unforum

[GuyP]

[Fuseunderground]

[AngusA]

I disagree with the previous posts. When setting a puzzle for people to solve, you have to take into account their ability to tackle the problem. I suspect the number of people in this forum with the mathematical skills to begin to tackle Riemann is pretty close to zero. And that's not an insult to anyone because it is such a specialised area of maths - it would take years to develop the necessary skills and then, like most professional mathematicians of the last two centuries, you'd struggle to get anywhere with it.

But I think what annoys me most is the amount of time I've spent trying to solve a puzzle that wasn't there.

[maevey]

[AngusA]

The big difference between Elucidate and Riemann is that there was a definitive answer to Elucidate. It was always possible for someone to stumble across the way to solve the card. There is not necessarily a proof to Riemann at all.

[Magma]

I'm still not happy with the idea that we have to wait for a proof before it can be solved.

Mind Candy have said over and over again (Mostly to people doing "Shuffled"):
All cards can be solved without the use of any other cards.

Now seeing as nobody has actually proved the Reimann Hypothesis yet, would that not go against the first half of the statement? They could not say for certain that at the present time "Riemann" can be solved.

I would hate to see what happens if they are counting on this up-and-coming proof being found to be complete, only to have it fall through and be unproved for a few hundred years...

[duckiemonster]

Okay... I've had enough of all of this 'we've been fleeced' nonsense. What follows is a rant, but it's a long overdue rant. And I'd appreciate it if people READ it.

----------------

Does it actually matter if it's not solved for 100 years?

This is the one thing that really bugs me about this community, the insistance on the 'here and now', 'let's move up the leaderboard!' aspect. I wouldn't give a toss if in 50 years time this card is still in the unsolved heap. I really wouldn't care if it's not solved in the remainder of my lifetime.

Let's take a step back from the 'argh, must be the first to soolve!' mentality and just accept this as the beautiful reminder that there are many, many things out there in the world that are unknown. MindCandy (or the academy) are NOT deliberately trying to cheat us on this, they're encouraging us to think beyond the realms of our everyday boring existance and actually trying to make us take an interest in the world beyond our own narrow viewpoints.

I would love to be sat, as a very different duckiemonster, in front of the TV in about 30 years time, and have a news item flash up about solving the Riemann Hypothesis, and to be able to sit there and go 'hurrah, that's the damned card solved'. I'd love to get back in touch with 'old' friends from where I am now and talk about the good times with Perplex City all over again. I would absolutely adore having something of this game still left with a big fat question mark once it's all over bar the shouting. Things don't have to be instantaneous; this is something that I'm learning as I get older, it's often the things that take time to resolve that are the best.

--------------

For those of you that agree with me, I suggest you check out the "latchkey project" (just google on in). For those of you that don't, I suggest you try and find a bit of romance.

[European Chris]

Why don't you go out with me when you get bored of Jamie?

[kaitwospirit]

My problem with this card is not that the solve might come in 50 years. It's that there might be no solve ever. It's still possible that the Riemann hypothesis is proven to be false.

[duckiemonster]

[European Chris]

Not really.

[AngusA]

I don't want to cause Duckiemonster to explode but my final thought on this subject is this. There are quite a lot of interesting areas around the Riemann Hypothesis that could be used to create a puzzle, so it should be possible to introduce the Riemann Hypotheseis AND create a solvable puzzle.

I'd also like to clear up one point. This theorem may be provable or disprovable but also it may not be possible to do either and you would never know. See Godel's Incompleteness theorem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems which says:

"For any consistent formal theory that proves basic arithmetical truths, it is possible to construct an arithmetical statement that is true but not provable in the theory"

[GuyP]

[Guin]

Its the UF boards I feel sorry for with all these rants

[locqust]

To be honest yes, I'm a little disappointed that the card cannot be solved at this time. But I've had a lot of fun trying to do it. Proof reading, the gradient thing and seeing what people came up with out of it. And learning about Riemann himself. THATS the most important thing about these cards. Having fun!