plustorial(0! + 0! + 7) 45 = floor(sqrt(2)) * plustorial(0! + 0! + 7) 46 = floor(sqrt(2)) + plustorial(0! + 0! + 7) 47 = 2 + plustorial(0! + 0! + 7) 48 = plustorial(2) + plustorial(0! + 0! + 7) 49 = (plustorial(2)! + 0! + 0) * 7 50 = 200/floor(sqrt(sqrt(plustorial(plustorial(7))))) 51 = -floor(sqrt(plustorial(plustorial(plustorial(2)))))+ plustorial(plustorial(0! + 0!) + 7) 52 = -plustorial(floor(sqrt(plustorial(plustorial(2)))))+ plustorial(plustorial(0! + 0!) + 7) 53 = -floor(sqrt(plustorial(plustorial(2))))+ plustorial(plustorial(0! + 0!) + 7) 54 = -floor(sqrt((2)))+ plustorial(plustorial(0! + 0!) + 7) 55 = plustorial(2 + 0! + 0 + 7) for 56-59, see 51-54 but eliminate the - out front 60-63 and 65+.. see 64 and do a bunch of twiddling like 51-54 64 = -2 + plustorial(floor(sqrt(plustorial(plustorial(0! + 0!) + 7) ok, i'm bored with this now it took you THAT long to get bored?! how do you know it took him a long time? Quote
ClimbingPanther Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 the sheer magnitude of keystrokes alone would have taken at least the inverse square of the third power of plustorial time it took to get bored Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 the sheer magnitude of keystrokes alone would have taken at least the inverse square of the third power of plustorial time it took to get bored it doesn't have to be fun to be fun Quote
foraker Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 it doesn't have to be fun to be fun http://www.math.harvard.edu/putnam/2006/index.html Quote
marylou Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 Oh mAAth problem! I thought it said mEth problem. F'in tweakers! Quote
Gary_Yngve Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 i remember taking that test almost 10 years ago.. i'd feel happy if i solved more than 2 of 12 Quote
selkirk Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 I tried to teach myself about differential equations one day Why in god's name would anyone ever do this? That's like practicing root canals on yourself! Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 i remember taking that test almost 10 years ago.. i'd feel happy if i solved more than 2 of 12 That makes me feel better. :-) At one point I could have struggled through some of those and did OK - no superstar that's for sure. These days, the brain has far too many cobwebs... Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 I tried to teach myself about differential equations one day Why in god's name would anyone ever do this? That's like practicing root canals on yourself! Differential equations are kind of fun... at least the ones/classes you learn in an intro class on them in college. Then of course, you find out that only a very small subset of them are solvable with basic, easy techniques... Quote
foraker Posted October 13, 2007 Posted October 13, 2007 My classification of math proofs is something like: a) You understand the proposition and have a good idea how to prove it. b) You understand the proposition, but have no immediate idea how to prove it, or struggle a great deal to figure it out. c) You not only don't know how to prove the proposition, you have no idea what it means. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 13, 2007 Posted October 13, 2007 My classification of math proofs is something like: a) You understand the proposition and have a good idea how to prove it. b) You understand the proposition, but have no immediate idea how to prove it, or struggle a great deal to figure it out. c) You not only don't know how to prove the proposition, you have no idea what it means. the problems on that test fall into b) for me. Quote
Gary_Yngve Posted October 13, 2007 Posted October 13, 2007 the tricky things about the Putnam are that it's timed (6 hours for 12 problems), and they're stingy on partial credit. the percent of people who get at least N questions right (get >= N*10 points) is roughly equal to 1/2^N. For example, looking at the 2003 stats, there were about 3000 total takers, 1000 got 10 points or more, 400 got 20 points or more, 100 got 40 points or more, 10 got 80 or more, and the winner was 110. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.