tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post743874709212979440..comments2015-05-03T08:16:59.739-07:00Comments on Skeptic's Play: The relatively prime graphmillerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05990852054891771988noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-25808107031333341062013-06-09T15:15:28.755-07:002013-06-09T15:15:28.755-07:00I'd love to write a python program to find a s...I'd love to write a python program to find a solution for this.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14050623939073775390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-13234256517978644712012-02-17T00:46:44.737-08:002012-02-17T00:46:44.737-08:00By the way: please make a change of the link to me...By the way: please make a change of the link to me in http://skepticsplay.blogspot.com/search?q=m24<br /><br />www.baumanneduard.ch <br />instead of <br />private.mcnet.ch/baumannBaumann Eduardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05635532009998724227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-22092476238912165132012-02-17T00:34:00.024-08:002012-02-17T00:34:00.024-08:00Ask for the smallest m+nAsk for the smallest m+nBaumann Eduardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05635532009998724227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-4819643329917427672012-02-04T09:56:16.708-08:002012-02-04T09:56:16.708-08:00Basically, I decided that m and n should be odd. T...Basically, I decided that m and n should be odd. The corners of the 3×3 square would all be evenly div by 2 so I just had to worry about m sharing a factor with each of n-1, n, n+1 and vice versa. Obviously, they would need to be three different factors that m shared (likewise n).<br /><br />One of m-1, m, m+1 and one of n-1, n, n+1 must have a factor of 3 so I assumed m to simply be a multiple of '3' and the next 2 smallest odd primes (3×5×7) and then looked at the prime factors for 104 and 106. <br /><br />I tried making n equal to the product of one odd prime from each of 104,105,106 and looked to see if both n-1 and n+1 also shared a factor with m.<br /><br />When none of the possible combinations worked, I briefly looked at m=3×5×11 but decided I might have a better chance of jagging a solution if at least one of m-1 / m+1 had 3 unique prime factors instead of only 2 as it would give me more possibilities for n. So then I tried m=3×7×11 and found n=7337. Ironically, there is a sol'n with m=3×5×11=165 - n is 10209.Secret Squïrrelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-16800593621984498152012-02-02T13:56:37.817-08:002012-02-02T13:56:37.817-08:00Nice! Looking at your solution, I'm guessing ...Nice! Looking at your solution, I'm guessing that you searched pairs of numbers that each had three unique prime factors?millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05990852054891771988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-17170314587475811072012-02-02T08:32:19.921-08:002012-02-02T08:32:19.921-08:00Ok, it's been a few days. The sol'n I foun...Ok, it's been a few days. The sol'n I found is m=231, n=7337. I didn't look for any others. My method wasn't particularly elegant but I managed to keep it relatively simple with a bit of trial-and-error at the end.Secret Squïrrelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-46518906550650646022012-01-29T18:28:40.125-08:002012-01-29T18:28:40.125-08:00Well, there are rather a lot to choose from!Well, there are rather a lot to choose from!Secret Squïrrelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-74739513136414520612012-01-29T10:35:39.072-08:002012-01-29T10:35:39.072-08:00You must have found a different solution than I. :...You must have found a different solution than I. :-)millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05990852054891771988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-32999404281116546552012-01-29T01:38:07.587-08:002012-01-29T01:38:07.587-08:00Ok, took me longer than I thought it would, but I ...Ok, took me longer than I thought it would, but I have a sol'n. I won't post it in case anyone wants to work it out for themselves but the first digit of m,n is 2,7.Secret Squïrrelnoreply@blogger.com