Alt text: Five dices. Top left corner is a three, top right corner is a six, bottom left corner is also a six and bottom right corner is two threes forming a straight angle.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] lemmydripzdotz456 82 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Can anybody help me understand this? I can't make it be 196 or anything. I'm at a loss.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I think it's loss?

[–] superduperenigma 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Motherfucker

[–] Thteven 1 points 9 months ago

Thought it was a 196 joke at first and now I'm just irritated.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

How though? I'm really not getting it

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

1, 2, 2, 1 and 1 laying down. Classic loss.jpg

[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I’m now committed to getting this to work, but I’m not quite there.

(6^3) - 6 * 3 - 3 = 195 Beyond this, I’m quite lost on how this can be done with simple arithmetic.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

If you allow factorials:

6^3 - 6! / (3! * 3!) = 196

Edit: also 66*3 - 3!/3 = 196

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Factorials or something more than basic arithmetic (+exponents) is needed as I went ahead and programmatically checked every expression without parenthesis and the closest would always be 195. Interestingly, all values within a difference of 10 were multiples of 3.

A lost cause indeed.

[–] fishbone 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Interestingly, all values within a difference of 10 were multiples of 3.

If it's limited to basic arithmetic (+-*/) and no parenthesis, would there be any answer possible that's not a multiple of 3? My first thought is telling me that common order of operations would make any equation using the numbers in the OP and the restrictions laid out would always amount to a multiple of 3.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

That was my initial thought, but you can do add or sub by 2 (6 / 3) to get a non-multiple of 3. I had to double check and see that there were in fact values of i.e. x.5 within I think a difference of 64, can’t remember the exact values or their expressions.

[–] fishbone 2 points 9 months ago

Oh yep, my bad. It's always division that throws me in math expressions that have multiple steps to them.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If we allow combining digits to make larger numbers (like kittehx's edit) we can actually do

(33*6) - (6/3) = 196

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

How did I not try that? Now I feel dumb lol

[–] Wilzax 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

(6!/3!)*1.633

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

It's "loss", a sad famous meme comic