Skip to main content
Bounty Ended with 500 reputation awarded by Sny
added 31 characters in body
Source Link

Before starting off, I just want to state that I don't know the proper formatting, so the answer might be downvoted. Also, I might be pulling at straws for the most part, because I am just an engineering student trying to apply his brain at some puzzles, but here goes nothing-

My first guess is that all (or at least some) alphabets have a number associated with them. Keeping that in mind, a determinant for T can be calculated.

That comes out to be 2. Coincidently, a determinant is represented as Δ, and so that might prove useful when calculating the value of A. The thing in brackets above the matrix might just be the power (when turned to numbers) that we need to raise this Δ to.

Next, in R, I surmise that

[oz gal] might be a reference to "ounces (oz) in a gallon (gal)". That will come out to be 128. The reason why I don't think it is "gallons in ounces" instead is because that would be decimals, and who likes those! :P But then, keeping 1/128 in the back of the head doesn't hurt since S might be large, balancing out the 1/128.

I have some thoughts regarding 1ST as well (sorry, don't know how to write that).

It is a kind of a curveball...in a sense. Well, it should denote two things. a.) What is reads, first, and b.) 1^(SxT). In general, the superscript on 1 is in small letters. The use of capital letters, however, makes me think it has something to do with raising the power of 1, which would be 1 of course. As I said, kind of a curveball.

Someone might be curious as to how is my first interpretation of 1ST useful. Well,

Look at the P row. Doesn't that read like "1st rotate (and then the number inside tells the index)"?

Some of the findings like this are below-

T = 2^(3x1xAx↕)

R = 1x128xS OR R = S/128

E = 0

O = \x/

I conjecture that S is a square number. You see, is sq. if the square root of S still belongs to the set of Natural Numbers (second last line), it has to be a square number. Similarly in the last line, S^(5/2) kinda points in the same direction. Also, the bar above might indicate taking an average of all the five elements of that set.

If _ is equal to 1, that would mean X is either equal to 1, or 1111, as X is just a bunch of underscores written in succession, which can be interpreted as 1's multiplying, or representing a number as it stands.

Lastly, the partial derivatives of Z added up, it reminds myme of the gradient operation. Also, these partial derivative terms are natural numbers in themselves, as they are part of the set according to the second last line as well.

That's it for now, I will update if I think of anything else.

Before starting off, I just want to state that I don't know the proper formatting, so the answer might be downvoted. Also, I might be pulling at straws for the most part, because I am just an engineering student trying to apply his brain at some puzzles, but here goes nothing-

My first guess is that all (or at least some) alphabets have a number associated with them. Keeping that in mind, a determinant for T can be calculated.

That comes out to be 2. Coincidently, a determinant is represented as Δ, and so that might prove useful when calculating the value of A. The thing in brackets above the matrix might just be the power (when turned to numbers) that we need to raise this Δ to.

Next, in R, I surmise that

[oz gal] might be a reference to "ounces (oz) in a gallon (gal)". That will come out to be 128. The reason why I don't think it is "gallons in ounces" instead is because that would be decimals, and who likes those! :P But then, keeping 1/128 in the back of the head doesn't hurt since S might be large.

I have some thoughts regarding 1ST as well (sorry, don't know how to write that).

It is a kind of a curveball...in a sense. Well, it should denote two things. a.) What is reads, first, and b.) 1^(SxT). In general, the superscript on 1 is in small letters. The use of capital letters, however, makes me think it has something to do with raising the power of 1, which would be 1 of course. As I said, kind of a curveball.

Someone might be curious as to how is my first interpretation of 1ST useful. Well,

Look at the P row. Doesn't that read like "1st rotate (and then the number inside tells the index)"?

Some of the findings like this are below-

T = 2^(3x1xAx↕)

R = 1x128xS OR R = S/128

E = 0

O = \x/

I conjecture that S is a square number. You see, is sq. root of S still belongs to the set of Natural Numbers (second last line), it has to be a square number. Similarly in the last line, S^(5/2) kinda points in the same direction. Also, the bar above might indicate taking an average of all the five elements of that set.

If _ is equal to 1, that would mean X is either equal to 1, or 1111, as X is just a bunch of underscores written in succession, which can be interpreted as 1's multiplying, or representing a number as it stands.

Lastly, the partial derivatives of Z added up, it reminds my of the gradient operation. Also, these partial derivative terms are natural numbers in themselves, as they are part of the set according to the second last line as well.

That's it for now, I will update if I think of anything else.

Before starting off, I just want to state that I don't know the proper formatting, so the answer might be downvoted. Also, I might be pulling at straws for the most part, because I am just an engineering student trying to apply his brain at some puzzles, but here goes nothing-

My first guess is that all (or at least some) alphabets have a number associated with them. Keeping that in mind, a determinant for T can be calculated.

That comes out to be 2. Coincidently, a determinant is represented as Δ, and so that might prove useful when calculating the value of A. The thing in brackets above the matrix might just be the power (when turned to numbers) that we need to raise this Δ to.

Next, in R, I surmise that

[oz gal] might be a reference to "ounces (oz) in a gallon (gal)". That will come out to be 128. The reason why I don't think it is "gallons in ounces" instead is because that would be decimals, and who likes those! :P But then, keeping 1/128 in the back of the head doesn't hurt since S might be large, balancing out the 1/128.

I have some thoughts regarding 1ST as well (sorry, don't know how to write that).

It is a kind of a curveball...in a sense. Well, it should denote two things. a.) What is reads, first, and b.) 1^(SxT). In general, the superscript on 1 is in small letters. The use of capital letters, however, makes me think it has something to do with raising the power of 1, which would be 1 of course. As I said, kind of a curveball.

Someone might be curious as to how is my first interpretation of 1ST useful. Well,

Look at the P row. Doesn't that read like "1st rotate (and then the number inside tells the index)"?

Some of the findings like this are below-

T = 2^(3x1xAx↕)

R = 1x128xS OR R = S/128

E = 0

O = \x/

I conjecture that S is a square number. You see if the square root of S still belongs to the set of Natural Numbers (second last line), it has to be a square number. Similarly in the last line, S^(5/2) kinda points in the same direction. Also, the bar above might indicate taking an average of all the five elements of that set.

If _ is equal to 1, that would mean X is either equal to 1, or 1111, as X is just a bunch of underscores written in succession, which can be interpreted as 1's multiplying, or representing a number as it stands.

Lastly, the partial derivatives of Z added up, it reminds me of the gradient operation. Also, these partial derivative terms are natural numbers in themselves, as they are part of the set according to the second last line as well.

That's it for now, I will update if I think of anything else.

Source Link

Before starting off, I just want to state that I don't know the proper formatting, so the answer might be downvoted. Also, I might be pulling at straws for the most part, because I am just an engineering student trying to apply his brain at some puzzles, but here goes nothing-

My first guess is that all (or at least some) alphabets have a number associated with them. Keeping that in mind, a determinant for T can be calculated.

That comes out to be 2. Coincidently, a determinant is represented as Δ, and so that might prove useful when calculating the value of A. The thing in brackets above the matrix might just be the power (when turned to numbers) that we need to raise this Δ to.

Next, in R, I surmise that

[oz gal] might be a reference to "ounces (oz) in a gallon (gal)". That will come out to be 128. The reason why I don't think it is "gallons in ounces" instead is because that would be decimals, and who likes those! :P But then, keeping 1/128 in the back of the head doesn't hurt since S might be large.

I have some thoughts regarding 1ST as well (sorry, don't know how to write that).

It is a kind of a curveball...in a sense. Well, it should denote two things. a.) What is reads, first, and b.) 1^(SxT). In general, the superscript on 1 is in small letters. The use of capital letters, however, makes me think it has something to do with raising the power of 1, which would be 1 of course. As I said, kind of a curveball.

Someone might be curious as to how is my first interpretation of 1ST useful. Well,

Look at the P row. Doesn't that read like "1st rotate (and then the number inside tells the index)"?

Some of the findings like this are below-

T = 2^(3x1xAx↕)

R = 1x128xS OR R = S/128

E = 0

O = \x/

I conjecture that S is a square number. You see, is sq. root of S still belongs to the set of Natural Numbers (second last line), it has to be a square number. Similarly in the last line, S^(5/2) kinda points in the same direction. Also, the bar above might indicate taking an average of all the five elements of that set.

If _ is equal to 1, that would mean X is either equal to 1, or 1111, as X is just a bunch of underscores written in succession, which can be interpreted as 1's multiplying, or representing a number as it stands.

Lastly, the partial derivatives of Z added up, it reminds my of the gradient operation. Also, these partial derivative terms are natural numbers in themselves, as they are part of the set according to the second last line as well.

That's it for now, I will update if I think of anything else.