[Next Message in Time] | [Previous Message in Time] | [Next Message in Topic] | [Previous Message in Topic]

Message ID: 361
Date: Tue Aug 17 01:59:49 BST 1999
Author: Xillitil of Povar
Subject: Re: Combinations for that fishing pole = irrelevant math stuff


yeh, there is probably no practical use for the numbers, but it's been a
while since my brain got any exercise...and being realistic is no fun :)

realized that i forgot order is not important again...
current guess is 13^8/8!...~20231
or 13^4/4!=~1120 for 4 slots used...

hmmm...that seems to be not quite right either...dunno...gonna have to go
find some old textbooks or something...


Xillitil/Povar


>From: "Fippy Darkpaw" <thewhitemage@...>
>
>
>Guys, you aren't really being realistic here. You say that there is a
>certain amout of items that we can use to make it, what are you saying?
>Thats it's 13? Let's just say we decided that only 4 slots are used to make
>it, even then, you can't make any acurate calculation of the amount of
>combinations there are, I mean, I dout we will be using grease, sprockets,
>gnomish bolts, and gears to be making the fishing pole. We probably have to
>have some kind of rod or shaft too, and with your calulations, you are
>inluding various of those useless combinations, that we can probably guess
>wouldn't make the pole. You are just going to have to face the fact that we
>just have to keep trying, or find some alternate way of learning the
>recipe,
>so no amount of calculations are going to help us much unless you aply them
>in a practical way, so you should stop wasting your time. That is all I
>have
>to say for now.
>
>Sniffledoo Copperheart.
>
>>From: "Xillitil of Povar" <xillitil@...>
>>
>>
>>oops...yer right...i was doin permutations...shoulda been divide instead
>>o'
>>subtract...did it right on the calculator at least :)
>>but since we can repeat items, i seem to recall that we don't want
>>combinations or permutations...
>>any slot could have any of the 13 items, regardless of the other slots, so
>>we get the slightly less nice number of 13^8=815,730,721
>>or if we assume, as some have suggested, that it worked with the old 4
>>slot
>>toolbox, 13^4=28561 possibilities
>>that sound right to those with more recent education or more convenient
>>reference materials?
>>
>>Xillitil/Povar
>>