New answers tagged number-sequence
0
The sequence is two sequences interlaced. That is what makes it difficult to figure out.
-1
possible reasoning:
3
because even terms reduce by 3.5
11
OH MY GOD I just got it. Like, as I was looking at my own question. Boy do I feel silly.
The next number is
PHEW that was bugging the bejeezus out of me! Hahaha
3
The solution is:
3
Solution:
Finding the Solution:
This gets us:
We now have:
This gives us:
Now, we have:
Here we have:
In conclusion:
0
Solution with any numbers of cards:
6
As claimed above by other users, the arrangement is imposible with four sets of four cards. The earliest solution occurs for four sets of cards 1 to 24, for which there are three solutions. These are known as Langford Quads and are described at John Miller's excellent blog on Langford's Problem.
These are Richard Noble's three solutions.
3
An answer for 5s (updated)
7
A similar answer to Quintec's (asserting that it is impossible):
Consider that you only have 12 cards that are not a 4, and that you need 12 total cards between the 4s. So the entire arrangement must look like
4 _ _ _ _ 4 _ _ _ _ 4 _ _ _ _ 4
As per Quintec's observation, somewhere in there we must have
_ A _ A _ A _ A _
But you can see that there ...
12
I claim that no arrangement is possible in the case with cards ace through four.
Note that
_A_A_A_A_ (_ is any other card)
must be part of the arrangement. Now consider two cases:
the row starts and ends with aces - this is obviously not
possible, since that arrangement would only hold 7 cards, and we
require 16.
there are cards to the left and right ...
4
The next term is:
Because the terms are all:
Meaning that the next term must be:
0
119? With regard to the main increase amount (ie 7, 12, 16), change of +5 then 0 repeated x 1, change of +4 then 0 repeated x 3, change of 3 then 0 repeated x 5. With the zero repetition being increasing odd numbers and the main increasing amount reducing by 1 each round.
5
4
The answer is:
because:
2
Possible Answers
First one
Second one
Third one
Fourth one (spotted by @Stiv)
6
The second hint was helpful.
Once you see things that way, it is not hard to see the relationship between the left and right side of the equality sign.
The answer:
1
My answer is X=4 and 5341068+5.
Sketch is on photo below.
3
Reason:
5
3
second:
because:
third:
because:
1
The first sequence
So the next term is
2
Mohiri got the correct answer, but they came to that answer for a slightly different reason than the logic I was using. I'm adding this answer to clarify my approach.
10
Are the next 3 terms
The numbers are
So:
Continuing the sequence:
The same pattern applies for the second hint, and the third
0
Q6:
Q24:
4
Since our dear friend balazs.com has not deigned to provide a comprehensible explanation to us lowly mortals, I've provided a simple explanation here:
The missing number is:
This is because:
2
0
I suspect it is number
5
The answer to this is:
Since:
Top 50 recent answers are included
