Topic List | Page List: 1 |
---|---|
Topic | Another probability question |
tyder21 05/17/20 12:25:08 AM #11: | I said that, but continued to stare at it anyway. It's because your solution accidentally introduces a bunch of 0-leading numbers (e.g. 0112345). This perfectly offsets for the double-0's that you weren't contemplating because you can take any of these 0-leading numbers and map them to valid double-0 numbers. 0112345 -> 1002345. Accidentally very clever. --- http://letterboxd.com/tyder21/ Ain't no party like an azuarc party. ... Copied to Clipboard! |
Topic List | Page List: 1 |