Page 1 of 1
Spoilers for Monday 8th September 2025 (Series 92, Heat 51)
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2025 2:46 pm
by Gavin Chipper
I thought the "obvious" way to do that 3rd numbers was 75*50/6+6*100/25 = 649. It's essentially a 25 squared method.
The last numbers could also be done an easier way than Rachel's method - (8+4)*3*10+2 = 362. Rachel did 45*8+2, getting the 45 a rather clunky way.
By the way, while I'm here - the other day did they ask whether anyone had ever played their parent/
offspring in a game? I wasn't paying that much attention and can't remember what day it was or why it might have come up. But anyway
Wayne Summers famously lost to his father in a heat game before going on to win the series and the CoC.
Re: Spoilers for Monday 8th September 2025 (Series 92, Heat 51)
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2025 3:27 pm
by John Garcia
Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Mon Sep 08, 2025 2:46 pm
I thought the "obvious" way to do that 3rd numbers was 75*50/6+6*100/25 = 649. It's essentially a 25 squared method.
Yeah that's the way I did it too.
Not the biggest numbers faux-pas on today's show though.
Colin asked "A number 1 followed by 100 zeros is known by what name?"
Rachel replied "A googolplex".
The correct answer was a googol. A googolplex is a 1 followed by 10^100 zeros, so slightly out.
Re: Spoilers for Monday 8th September 2025 (Series 92, Heat 51)
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2025 4:28 pm
by Gavin Chipper
John Garcia wrote: ↑Mon Sep 08, 2025 3:27 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Mon Sep 08, 2025 2:46 pm
I thought the "obvious" way to do that 3rd numbers was 75*50/6+6*100/25 = 649. It's essentially a 25 squared method.
Yeah that's the way I did it too.
Not the biggest numbers faux-pas on today's show though.
Colin asked "A number 1 followed by 100 zeros is known by what name?"
Rachel replied "A googolplex".
The correct answer was a googol. A googolplex is a 1 followed by 10^100 zeros, so slightly out.
If she'd said "four" she would have been closer arithmetically speaking, if not conceptually so.
Re: Spoilers for Monday 8th September 2025 (Series 92, Heat 51)
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2025 4:43 pm
by John Garcia
Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Mon Sep 08, 2025 4:28 pm
If she'd said "four" she would have been closer arithmetically speaking, if not conceptually so.
Yeah. There aren't enough atoms in the universe to even write out that number.
Re: Spoilers for Monday 8th September 2025 (Series 92, Heat 51)
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2025 5:43 am
by Howie Myers
r11 alt: (I think easier) 4*8*10+3*2*7=362
Re: Spoilers for Monday 8th September 2025 (Series 92, Heat 51)
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2025 7:49 pm
by Adam Dexter
Howie Myers wrote: ↑Tue Sep 09, 2025 5:43 am
r11 alt: (I think easier) 4*8*10+3*2*7=362
I gave up on 45 * 8 + 2 and did
(10+3)*4*7 + 2