-4
$\begingroup$

This question already has an answer here:

I can't help but wonder if we've seen it before. I do know however it seems to be entirely made from booleans! I can't remember any booleans?!?!?!

true
true false true true
true false true false true
true false false true false true true true false true true
true true false true true false false true false false true true true false true false true
true false false true true false false false false true true true false false true false false true true

I'm almost positive this is a known pattern, but maybe I'm wrong? Do any of you know the pattern, and can you confirm if it's been here before?

$\endgroup$

marked as duplicate by Ian MacDonald, McMagister, Narmer, Aza Sep 9 '15 at 16:10

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • $\begingroup$ And none of that's meta. Everything in the puzzle is important. $\endgroup$ – warspyking Sep 1 '15 at 16:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Deusovi I would call it a duplicate, but I would vote to close the other one, as I think this is the better one. $\endgroup$ – GentlePurpleRain Sep 1 '15 at 17:05
  • $\begingroup$ @GentlePurpleRain: I was under the impression that duplicate status was always resolved in favor of the earlier one. $\endgroup$ – Deusovi Sep 1 '15 at 17:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Deusovi, I thought I remembered a meta discussion on that, where the suggestion was that the better question should be kept (what if someone posts a two-liner with no formatting and spelling mistakes, and someone else later posts a puzzle with a similar premise, but weaves it into an excellent story and obviously puts a lot of work into it?), but I can't seem to find it now. $\endgroup$ – GentlePurpleRain Sep 1 '15 at 17:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think you should also all note that the other puzzle was posed by the same person. It's even a meta-duplicate! $\endgroup$ – Ian MacDonald Sep 2 '15 at 0:22
8
$\begingroup$

If we convert the sequence to binary, with true=1 and false=0...

1
1011
10101
10010111011
11011001001110101
1001100001110010011

Then we convert from binary to decimal...

1
11
21
1211
111221
312211

We see that the sequence is

The age old sequence where each number describes the count of digits in the previous number, so the value after 1 is "one one", or 11.

Has it been here before?

Yeah, it has. This isn't the original form, but it's another warspyking classic, which is really just as good.

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ but it's another warspyking classic, which is really just as good. Made me smile $\endgroup$ – warspyking Sep 1 '15 at 17:50

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.