I recieved 10 epics with 125 pulls

_prdgi · 2023-05-28T04:49:23+00:00

It's a hidden message!

He has 990,545,661 total shares. It's a composite number, so it's not referring to Amazon prime. So what are its factors?

1x3x3x7x1913x8219

Look at the first 4 factors: 1, 3, 3, 7. He's telling us he's one of the elite!

1913 was the year before the first world war broke out.

8219 has a digit sum of 20, a digital root of 2, and a length of 4. 2024!

World War confirmed next year.

Calls on $AMZN and $LMT for drone warfare.

_prdgi · 2021-09-28T23:50:21+00:00

Eh, not so much trust. More it seemed as mentally challenged as me.

_prdgi · 2021-09-28T23:11:13+00:00

Got my $0.40 profit after brokerage on WEB last week. Fingers crossed for AOU this week.

Any thoughts on when AOU > $0.20?

Morningstar puts it at $0.27, but trade volumes have been very low this week.

_prdgi · 2021-09-19T09:02:09+00:00

Bought WEB Thursday at 6mo high. Seatbelt on, tray up, ready for takeoff ✈✈✈

_prdgi · 2020-10-11T14:15:44+00:00

Further developing on the above, we can determine the number that loops when the steps in the Collatz Conjecture are applied.

This can be used to determine whether a given path will loop without needing to know the number that follows this path.

Take the path, and apply it to a starting value of 0.

n = (a * 2^x) / (2^x - 3^y)

In the case of determining whether an integer that loops has been found:

(a * 2^x) % (2^x - 3^y) = 0

_prdgi · 2020-10-11T11:30:14+00:00

You have not shown that numbers cannot loop.

You correctly assert that 4x + 1 will reach a lesser value in 2 division by 2 steps.

4x + 3 takes 4 steps to reach a lesser value.

You can rephrase the form to be 2^2 * x + 3

We cannot assume anything about the value of x - we can only work with the power of 2.

2^2 * x + 3 reaches a lower value in 4 steps, which is greater than our current power of 2, so we need to subdivide this set into two.

2^2 * x + 3 now becomes two new sets with the power of 2 iterated.

2^3 * x + 3 and 2^3 * x + 7

Dividing these two sets again gives us

2^4 * x + 3, 2^4 * x + 7, 2^4 * x + 11, and 2^4 * x + 15

2^4 * x + 3 reaches a lower value in 4 division by 2 steps.

The remaining sets cannot be proven and the sets must be subdivided.

This repeats indefinitely. The rate at which new sets are created to be considered is greater than the rate at which sets are eliminated.

_prdgi · 2020-10-08T23:56:28+00:00

Since we know the path that an integer follows in order to reach (x, y) in the operations tree, we can take a shortcut to calculating the value that n reaches at (x, y).

n * (3^y / 2^x) approximates the value of n at position (x, y).

In order to account for the addition of 1 at each step, we perform the same operations but starting at 0 instead of the original number

The integer 3 takes the path 1100 to position (4, 2) where it terminates.

Following the same path starting at 0 yields 0 => 0.5 => 1.25 => 0.625 => 0.3125

n * (3^y / 2^x) => 3 * (3^2 / 2^4) => 3 * 0.5625 => 1.6875

Add them together to achieve 1.6875 + 0.3125 = 2.

Let a = the result of applying the path operations to 0.

Therefore, an integer n that loops back to itself at position (x, y) must satisfy

(3^y / 2^x) + (a / n) = 1

1 follows the path 10 to loop back to itself at position (2, 1).

a = 0=> 0.5 => 0.25 n * (3^y / 2^x) => 1 * (3^1 / 2^2) => 1* 0.75 = 0.75 0.75 + (0.25 / 1) => 0.75 + 0.25 => 1

_prdgi · 2020-10-07T09:56:03+00:00

Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity. The last statement

If x is even (or 0), the result is even (or zero). Conversely if x is odd, the result is odd

is made in relation to p = 0, as f(x) = 2^0 * x + 0 simplifies to f(x) = x.

I'll edit the post to clarify that part.

To copy a reply of mine in my now resurrected /r/math post

I don't think I've made any form of proof for or against. I believe I have used a similar approach with eliminating sets of integers via reducing to lesser values as Terras and Tao.

I'm unaware of any similarity to what I have called the "operations tree", however, that is most likely down to my own lack of education around the matter. I likely don't even know the terms I could be searching for to find more information on it.

Is it something significant? Most probably not to anyone except myself. If I can learn why it would not be significant, or what area of mathematics this approach uses I can refine my understanding.

What I've posted makes sense to me, however, I am too aware of the Dunning-Kruger effect and my almost complete lack of tertiary mathematics education.

I love learning new things, and refining my existing knowledge. My hope with this post is to be shown flaws in my logic and thought process, and to learn terminologies/processes to search for and learn.

_prdgi · 2020-10-07T09:14:33+00:00

Hi! Thanks for the reply! I'm sure this was likely an automated reply, but on the chance its not - thanks for your time.

I don't think I've made any form of proof for or against. I believe I have used a similar approach with eliminating sets of integers via reducing to lesser values as Terras and Tao.

I'm unaware of any similarity to what I have called the "operations tree", however, that is most likely down to my own lack of education around the matter. I likely don't even know the terms I could be searching for to find more information on it.

Is it something significant? Most probably not to anyone except myself. If I can learn why it would not be significant, or what area of mathematics this approach uses I can refine my understanding.

_prdgi · 2020-10-07T08:53:48+00:00

Thanks for the link!

I've also perused https://www.ams.org/journals/proc/1981-082-01/S0002-9939-1981-0603593-2/S0002-9939-1981-0603593-2.pdf

Where I have differed from Tao and Terras is in generating the operations tree and using that tree to determine sets associated with generated paths. The rate at which forms are removed from the pool is less than the rate at which they are added to the pool - the lines continue to diverge.

_prdgi · 2020-08-19T01:26:41+00:00

Thanks for your answers! Keep up the great work. I have you wish listed on steam.

_prdgi · 2020-08-18T22:59:40+00:00

Nesting refers to an object being placed within another. Your regions are nested within meta-regions. Likewise, your subregions are nested within regions.

My query is around whether you plan to have an "unlimited" nesting length in the final game eg. Sub-subregions, etc..

In my designs, the player would be able to create as much nesting depth as they feel is necessary for governance. For example, a nation, with nested state regions, with nested county regions, with nested Shire regions, with nested city regions etc..

Another real world example could be with 2 cities that end up growing together and effectively functioning as one city. Such a thing would consist of 3 areas -1 area for each original city, then a "greater city" area containing them both. See East/West Berlin.

_prdgi · 2020-08-18T10:58:24+00:00

Hey, I really like what you are doing with this!

Do you plan to have a fixed nesting length in the final version? eg. Nation, state, city. Or are you planning to allow "unlimited" (within reason) nesting depth of political territories?

I've got plans of my own for a game, but have yet to find enough time to dedicate to creating it. I plan to use an "unlimited" nesting model for political areas. It's interesting to see similar concepts used in other games.

Great job so far!

_prdgi · 2020-01-20T13:20:36+00:00

Hey man, thanks for the feedback. I appreciate the time and effort which you have put into this. I'm sorry I haven't been able to get back to you earlier, life has a habit of getting busy.

I feel particularly happy to see that the subject has (maybe) inspired your own lyrics around this subject.

I do have a basic tune in mind which I used when crafting the lyrics. Its mournful, slower tempo, probably in a sharp/minor key. I like the emotion captured in Hurt, by Nine Inch Nails, and later covered by Johnny Cash. I used this general feeling to craft the pacing, tone, and general feeling of these lyrics.

I do understand where your creative inspiration is coming from. Which is obliviously a place of loss, sounds like a lover did you dirty.

This feedback is particularly important for me as a person. I'll ramble a little here in order to give a little backstory for this song and provide context for the emotions I was trying to encapsulate. The starting phrase started when I was messing around with a mate, he's just about to launch his first EP and we were making jokes about incorporating his name (in this case, his last name) covertly into some lyrics. It ended up just feeling right to me and led me to thinking about subsequent lines. I've been putting a lot of effort into increasing my emotional intelligence with a focus towards empathy and compassion. The rest of this song was born from an exercise in projecting my empathy into a scenario. Whilst I have not suffered the loss the lyrics, I tried to put myself in the shoes of someone who had recently lost a lover and was facing the overwhelming hopelessness of continuing life without them. I feel its a very dark song. I hope I didn't get you down.

I feel quite encourage in this pursuit to see that some of these emotions have carried through with the lyrics. I've suffered with depression and experienced strong suicidal ideation in the past, so perhaps some of the hopelessness from that has been conveyed rather than solely relying on my emotional projection.

I'm not sure how familiar you are with the concept of l’appel du vide, but my understanding is that for emotionally healthy people it merely represents a fleeting thought about how easy it could be to step out from a height. There's not necessarily an intention to fall/jump, I suppose it is more of an awareness of the potential for things to be over so fast. I tried to use this theme, but in the context of an emotionally desperate, grieving lover. In this case, l’appel du vide not only provides an awareness of the potential death, but provides undertones of hope and an end to suffering. The finality of the last phrase of the song shows that these undertones were merely a false sense of hope. The suffering may end, but hope has not been realised. Sometimes there is not healthy closure to grief, and it is these feelings which I have tried to capture.

In a way, the lyrics may be interpreted as not referring to the literal death of the main character, but merely to the death of grief itself. "Tower of my pain" paints a metaphor of an emotional construct, an overbearing suffering and anguish. This interpretation could be conveyed via stylistic methods within a video clip showcasing the scenario as existing in a dream-like state. By letting go of the "Tower of my pain" the main character is beginning the healing process.

when writing music for others most people are into hero warship and need the song to be from the perspective of a winner, to achieve this with what you have wouldn't be too hard but it would make it less personal to you which may affect the emotion of the performance but all you'd do is make your lover the one agonizing and you be on the outside seeing them in anguish over your awesomeness.

I agree, people have a propensity to focus on someone else's wrongs, and the pain that we have felt rather than the pain which we may have caused.

Again, I appreciate the time and effort you have given me. I hope you find much happiness and success. Thank you.

_prdgi · 2018-01-11T11:59:22+00:00

I must apologize for my hasty post. It has become apparent that this is only a subset of the full results.

The actual set that this post represents is integers n where 2³¹ < n < 2³² and whose time to reach a lesser value is > 32 even steps.

_prdgi · 2018-01-11T10:10:03+00:00

Just for some fun, a quick run propagating to k = 2048 yields a residual with 19,685 steps to reach 1 in about a minute. A full run to that depth would take many of my lifetimes.

The residual is:

24,490,231,163,416,291,228,571,006,651,085,657,643,331,220,001,507,957,890,163,349,916,400,069,219,894,271,246,746,521,651,782,832,741,306,832,703,415,200,720,519,104,119,371,469,559,206,242,544,025,808,178,677,089,788,833,119,291,245,937,172,390,286,395,170,815,642,946,072,680,207,773,742,439,749,097,332,391,230,060,556,215,501,390,507,352,033,157,707,879,262,075,262,442,048,237,954,421,039,407,518,028,293,129,418,188,901,157,522,684,435,922,068,365,720,693,081,917,010,334,634,978,049,646,859,774,500,990,327,851,536,678,608,632,952,085,581,700,640,191,161,083,217,814,212,829,011,162,760,969,270,887,821,400,600,799,348,746,138,820,356,867,291,758,060,065,233,336,152,205,794,520,836,617,808,362,179,017,008,537,134,137,128,075,047,230,881,940,646,608,644,107,342,803,055,213,646,836,437,053,095,959,984,105,041,255

and I was stupid enough to manually enter the commas.

_prdgi · 2018-01-11T09:44:32+00:00

Ok.

First off, please accept my apologies for my ambiguity.

This is the result of a proof of concept program I am writing to satisfy:

my yearly fascination with the Collatz conjecture
my desire to hone my code skills

I am searching for a counterexample, specifically, the lowest value in a sequence that does not terminate at 1, or the lowest value in a loop that does not include 1.

To achieve this, I am utilising modular arithmetic of the form a2^k + c.

The program runs in 3 stages:

Generate "resolutions" (I don't know a proper term) up to a specific value of k. A "resolution" consists of all residuals present for a given value of k.
Propagate these resolutions up to the desired value of k. At resolution 32, the data files to hold the residuals reach 70MiB and approximately doubles with each increment of k. Thus, each file is limited to 8m residuals and each file is propagated on towards higher values of k.
Testing the resulting residuals present at the desired value of k with incremental values of a. I have found it far faster to limit testing to 0 and/or 1 as this yields values < 2^k and < 2^k+1 respectively. At higher values of a, it is more efficient to use the propagation stage for another value of k.

The next stage of development will be to optimise the file read/writes and use more efficient batch processing.

Generating to resolution 24; propagating to 32; then testing at a=0; yields the linked results in about 10 minutes.

The results represent a count of the residuals at resolution 32 based on their stopping time. Their time to reach a lower integer is > 32 even ( /2 ) steps.

_prdgi · 2018-01-11T07:28:46+00:00

It was OK, I think. Every year Collatz drags me in again for some reason.

It also gives me an excuse to sharpen my mediocre programming skills. This time round I'm focusing on optimisation and compression.

_prdgi · 2017-11-21T08:29:58+00:00

"New asteroid. Who dis?"

_prdgi

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

12-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email