Tag Archives: big numbers

Numenko, Turning Square, and Toilet Paper

Welcome to this week’s Math Munch!

Have you ever played Scrabble or Bananagrams? Can you imagine versions of these games that would use numbers instead of letters?

Meet Tom Lennett, who imagined them and then made them!

Tom playing Numenko with his grandkids.

Tom playing Numenko with his grandkids.

Numemko is a crossnumber game. Players build up number sentences, like 4×3+8=20, that cross each other like in a crossword puzzle. There is both a board game version of Numenko (like Scrabble) and a bag game version (like Banagrams). Tom invented the board game years ago to help his daughter get over her fear of math. He more recently invented the bag game for his grandkids because they wanted a game to play where they didn’t have to wait their turn!

The Multichoice tile.

The Multichoice tile.

One important feature of Numenko is the Multichoice tile. Can you see how it can represent addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, or equality?

How would you like to have a Numenko set of your own? Well, guess what—Tom holds weekly Numenko puzzle competitions with prizes! You can see the current puzzle on this page, as well as the rules. Here’s the puzzle at the time of this post—the week of November 3, 2013.

Can you replace the Multichoice tiles to create a true number sentence?

Challenge: replace the Multichoice tiles to create a true number sentence.

I can assure you that it’s possible to win Tom’s competitions, because one of my students and I won Competition 3! I played my first games of Numenko today and really enjoyed them. I also tried making some Numenko puzzles of my own; see the sheet at the bottom of this post to see some of them.

Tom in 1972.

Tom in 1972.

In emailing with Tom I’ve found that he’s had a really interesting life. He grew up in Scotland and left school before he turned 15. He’s been a football-stitcher, a barber, a soldier, a distribution manager, a paintball site operator, a horticulturist, a property developer, and more. And, of course, also a game developer!

Do you have a question you’d like to ask Tom? Send it in through the form below, and we’ll try to include it in our upcoming Q&A!

leveledit

The level editor.

Say, do you like Bloxorz? I sure do—it’s one of my favorite games! So imagine my delight when I discovered that a fan of the game—who goes by the handle Jz Pan—created an extension of it where you can make your own levels. Awesome, right? It’s called Turning Square, and you can download it here.

(You’ll need to uncompress the file after downloading, then open TurningSquare.exe. This is a little more involved than what’s usual here on Math Munch, but I promise it’s worth it! Also, Turning Square has only been developed for PC. Sorry, Mac fans.)

The level!

The level I made!

But wait, there’s more! Turning Square also introduces new elements to Bloxorz, like slippery ice and pyramids you can trip over. It has a random level generator that can challenge you with different levels of difficulty. Finally, Turning Square includes a level solver—it can determine whether a level that you create is possible or not and how many steps it takes to complete.

Jz Pan is from China and is now a graduate student at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, majoring in mathematics and studying number theory. Jz Pan made Turning Square in high school, back in 2008.

Jz Pan has agreed to answer some of your questions! Use the form below to send us some.

If you make a level in Turning Square that you really like, email us the .box file and we can share it with everyone through our new Readers’ Gallery! Here is my level from above, if you want to try it out.

Jz Pan has also worked on an even more ambitious extension of Bloxorz called Turning Polyhedron. The goal is the same, but like the game Dublox, the shape that you maneuver around is different. Turning Polyhderon features several different shapes. Check out this video of it being played with a u-polyhedron!

And if you think that’s wild, check out this video with multiple moving blocks!

Last up this week, have you ever heard that it’s impossible to fold a piece of paper in half more than eight times? Or maybe it’s seven…? Either way, it’s a “fact” that seems to be common knowledge, and it sure seems like it’s true when you try to fold up a standard sheet of paper—or even a jumbo sheet of paper. The stack sure gets thick quickly!

Britney Gallivan and her 11th fold.

Britney and her 11th fold.

Well, here’s a great story about a teenager who decided to debunk this “fact” with the help of some math and some VERY big rolls of toilet paper. Her name is Britney Gallivan. Back in 2001, when she was a junior in high school, Britney figured out a formula for how much paper she’d need in order to fold it in half twelve times. Then she got that amount of paper and actually did it!

Due to her work, Britney has a citation in MathWorld’s article on folding and even her own Wikipedia article. After high school, Britney went on to UC Berkeley where she majored in Environmental Science. I’m trying to get in touch with Britney for an interview—if you have a question for her, hold onto it, and I’ll keep you posted!

EDIT: I got in touch with Britney, and she’s going to do an interview!

A diagram that illustrates how Britney derived her equation.

A diagram that illustrates how Britney derived her equation.

The best place to read more about Britney’s story in this article at pomonahistorical.org—the historical website of Britney’s hometown. Britney’s story shows that even when everyone else says that something’s impossible, that doesn’t mean you can’t be the one to do it. Awesome.

I hope you enjoy trying some Numenko puzzles, tinkering with Turning Square, and reading about Britney’s toilet paper adventure.

Bon appetit!

PS Want to see a video of some toilet-paper folding? Check out the very first “family math” video by Mike Lawler and his kids.

Reflection Sheet – Numenko, Turning Square, and Toilet Paper

God’s Number, Chocolate, and Devil’s Number

Welcome to this week’s Math Munch! This week, I’m sharing with you some math things that make me go, “What?!” Maybe you’ll find them surprising, too.

The first time I heard about this I didn’t believe it. If you’ve never heard it, you probably won’t believe it either.

Ever tried to solve one of these? I’ve only solved a Rubik’s cube once or twice, always with lots of help – but every time I’ve worked on one, it’s taken FOREVER to make any progress. Lots of time, lots of moves…. There are 43,252,003,274,489,856,000 (yes, that’s 43 quintillion) different configurations of a Rubik’s cube, so solving a cube from any one of these states must take a ridiculous number of moves. Right?

Nope. In 2010, some mathematicians and computer scientists proved that every single Rubik’s cube – no matter how it’s mixed up – can be solved in at most 20 moves. Because only an all-knowing being could figure out how to solve any Rubik’s cube in 20 moves or less, the mathematicians called this number God’s Number.

Once you get over the disbelief that any of the 43 quintillion cube configurations can be solved in less than 20 moves, you may start to wonder how someone proved that. Maybe the mathematicians found a really clever way that didn’t involve solving every cube?

Not really – they just used a REALLY POWERFUL computer. Check out this great video from Numberphile about God’s number to learn more:

Screen Shot 2013-10-02 at 2.48.01 PM

Here’s a chart that shows how many Rubik’s cube configurations need different numbers of moves to solve. I think it’s surprising that so few required all 20 moves. Even though every cube can be solved in 20 or less moves, this is very hard to do. I think it’s interesting how in the video, one of the people interviewed points out that solving a cube in very few moves is probably much more impressive than solving a cube in very little time. Just think – it takes so much thought to figure out how to solve a Rubik’s cube at all. If you also tried to solve it efficiently… that would really be a puzzle.

Next, check out this cool video. Its appealing title is, “How to create chocolate out of nothing.”

This type of puzzle, where area seems to magically appear or disappear when it shouldn’t, is called a geometric vanish. We’ve been talking about these a lot at school, and one of the things we’re wondering is whether you can do what the guy in the video did again, to make a second magical square of chocolate. What do you think?

infinityJHFinally, I’ve always found infinity baffling. It’s so hard to think about. Here’s a particularly baffling question: which is bigger, infinity or infinity plus one? Is there something bigger than infinity?

I found this great story that helps me think about different sizes of infinity. It’s based on similar story by mathematician Raymond Smullyan. In the story, you are trapped by the devil until you guess the devil’s number. The story tells you how to guarantee that you’ll guess the devil’s number depending on what sets of numbers the devil chooses from.

Surprisingly, you’ll be able to guess the devil’s number even if he picks from a set of numbers with an infinite number of numbers in it! You’ll guess his number if he picked from the counting numbers larger than zero, positive or negative counting numbers, or all fractions and counting numbers. You’d think that there would be too many fractions for you to guess the devil’s number if he included those in his set. There are infinitely many counting numbers – but aren’t there even more fractions? The story tells you about a great way to organize your guessing that works even with fractions. (And shows that the set of numbers with fractions AND counting numbers is the same size as the set of numbers with just counting numbers… Whoa.)

Is there something mathematical that makes you go, “What?!” How about, “HUH?!” If so, send us an email or leave us a note in the comments. We’d love to hear about it!

Bon appetit!

Prime Gaps, Mad Maths, and Castles

Welcome to this week’s Math Munch!

It has been a thrilling last month in the world of mathematics. Several new proofs about number patterns have been announced. Just to get a flavor for what it’s all about, here are some examples.

I can make 15 by adding together three prime numbers: 3+5+7. I can do this with 49, too: 7+11+31. Can all odd numbers be written as three prime numbers added together? The Weak Goldbach Conjecture says that they can, as long as they’re bigger than five. (video)

11 and 13 are primes that are only two apart. So are 107 and 109. Can we find infinitely many such prime pairs? That’s called the Twin Prime Conjecture. And if we can’t, are there infinitely many prime pairs that are at most, say, 100 apart? (video, with a song!)

Harald Helfgott

Harald Helfgott

Yitang "Tom" Zhang

Yitang “Tom” Zhang

People have been wondering about these questions for hundreds of years. Last month, Harald Helfgott showed that the Weak Goldbach Conjecture is true! And Yitang “Tom” Zhang showed that there are infinitely many prime pairs that are at most 70,000,000 apart! You can find lots of details about these discoveries and links to even more in this roundup by Evelyn Lamb.

What’s been particularly fabulous about Tom’s result about gaps between primes is that other mathematicians have started to work together to make it even better. Tom originally showed that there are an infinite number of prime pairs that are at most 70,000,000 apart. Not nearly as cute as being just two apart—but as has been remarked, 70,000,000 is a lot closer to two than it is to infinity! That gap of 70,000,000 has slowly been getting smaller as mathematicians have made improvements to Tom’s argument. You can see the results of their efforts on the polymath project. As of this writing, they’ve got the gap size narrowed down to 12,006—you can track the decreasing values down the page in the H column. So there are infinitely many pairs of primes that are at most 12,006 apart! What amazing progress!

Two names that you’ll see in the list of contributors to the effort are Andrew Sutherland and Scott Morrison. Andrew is a computational number theorist at MIT and Scott has done research in knot theory and is at the Australian National University. They’ve improved arguments and sharpened figures to lower the prime gap value H. They’ve contributed by doing things like using a hybrid Schinzel/greedy (or “greedy-greedy”) sieve. Well, I know what a sieve is and what a greedy algorithm is, but believe me, this is very complicated stuff that’s way over my head. Even so, I love getting to watch the way that these mathematicians bounce ideas off each other, like on this thread.

Andrew Sutherland

Andrew Sutherland

Click through to see Andrew next to an amazing Zome creation!

Andrew. Click this!

Scott Morrison

Scott Morrison

Andrew and Scott have agreed to answer some of your questions about their involvement in this research about prime gaps and their lives as mathematicians. I know I have some questions I’m curious about! You can submit your questions in the form below:

I can think of only two times in my life where I was so captivated by mathematics in the making as I am by this prime gaps adventure. Andrew Wiles’s proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem was on the fringe of my awareness when it came out in 1993—its twentieth anniversary of his proof just happened, in fact. The result still felt very new and exciting when I read Fermat’s Enigma a couple of years later. Grigori Perelman’s proof of the Poincare Conjecture made headlines just after I moved to New York City seven years ago. I still remember reading a big article about it in the New York Times, complete with a picture of a rabbit with a grid on it.

This work on prime gaps is even more exciting to me than those, I think. Maybe it’s partly because I have more mathematical experience now, but I think it’s mostly because lots of people are helping the story to unfold and we can watch it happen!

fig110u2bNext up, I ran across a great site the other week when I was researching the idea of a “cut and slide” process. The site is called Mad Maths and the page I landed on was all about beautiful dissections of simple shapes, like circles and squares. I’ve picked out one that I find especially charming to feature here, but you might enjoy seeing them all. The site also contains all kinds of neat puzzles and problems to try out. I’m always a fan of congruent pieces problems, and these paper-folding puzzles are really tricky and original. (Or maybe, origaminal!) You’ll might especially like them if you liked Folds.

Christian's applet displaying the original four-room castle.

Christian’s applet displaying the original four-room castle.

Finally, we previously posted about Matt Parker’s great video problem about a princess hiding in a castle. Well, Christian Perfect of The Aperiodical has created an applet that will allow you to explore this problem—plus, it’ll let you build and try out other castles for the princess to hide in. Super cool! Will I ever be able to find the princess in this crazy star castle I designed?!

Crazy star castle!

My crazy star castle!

And as summer gets into full swing, the other kind of castle that’s on my mind is the sandcastle. Take a peek at these photos of geometric sandcastles by Calvin Seibert. What shapes can you find? Maybe Calvin’s creations will inspire your next beach creation!

Bon appetit!

167739151_ec142bbfe8 3342635687_f847918e0e 5945114420_c950231830