Listener 4125 Elementary Number Theory by Oyler

[dr b]

Elementary, indeed. An easily guessed theme as far as resolving the ambiguities is concerned, leading to a very quick grid fill. The most interesting thing about it was checking the statements against the unclued entries to get to the thematic word. This must have been a lot of work to create, but the nature of the solution was too obvious, I think.

[trux]

S-M : perhaps the fact that a child might be able to solve this justifies the title, as much as the word itself does ... I think you exaggerate : just try giving the puzzle to a "normal" 15-year-old "as is", with no helpful explanations and I think most would run a mile ! The level of maths required, admittedly, would have been taught to said hypothetical teenager by this stage, I agree - but that's no bad thing. The recent Equilateral Numbers puzzle was a step too far in the other direction, in my view ...

[dr b]

Is it sadder that a typical 15 year old could not do this puzzle, or that a typical 15 year old could not run a mile?

[AndrewG-S]

I have a 15 year old daughter so will test the hypothesis and report back.

[numericals]

Here is a new puzzle.

The statements lettered A to R below detail the true point being made by the poster in this thread.

A: I hate numericals, because they're too hard.
B: I finished it before the publication date.
C: This was far too easy
D: I have no idea what a real 15 year old is actually capable of.
E: Oyler's let himself down here.
F: People who give away clues ruin it for everyone
G: Anyone who looks here before they've finished is cheating anyway.
H: I find all mathematical calculation no matter how complex effortless but cannot punctuate a sentence
I: I just fill in any old nonsense as soon as I think I've guessed what the puzzler is getting at.
J: Anyone who uses a computer to do these things must be stupider than a 15 year old
K: Anyone who doesn't use a computer must be older than a 15 year old.
L: Why have they changed the date? It would have ruined my life if I'd had one!
M: There aren't as many ambiguities as he said there would be.
N: Yes there are.
O: Is six a number?
P: I am incredibly, incredibly clever. And you're not.
Q: Is that the word? Really? Well, what's it got to do with...
R: This was a very satisfying puzzle which certainly kept me occupied, and I am utterly in awe of anyone who can set anything like it. More please.


Solvers must see if they can spell the name of the poster by putting together all the letters that apply, but shouldn't hold out too much hope.


"R"

[the_heisman]

I have enjoyed this website a lot since starting to have a real crack at The Listener a couple of years ago. Amidst all the humorous, intelligent musings there are only 2 things that can spoil it. Firstly the excessively vitriolic comments aimed at other posters and secondly people giving the game away; the latter being much the more annoying of the two. The argument that you don"t have to look until you have finished is particularly feeble as it is obvious from reading it that most people have not finished at the time of their postings. In addition it seems utterly ungrateful and disrespectful of the enormous work put in by the setters to give away the answers before they are published. It requires minimal effort to write a posting that does not give the game away and there is no upside in doing it other than for the reasons speculated upon by "Numericals". Thank you very much Oyler. Fortunately i was on holiday when shamefully far down the track the "property" revealed itself so the puzzle was not spoiled for me. Hmmm...possibly broken my own rules on vitriol....

[numericals]

the_heisman, I hope mine doesn't count as excessively vitriolic. I was just having a bit of (I thought) fun.

[the_heisman]

not at all Numericals - i was rather unfairly using your helpful (and fun) list to back up my point about blurting!

[Eril]

Well, 'numericals', by a process of elimination (as opposed to logic - and therefore with some sort of philosophical parallel to the 'suduko' method applicable to the puzzle itself) your hidden self seemed to be revealed - only the 'mno' statements maybe don't quite fit. 'Six' of course is a word, not a number... But could m and n both be false?

Anyway, re the final word-theme link - is this given by *part* of the word found?

[numericals]

Intrigued by your elimination, Eril. I'm especially flattered that you think B might apply to me. E and R are a bit at odds, surely. I think 'six' is indeed a word, but I submit that six is a number. But now I'm sounding P and that was certainly never my intention (and very far from the truth).

I think you need the whole word, and that gives the theme. Though why /that/ word and not others of its class is evading me. So I'm Q too. Yes, I see your point.

[jsnhghs]

Surely a spoiler not to appear at 'The AnswerBank' would be a contradiction in terms? Anyhow I went down the route of solving each clue before seeing 'it' very late in the day. (this is only my second attempt at the numerical crossword). I'm not convinced by the thematic word which makes me question this particular anangram. From the clues given I can only assume that ENT and 53 are useful. Please feel free to spoil this for me....

[jsnhghs]

doohhh got it...

[numericals]

I'm sorry you find my efforts sad, S-M (It didn't take very long), but don't you think someone who posts 'Elementary, indeed' the day before the puzzle was even published might be rightly accused of tending towards the boastful and deserving of a little teasing? I find the numericals very satisfying (couldn't even begin to attempt a Listener word crossword) but certainly not easy, and it always seems churlish to me that those who enjoy the word ones more so much resent giving it up for five weeks of the year.

In any case, the principle intention was to entertain, not to annoy. Sorry if I failed.