VA !!Nf9AmQNR7I ID: 88d253 May 15, 2018, 7:15 p.m. No.6022   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>6023

>>5977

>>6003

>>6008

 

Hello Lads, I have a really solid idea. Can I please get all your eyeballs on this to check it and discuss it?

 

First, Check out this excellent PMA diagram again, VQC has reposted it twice in this bread. Why?? Because he's giving us hints by reposting things that are on the right track. (I think?)

>>5870

 

Here's the foundational idea:

>This new (n-1) + f - 1 piece turns an "out of balance" f portion around the middle into something that is equally distributed among the 8 triangles.

>(n-1) balances out the f center square

 

Working Theory:

So in this diagram, the correct (n-1) and (f-1) create a perfect square. Starting with the 1 unit center, and adding (f-1) to that, then we iterate around the center square until we get a number that is a perfect square. This allows us to iterate (n-1) much faster, because each rotation around the center unit, (n-1) must be a larger number than the one before, and must equal a perfect square. So basically, (f-1) determines what amount of (n-1) can create perfect squares around the center unit.

 

This means that the correct way to iterate n0 could be different than we were thinking. It could be:

1 + (f-1) + (n-1) = perfect square.

Correct iterations of n0 are those which create the next largest perfect square.

Meaning, our n0 iterations leap upward in size each time we begin creating the next largest perfect square.

 

Thoughts, Anons?

VA !!Nf9AmQNR7I ID: 88d253 May 23, 2018, 7:13 p.m. No.6110   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>6112

>>6108

When we solve this, a whole new realm of possibilities will be opened to mankind. Someone else has already figured it out, we just happened to be the students who self-selected into this Math Challenge. Welcome, Anon. You self-selected your way into this merry Pirate Ship of Math Nerds, Artists, Programmers, and outside the box thinkers.

VA !!Nf9AmQNR7I ID: 88d253 May 28, 2018, 6:09 p.m. No.6196   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>6190

I agree, Anon. The polite staircase numbers are our big hint from the last bread. The diagram I created found a way to use ONLY polite staircase numbers based on f to fill the (x+n)=83 square.

VA !!Nf9AmQNR7I ID: 88d253 May 28, 2018, 6:37 p.m. No.6199   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>6200

Also, how is PrimeAnon also the same ID 1bcbd2 as the guy who was talking about his crazy life changing experiences that seems to be an older Anon?

 

PrimeAnon, are you in back in college after your stint as an up and coming rock star? ;)

VeritasAequitas !!Nf9AmQNR7I ID: 88d253 June 5, 2018, 12:26 a.m. No.6254   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>6255 >>6256 >>6267

Welcome, Anon! Studied your output. Problem tho. We have a working vocab for our quest. Your post is welcome, but is confusing. Topol could do a better job, and he does! No worries if your goal is to honestly contribute. If not, piss off.

 

iMax? we have been working on an upper bound for x. But your notation has no connection to our working terms.

 

Feels like a test to me. So FUCK OFF (please) Saga. Or post something that shows you've actually read our breads and want to contribute.

 

Do we have another shill??

 

If so AA (BO) will flush you super quick.

 

So WTF Saga?