Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:25 pm
can someone pm me the answer? jsut to check mine
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:25 pm
i must be half asleep. I dont see any possibility. Could someone point me in the right direction.
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:26 pm
Hi, I see I missed the new LC. ACK! Another math problem......as I run off screaming....I hope there is a clue or two for we lost souls! 
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:27 pm
reesecal wrote:well, the only prime number there is the first one, 13
14 is divisible by 1, 2, and 7
95 is divisible by 1, 5, and 19
62 is divisible by 1, 2, and 31
From that, one can make the following theory:
(31+12)*5 = 215 , and after
(31+12*2)*2 = 110
However, this concept should be trashed, as it doesn't work with 13.
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:27 pm
well, maybe the dudes who know can hint it up for us 
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:29 pm
actually it becomes a new system when you move it back to 13, which is the way I figured it out
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:31 pm
ugh!! No wonder i failed math. Its just a bunch of stupid numbers to me. AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:31 pm
Marshmallow Sky wrote:actually it becomes a new system when you move it back to 13, which is the way I figured it out
hey marshmallow - is the solution strictly mathematic/sequence based or is there other neopet stuff at work?
np if you don't want to say, just curious
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:32 pm
If I was right (which I may not be), it was strictly math. Very difficult sequence too.
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:32 pm
Marshmallow Sky wrote:actually it becomes a new system when you move it back to 13, which is the way I figured it out
That doesn't work for sequences, unfortunately. If you use "It doesn't fit my original rule, so I'll add an exception", why not add a third for odd numbers which are not prime, and a fourth for even numbers which are divisible by 7?
(of course, that's not concrete)
Last edited by Hunter Lupe on Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:33 pm
hint: (hope this is legal and doesn't give it away)
it's not manipulating the numbers in any way - i.e. no multiplication.
it's not manipulating the numbers in any way - i.e. no multiplication.
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:36 pm
bluebird wrote:hint: (hope this is legal and doesn't give it away)
it's not manipulating the numbers in any way - i.e. no multiplication.
hm... one says not multiplication, the other multiplication....
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:36 pm
bluebird wrote:hint: (hope this is legal and doesn't give it away)
it's not manipulating the numbers in any way - i.e. no multiplication.
Thanks... but can you tell us if it's a solution having to do with the numbers themselves or with something else on the site (like that previous calendar one)?
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:37 pm
Thanks for the hint, bluebird.
I still don't have it. But I guess I'll stop trying to find patterns with the numbers using math.
I still don't have it. But I guess I'll stop trying to find patterns with the numbers using math.
Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:38 pm
Like I've said, I might be wrong. I went with a less obvious way of finding the answer. Maybe i'm overcomplicating it. This is a kids' site. It could just require a young mind