Post Reply 
Weekend Challenge Sharpened: Missing Positions in Champernowne's Constant
08-08-2015, 03:25 PM
Post: #11
RE: Weekend Challenge Sharpened: Missing Positions in Champernowne's Constant
Welcome back, nlj.

I'll do my best to answer your points:

1 Both. You have to deal with the necessary maths to know what to programme - You don't have to consider the proof that the number is normal.

2 My programme is the type of programme I really want, in principle the time taken is the same as the time needed for the powering operation.

3 Summation would be exclude but powering is OK, so is multiplication. I'm a bit primitive, & although multiplication is iterated addition & powering iterated multiplication I'd allow them, I guess basically through habituation & speed.

I don't have a better answer than yours but you have displayed the best understanding of the problem & may have the best chance of finding a more time-flat solution (as it looks like no one else is bothered - where are the alternative solutions people!).
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
RE: Weekend Challenge Sharpened: Missing Positions in Champernowne's Constant - Gerald H - 08-08-2015 03:25 PM



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)