Listener No 4215 Getting in Shape by Rood

[Ruthrobin]

Another cracker! We thought this was wonderful but how very tough. Obviously the editors are getting their own back on those who whinged that last week's lovely creation was too easy. We had pdm after pdm during the solving process, with astonishingly challenging but fair clues and thought the endgame was sheer magic. Thank you Rood for a stunning creation.

[jim360]

Ah, the first time I've ever had to apply Group Theory to a crossword puzzle! anyway this grid with the conditions specified has the same symmetry group as a rectangle - so that the 180-degree rotation can be thought of as doing both of the mirror symmetries one after the other.

[tilbee]

Yes a good, fun and challenging puzzle. Found the 9 letter word prior to following the instructions which avoided any ambiguity in what was required. Thanks to Rood.

[Ruthrobin]

Yes, I grovel jim360 - but of course, I see, now, what you are saying (and, of course, it is what we expect from someone who is going to represent the AB crowd on the right hand side of the Kings team in Monday's University Challenge - one more plug!) We'll be watching.

[jim360]

A full grid, at least, and the two messages plus on obvious nine-letter word. Still no idea how to carry out the instructions though. Sigh.

[tilbee]

jim360 - suggest you use the BRB definition rather than try and research on Wiki or elsewhere; think this will just tend to confuse.

[jim360]

Had a look at that definition. I think it's wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. No wonder I was confused. Anyway, sorted.

Actually I take issue with a fair few of BRB's definitions of science/ maths words. I mean, obviously it's hardly the place to turn to if you want to get a grasp on the subject. But even so, they could at least try to make it correct. Take the definition of that ever-popular particle, the Higgs boson;

"A massive meson with zero spin ...".

The meson bit is just plain wrong - mesons have smaller particles inside them but the Higgs boson is thought to be a fundamental particle and, therfore, is not a meson. The Relativity definition perpetuates the myth that special relativity cannot handle acceleration, too. It can. Anyway, rant over.

All that said, thanks for pointing me to the definition. I'd finished the puzzle earlier this morning but felt that it was a bit short of what the word meant to me. With that definition I'm finally satisfied that my solution is complete.

[tilbee]

"The Chambers Dictionary (2011) is the primary reference". It's just a puzzle Jim (though possibly not as you know it). Anyway good luck for tomorrow - but I think I can guess the result.

[silversolver]

Brilliant puzzle, one of my favourites of the year. Loved the final PDM when I realised how to carry out the instructions. Many thanks, Rood

[jim360]

For all my moaning about the finish being a tad unsatisfying I've really loved this puzzle overall. Some cracking clues in there, and a Listener in-joke perhaps with 19d?

Also, I wonder how the editors managed to sneak a 4-letter word past us... (look above 40d).

[JackDeCrow]

Yes, quite a challenge - and a great-looking outcome, even though I do feel a slight need to perform the second half of the first instruction over again (technically twice)! Mind you, I spent a fair while misinterpreting the first half as I linked it to the mirror symmetry, which gave results that were tantalisingly plausible but just didn't quite work! Thanks Rood.

[emcee]

Late posting here as grading scripts has taken over my life. A tough puzzle, the clues were very challenging in places. The endgame is fair enough although it took me a while to understand the first instruction.

Thanks, Rood. A brilliant puzzle.

[fallster]

Thanks for the reminder about the BRB def, tilbee. I was having a hard time reconciling the exact instructions with result I expected to see. Makes the finale a tad less satisfying, but overall a really fun puzzle.

[teuchter2]

I think I finished this one yesterday afternoon, so late posting again. I found it pretty tough. I've just printed out a new grid as I hadn't read the instructions properly and it will look better without the bars! (Prisoners must have that thought daily!) I have just been alerted by Perseverer to the fact that I have finally won a BRB!

[contendo]

I'm trailing along behind the rest of you as usual. Can someone tell me whether as well as the symmetry described by Ruthrobin is there also 180 degree symmetry, i.e. if you turn it upside down do the bars follow the same distribution?

[dr b]

"Bars (which display both 180-degree and mirror symmetry) and numbers need not be included in solvers’ submissions." So, yes.

[teuchter2]

Having looked at everything again, I'm not sure about whether my idea of what to put in is right? Does the adverb really qualify the verb, or is it more a statement of the position of something that then needs to be put somewhere else, maybe even in more than one place if my original idea is correct, which it probably isn't. I find it hard to cope with anything more than 3D.

[fortyseven]

A very enjoyable solve. Thanks for helpful comments on the exact way to follow the instructions from tilbee, JackDe Crow and fallster. I'm drawing on the conclusion that we follow the BRB rather than what we see in Wikipedia.

[trux]

Congrats to jim360 ("what's-'is-name on the end") for an impressive victory, and in answering ("500" correctly) the longest and most convolted question I think I have ever heard on UC without batting an eyelid. Onwards to Round 2!

[Ruthrobin]

Yes, indeed, congratulations to 'him'. Read back through the thread and you'll see that he explained the symmetry. We'll look forward to the next round.

[jim360]

Thank you, thank you! That was quite tense until the end, with Homerton always on our tale and even edging ahead at the end. But we won, and that's what counts, huh? Glad I got lots of physics stuff to bite onto, though I have to admit that the answer 500 I just made up...