## Search found 16 matches

- Mon May 07, 2018 11:55 am
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 531
- Replies:
**10** - Views:
**3967**

### Re: Problem 531

Probably a bit too late to help CT075, but my guess is that the error was in the case where n and m are not coprime.

- Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:05 am
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 217
- Replies:
**21** - Views:
**6543**

### Re: Problem 217

Forgive me for being dense, but why is T(2) 540 and not 11+22+33+44+55+66+77+88+99=495?

Edit: nm, I get it now

Edit: nm, I get it now

- Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:19 pm
- Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
- Topic: Summer 2017 Website Update
- Replies:
**87** - Views:
**22608**

### Re: Summer 2017 Website Update

I don't know if this is related to this recent update, but I think there is a bug somewhere with handling special characters in solution threads. Specifically if you look at the solution thread for problem 317, a couple of answers by the users monteverdi and backtracking mysteriously cut out. Withou...

- Thu Apr 12, 2012 11:43 pm
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 218
- Replies:
**13** - Views:
**3915**

### Re: Problem 218

Would it be possible to have an example of a perfect, not super-perfect right angled triangle?

- Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:12 pm
- Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
- Topic: Website update Saturday 24 September 2011
- Replies:
**291** - Views:
**76072**

### Re: Website update Saturday 24 September 2011

Perhaps not the most pressing problem, but did you just modify the numbers that determine the awarding of the Pi award? The description itself hasn't changed

- Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:38 pm
- Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
- Topic: Website update Saturday 24 September 2011
- Replies:
**291** - Views:
**76072**

### Re: Website update Saturday 24 September 2011

Also there seems to be a mistake for the numbers given for the Pi award

currently its:

3, 14, 15, 92, 65, 35, 26, 43, 38, 32, and 79

when it should be:

3, 14, 15, 92, 65, 35, 89, 79, 32, 38, and 46

?

currently its:

3, 14, 15, 92, 65, 35, 26, 43, 38, 32, and 79

when it should be:

3, 14, 15, 92, 65, 35, 89, 79, 32, 38, and 46

?

- Sat Sep 24, 2011 6:34 pm
- Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
- Topic: Website update Saturday 24 September 2011
- Replies:
**291** - Views:
**76072**

### Re: Website update Saturday 24 September 2011

So what precisely is meant by the "Lucky Luke" and "Pythagorean Triplet" awards? I presume the latter requires solving a set of 9 or less problems whose problem numbers can be used to form 3 pythagorean triplets rather than just solving 3 problems related to pythagorean triplets. As for the former I...

- Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:44 pm
- Forum: Resources
- Topic: Paper/Pencil Problems
- Replies:
**71** - Views:
**55713**

### Re: Paper/Pencil Problems

Well, it would be a little dishonest to say yes, since the variety of methods I've been using to answer those type of question have typically been dubious (although I made the effort to solve 138 'legitimately' with a bit of basic algebraic number theory). But I cannot see why the general strategy s...

- Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:24 pm
- Forum: Resources
- Topic: Paper/Pencil Problems
- Replies:
**71** - Views:
**55713**

### Re: Paper/Pencil Problems

Oky doke

- Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:26 am
- Forum: Resources
- Topic: Paper/Pencil Problems
- Replies:
**71** - Views:
**55713**

### Re: Paper/Pencil Problems

Perhaps I'm saying too much, I don't know. But they can all be solved with xxx can they not?

- Mon Aug 29, 2011 9:16 pm
- Forum: Resources
- Topic: Paper/Pencil Problems
- Replies:
**71** - Views:
**55713**

### Re: Paper/Pencil Problems

If you're going to count 139 and 138 (although I personally would not have the patience to do them without a computer myself ), the solutions to 321,140 and 137 are pretty similar.

- Thu Aug 18, 2011 8:42 pm
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 105
- Replies:
**5** - Views:
**1805**

### Re: Problem 105

Ah, knowing roughly what to look for I found where my mistake was. Thank you

- Wed Aug 17, 2011 12:33 pm
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 105
- Replies:
**5** - Views:
**1805**

### Problem 105

**Problem 105**(View Problem)

I'm out of ideas where my mistake might be for this problem. I'm getting that 31 of the sets are special sum sets, is this too low or too high?

- Sat Aug 06, 2011 11:08 pm
- Forum: Number
- Topic: finding the factors of a number
- Replies:
**3** - Views:
**3094**

### Re: finding the factors of a number

Heh, I wasn't expecting something slick like that. My instinct for combinatorial problems always seems to be to resort to something awkard and laborious...

- Sat Aug 06, 2011 5:21 pm
- Forum: Number
- Topic: finding the factors of a number
- Replies:
**3** - Views:
**3094**

### finding the factors of a number

This feels like a bit of a silly question to ask, but what is a good algorithm for finding all the factors of some number? The obvious one is to try dividing it by everything smaller than it, which can be sped up by just going to the square root and taking pairs of factors. A better way would be pre...

- Fri Jul 29, 2011 2:29 pm
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 312
- Replies:
**3** - Views:
**2218**

### Re: Problem 312

Gah, this problem is giving me a headache. I've had a formula for a long time, but my attempts at actually evaluating it have all been futile so far. What's really frustrating is that I'm getting correct answers for some parts, like C(10000) mod 10^8 but not C(10000) mod 13^8 and so I guess the mist...