View topic - [BEIJING] The "sum of sports" question

unforum
a.r.g.b.b

Welcome!

New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.

Website Restoration Project

This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.

Announcements

This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.

This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.

Our Esteemed Contributors

The time now is Wed Nov 13, 2024 11:27 am
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)

View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum

Calendar

Forum index » Archive » Archive: General » ARG: Find the Lost Ring

[BEIJING] The "sum of sports" question

Page 1 of 1 [5 Posts]

Author

Message

AUZ505
Unfictologist

Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 1599
Location: Germany

[BEIJING] The "sum of sports" question

The "sum of sports" question: Is 72 billion worlds really the number we need to reduce down to in order to travel on the 24th? Keep an eye on the Run Graph to see if the Olympics are getting us close enough... or if we have to do any special synchronising to make it happen!

_________________
Playing:

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 2:12 pm

danteIL
Unfictologist

Joined: 08 May 2006
Posts: 1990

Here is the very confusing discussion about the 'sum of the sports':

Quote:

<EliHunt> The next coded message follows:
<EliHunt> voyage. the world must align almost perfectly. calculate the goal. it is. the sum of sport below the highest limit
<EliHunt> This appears to be some instructions regarding how to travel home.
<Bookmore> If it is a sum, shouldn't it be the sum of sportS ?
<EliHunt> We know that as the Olympics continue, the number of worlds is dropping, which must also mean that they are aligning.
<JamesMutters> What does 'sum of sports'?
<EliHunt> We have seen from the run graph already today that a significant drop has occurred.
<EliHunt> Bookmore, yes I believe so. "The sum of the sports".
<chippy> summa = summer (palace)
<Tenchizard> may the highest limit be the "world records"?
<EliHunt> Chippy, that is interesting!
<Bookmore> "Below the highest limit"
<mrjudkins> so we can expect the drop will continue over the olympics
<Fencer> Sum=Summer palce? That's kinda odd....
<EliHunt> A little bit of a stretch but I appreciate thinking creatively.
<EliHunt> What is the sum of the sports?
<Bookmore> What is "the goal" ?
<EliHunt> What are the sports? And what is their sum?
<Bookmore> "Calculate a gold medal" ? :p
<mrjudkins> or the total number of sports?
<Tenchizard> let's begin with the basics: how much is one sport plus one sport?
<mrjudkins> for 1920 or for now?
<konamouse> how many sports are there this year?
<macmonkey> record times?
<EliHunt> Two sports
<JamesMutters> would it be the sum of the number of sports played in the ancient olympics?
<Tenchizard> now, how many sports are there?
<Tenchizard> I mean, olympic sports
<Canzonett> Depends on how you count them.
<konamouse> actual events, or just categories?
<konamouse> count men separate from womens'
<EliHunt> The sum of the sports being run at the Olympics?
<Canzonett> Do all the chariot races count as different sports?
<konamouse> i guess the answer would be how many gold medals will be awarded.
<EliHunt> I imagine it would be sports, not events, or they would have
written events, yes?
<Bookmore> 35 olympic disciplines this year.
<Tenchizard> yes, I think it's sports, not events
<JamesMutters> Eli, that makes sense
<EliHunt> Konamouse, but then it might have said the sum of the medals.
<lehall> wouldn't it have been the sports in either the original Olympics, or the 1920 ones?
<Shad0> @Eli: Depends on the context of the sentence from which the fragment has been drawn.
<EliHunt> Bookmore, 35? Okay, very interesting.
<Fencer> 35 sports,
<EliHunt> So "35 below the upper limit"
<unagi> I think not "sports" but "sport", singular
<JamesMutters> current olympic programs are 35 sports, 53 disciplines
<EliHunt> Would that make sense? What would that mean?
<EliHunt> Does anyone have the run graph open?
<konamouse> is it 2008 or 1920 or ancient games?
<Canzonett> but what IS the upper limit? We have no number there ...
<EliHunt> Canzonett, it does appear that there is a number, I believe
<Tenchizard> so, the sports below the olumpic records, wich would be below the upper limits?
<Shad0> @EliHunt: I do
<JamesMutters> 1x10^10
<mrjudkins> The upper limit being 1x10 to the power of 11?
<Canzonett> the upper limit of worlds - or of sport events?
<konamouse> and do they count the winter sports?
<JamesMutters> ten trillion
<Shad0> 100,000,000,000
<chippy> olympics = 28 sports, according to http://en.beijing2008.cn/sports/
<Bookmore> konamouse: I believe not, given the end of the quest is the end of the Summer Games.
<Canzonett> ten trillion minus 35 equals ...?
<EliHunt> Shad0, yes
<Shad0> one hundred trillion
<JamesMutters> ok, so 100 billion minus 35
<Shad0> err, billion
<Tenchizard> 100 billon minus 35 is... almost 100 billion?
<Shad0> what Ariock and James just said
<MauroKing> but 35 seems like such a low number compared to the other one
<EliHunt> 100 billion -- less 35, in the unit of measurement?
<unagi> 1/35, I think
<Shad0> I guess we'd need a LOT more city-sized omphalabyrinths if that were the goal
<JamesMutters> = 999,999,999,965
<Tenchizard> lots of nines
<JamesMutters> = 999,999,965
<EliHunt> That harldy seems likely, James
<chippy> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Summer_Olympics again, 28 sports
<Tenchizard> maybe the upper limit is something else
<Shad0> @James: It's not quite that bad. Only 99,999,999,965
<EliHunt> These are powers of 10, correct?
<JamesMutters> yes, powers of 10
<unagi> Yes.
<Fencer> are these the number of the worlds currently?
<macmonkey> where did the upper limit come from?
<mrjudkins> I read the upper limit as being power of 11
<mrjudkins> from the top line of run graph
<Bookmore> Aaaaah, ok.
<EliHunt> 10 to the 8, 10 to the 9 10 to the 10...
<Canzonett> and how do we use this number to calculate our goal?
<chippy> 28 sports, 35 disciplines
<Shad0> @mrjudkins: Which makes perfect sense, although we don't actually KNOW it
<sparta247> Now I'd say Chuck Norris
<Shad0> ...because the multiverse has never actually hit the upper limit
<JamesMutters> hang on, whatever number this is... what does it mean for us?
<Shad0> "the sum of sport below the highest limit."
<Shad0> @James: It's "the goal" that we must "calculate"
<mrjudkins> Six original Sports in the Ancient Olympics
<Canzonett> Yes, how do we use this number to calculate "our goal"? Coordinates?
<EliHunt> I believe this part of the code tells us how closely the worlds must be aligned to support multiple travelers.
<Ariock> 1x10^11 = highest limit
<mrjudkins> perhaps we need to get down to the power of 5?
<Canzonett> Number of times that labyrinth has to be run? Wink

<EliHunt> And the run graph shows us how closely the worlds are aligned.
<CS> so we know when to run the 11 circuit?
<Bookmore> Look at the left of the run graph
<Tenchizard> is there any kind of math operation wich uses the word "below"? sorry but I don't know english maths Razz

<EliHunt> If 100 billion is the maximum number of worlds, as shown by the upper limit...
<Bookmore> You have one "highest limit" all the way to the top
<Fencer> only in fractions, tenchizardd
<EliHunt> Perhaps it means "less 35", tenchizard?
<Bookmore> And then 6 grouped together under the highest limit
<Fencer> or x/35?
<sparta247> maybe the highest limit is our omph strength?
<JamesMutters> Eli... does this mean that we WANT to get the number of worlds up?
* chippy goes for 28. y'all wrong with 35
<Bookmore> Wouldn't that work ?
<JamesMutters> so we would want to desynch
<JamesMutters> ...?
<Nighthawk> Below could imply division, being the denominator...?
<Tenchizard> then it would be 10^10/35 (or 28, or whatever)?
<EliHunt> James, it appears you are not following.
<JamesMutters> I'm trying
<Ariock> are we talking about 28 or 35?
<Dav> both
<chippy> 35 disciplines, 28 sports
<Canzonett> we're talking method, not absolute numbers at the moment
<EliHunt> I believe we are working with the number 35 as our best bet.
<JamesMutters> ok, so summer olympics include 28 sports, winter is 7
<mrjudkins> okay - so 35 less than the upper limit.
<Shad0> Eleven minus thirty-five is... negative twenty-four. 10^-24 is... umm... really tiny.
<EliHunt> Okay, 28.
<Ariock> that would be a fraction of a world
<Tenchizard> shad0: no, it would be (10^10)/35
<Shad0> 10^-17=0.00000000000000001
<EliHunt> Well, perhaps we are only interested in the sum of sport at the games travel will occur at.
<EliHunt> Perhaps 28 is the valid sum.
<Ariock> that would be 28
<mrjudkins> Okay 28 hten.
<JamesMutters> we concurr here
<Canzonett> Sounds likely - the ancient Greeks didn't have WInter Olympics ...
<EliHunt> 10^28 below the upper limit would be massively negative worlds! I don't think that could be correct.
<mrjudkins> No...
<Fencer> What's the upper limit again?
<Shad0> 100,000,000,000/28=28,571,428.57
<mrjudkins> So if 10^11 is the upper limit
<konamouse> 10^11/28?
<Tenchizard> I think the "equation" is sports below limit
<Ariock> 2.8x10^10 perhaps
<Bookmore> Hmmmm.
<Fencer> That's kinda small.
<Ariock> or 28x10^9
<CS> divide the limit by the sum of the sport?
<Shad0> So there must be no more than 28,571,428 worlds?
<Fencer> so (10^11)/28?
<Fencer> or 10^10/28?
<sparta247> ah
<EliHunt> Below suggests subtraction rather than division, I would guess?
<Shad0> @Fencer: 10^11
<Bookmore> Question.
<Canzonett> Agreed.
<Bookmore> if the athletic performances during the games are going to make synchronisation mroe accurate...
<konamouse> if subtraction then the use of "less than"
<EliHunt> It seems we must simply determine the unit here.
<Nighthawk> Dunno. "Below" could be the same as "underneath", as in the denominator in division.
<konamouse> to me "below" means underneath
<Bookmore> Wouldn't that maen that the more world records are broken, the better the sync would be ?
<Shad0> @EliHunt: But if the maximum number of worlds is (10^11)-28, that's... well... pretty easy to satisfy.
<Canzonett> Then "below" is to be understood visually, referring to the run graph
<EliHunt> Obviously, we can hope to achieve the alignment randomly.
<sparta247> wait do we know if the rings are referring to the modern or ancient olympics?
<EliHunt> If we are unable to solve this part of the code.
<CS> it looks like division to me . . notation for a fraction/ ratio
<Shad0> @Sparta: The rings were created by the 1920 agonothetai
<Canzonett> We shouldn't rely on random alignment, though ...
<sparta247> okay
<JamesMutters> agreed Canzonett
<EliHunt> Agreed, Canzonett.
<Tenchizard> hmm... (10^10)/28=357142857,14285714285714285714286
<Tenchizard> that's an ugly number
<Fencer> So that's the number of worlds we have to have?
<Fencer> In order to send them back?
<sparta247> But I mean haven't they added sports and such?
<Bookmore> If the synchronisation is made easier by a higher number of high level athletic performances
<Bookmore> Couldn't the objective AND the sum be the number of sports that are UNDER world records at the end of the games ?
<EliHunt> We know alignment will continue throughout the games. Perhaps we should move on add the math to our list of projects
<Bookmore> Of course, we wouldn't know for sure until the end of the games.
<lehall> sounds like a plan
<JamesMutters> sounds good Eli
<EliHunt> Okay, so moving on:
<Canzonett> We still have some days to work on that task ..
<Tenchizard> bookmore: I said that about the upper limits, that it could be the world records
<Ariock> 1x10^11 is the upper limit. we need to drop by 28 somethings.
<mrjudkins> Added.
<Bookmore> Aaaah, sorry Tenchizard. Good idea, then Wink

<unagi> So, is the unit the number of the worlds every sport decreases?
<EliHunt> Ariock, yes, excellent summary. Thank you, Mr. Judkins.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Ariock seems to have provided the most useful summary: "<Ariock> 1x10^11 is the upper limit. we need to drop by 28 somethings. " In other words, keep watching that RUN GRAPH.

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 3:49 pm

AUZ505
Unfictologist

Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 1599
Location: Germany

later in the chat the following was said:

Quote:

<Ariock> 100-28=72 billion?
<EliHunt> Ariock, yes, perhaps a total of 72 worlds is the maximum allowing travel.

_________________
Playing:

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 4:45 pm

danteIL
Unfictologist

Joined: 08 May 2006
Posts: 1990

AUZ505 wrote:

later in the chat the following was said:

Quote:

<Ariock> 100-28=72 billion?
<EliHunt> Ariock, yes, perhaps a total of 72 worlds is the maximum allowing travel.

Yes, except I don't think he meant exactly "72" worlds, did he?

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 7:21 pm

DavFlamerock
Entrenched

Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 937
Location: H2Oville, ME, USA

Lol no, I think he meant 72 billion worlds. Razz

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:22 pm

Display posts from previous: Sort by:

Page 1 of 1 [5 Posts]

Forum index » Archive » Archive: General » ARG: Find the Lost Ring

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum