Armed with a sword and a shield, a proud knight combats a monstrous hydra with 100 heads.

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
9
down vote

favorite
2












Hi so I am battling with this question at the moment.



"Armed with a sword and a shield, a proud knight combats a monstrous hydra with 100 heads. When he slashes, he removes 17 heads and 5 heads grow back. When he slices, he removes 6 heads and 33 grow back. When he cuts, 14 heads fall and 8 grow back. When he stabs, 2 heads fall and 23 grow back.



In order to kill the hydra, all its heads must be removed at some point, in which case no heads will grow back.



Can the knight’s sword and courage triumph against this mythological monster?"



I am assuming the hydra cannot grow more than the original 100 heads, and that you must cut off the exact amount (you can't slash 9 times).



My current working consists of:



rule a = shrink 6

rule b = shrink 12

rule c = grow 21

rule d = grow 27



b can be discounted as it's just aa



as 100 is the start point, and 6 is the minimum reduction some sum of 100 + c(x) + d(y) = a(z), or 100 + (21 * x) + (27 * y) must equal a multiple of 6.



100 + (21 * x) + (27 * y) = 6 * z where x, y, z are positive integers



simplifies to z = (7x/2) + (9y/2) + (50/3). For all positive integers x, y, there is no integer solution for z



I am not convinced this is enough proof.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Dance is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1




    If there are 17 heads left and he slashes, does hydra die before heads grow back, or will it live with 5 heads?
    – mathreadler
    yesterday










  • I am assuming that the head die and come back at the same time, so it will live with 5 heads.
    – Dance
    yesterday






  • 3




    @Dance: If that is the rule, then how can the hydra be killed at all? From any state?
    – Henning Makholm
    yesterday






  • 1




    What happens if he slashes when the hydra has 16 heads? If the answer is 4 heads, what happens if he slashes when the hydra has 4 heads?
    – Joshua
    yesterday






  • 3




    I don't think you should assume that the number of heads is limited to 100. Also, the question clearly states that if you remove all the heads, none will grow back, so if you slash a hydra with 17 heads, you get a hydra with no heads, so it does not grow five new ones.
    – David Richerby
    yesterday














up vote
9
down vote

favorite
2












Hi so I am battling with this question at the moment.



"Armed with a sword and a shield, a proud knight combats a monstrous hydra with 100 heads. When he slashes, he removes 17 heads and 5 heads grow back. When he slices, he removes 6 heads and 33 grow back. When he cuts, 14 heads fall and 8 grow back. When he stabs, 2 heads fall and 23 grow back.



In order to kill the hydra, all its heads must be removed at some point, in which case no heads will grow back.



Can the knight’s sword and courage triumph against this mythological monster?"



I am assuming the hydra cannot grow more than the original 100 heads, and that you must cut off the exact amount (you can't slash 9 times).



My current working consists of:



rule a = shrink 6

rule b = shrink 12

rule c = grow 21

rule d = grow 27



b can be discounted as it's just aa



as 100 is the start point, and 6 is the minimum reduction some sum of 100 + c(x) + d(y) = a(z), or 100 + (21 * x) + (27 * y) must equal a multiple of 6.



100 + (21 * x) + (27 * y) = 6 * z where x, y, z are positive integers



simplifies to z = (7x/2) + (9y/2) + (50/3). For all positive integers x, y, there is no integer solution for z



I am not convinced this is enough proof.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Dance is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1




    If there are 17 heads left and he slashes, does hydra die before heads grow back, or will it live with 5 heads?
    – mathreadler
    yesterday










  • I am assuming that the head die and come back at the same time, so it will live with 5 heads.
    – Dance
    yesterday






  • 3




    @Dance: If that is the rule, then how can the hydra be killed at all? From any state?
    – Henning Makholm
    yesterday






  • 1




    What happens if he slashes when the hydra has 16 heads? If the answer is 4 heads, what happens if he slashes when the hydra has 4 heads?
    – Joshua
    yesterday






  • 3




    I don't think you should assume that the number of heads is limited to 100. Also, the question clearly states that if you remove all the heads, none will grow back, so if you slash a hydra with 17 heads, you get a hydra with no heads, so it does not grow five new ones.
    – David Richerby
    yesterday












up vote
9
down vote

favorite
2









up vote
9
down vote

favorite
2






2





Hi so I am battling with this question at the moment.



"Armed with a sword and a shield, a proud knight combats a monstrous hydra with 100 heads. When he slashes, he removes 17 heads and 5 heads grow back. When he slices, he removes 6 heads and 33 grow back. When he cuts, 14 heads fall and 8 grow back. When he stabs, 2 heads fall and 23 grow back.



In order to kill the hydra, all its heads must be removed at some point, in which case no heads will grow back.



Can the knight’s sword and courage triumph against this mythological monster?"



I am assuming the hydra cannot grow more than the original 100 heads, and that you must cut off the exact amount (you can't slash 9 times).



My current working consists of:



rule a = shrink 6

rule b = shrink 12

rule c = grow 21

rule d = grow 27



b can be discounted as it's just aa



as 100 is the start point, and 6 is the minimum reduction some sum of 100 + c(x) + d(y) = a(z), or 100 + (21 * x) + (27 * y) must equal a multiple of 6.



100 + (21 * x) + (27 * y) = 6 * z where x, y, z are positive integers



simplifies to z = (7x/2) + (9y/2) + (50/3). For all positive integers x, y, there is no integer solution for z



I am not convinced this is enough proof.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Dance is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











Hi so I am battling with this question at the moment.



"Armed with a sword and a shield, a proud knight combats a monstrous hydra with 100 heads. When he slashes, he removes 17 heads and 5 heads grow back. When he slices, he removes 6 heads and 33 grow back. When he cuts, 14 heads fall and 8 grow back. When he stabs, 2 heads fall and 23 grow back.



In order to kill the hydra, all its heads must be removed at some point, in which case no heads will grow back.



Can the knight’s sword and courage triumph against this mythological monster?"



I am assuming the hydra cannot grow more than the original 100 heads, and that you must cut off the exact amount (you can't slash 9 times).



My current working consists of:



rule a = shrink 6

rule b = shrink 12

rule c = grow 21

rule d = grow 27



b can be discounted as it's just aa



as 100 is the start point, and 6 is the minimum reduction some sum of 100 + c(x) + d(y) = a(z), or 100 + (21 * x) + (27 * y) must equal a multiple of 6.



100 + (21 * x) + (27 * y) = 6 * z where x, y, z are positive integers



simplifies to z = (7x/2) + (9y/2) + (50/3). For all positive integers x, y, there is no integer solution for z



I am not convinced this is enough proof.







linear-algebra proof-verification puzzle






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Dance is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Dance is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday









Acccumulation

6,0842616




6,0842616






New contributor




Dance is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked yesterday









Dance

483




483




New contributor




Dance is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Dance is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Dance is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 1




    If there are 17 heads left and he slashes, does hydra die before heads grow back, or will it live with 5 heads?
    – mathreadler
    yesterday










  • I am assuming that the head die and come back at the same time, so it will live with 5 heads.
    – Dance
    yesterday






  • 3




    @Dance: If that is the rule, then how can the hydra be killed at all? From any state?
    – Henning Makholm
    yesterday






  • 1




    What happens if he slashes when the hydra has 16 heads? If the answer is 4 heads, what happens if he slashes when the hydra has 4 heads?
    – Joshua
    yesterday






  • 3




    I don't think you should assume that the number of heads is limited to 100. Also, the question clearly states that if you remove all the heads, none will grow back, so if you slash a hydra with 17 heads, you get a hydra with no heads, so it does not grow five new ones.
    – David Richerby
    yesterday












  • 1




    If there are 17 heads left and he slashes, does hydra die before heads grow back, or will it live with 5 heads?
    – mathreadler
    yesterday










  • I am assuming that the head die and come back at the same time, so it will live with 5 heads.
    – Dance
    yesterday






  • 3




    @Dance: If that is the rule, then how can the hydra be killed at all? From any state?
    – Henning Makholm
    yesterday






  • 1




    What happens if he slashes when the hydra has 16 heads? If the answer is 4 heads, what happens if he slashes when the hydra has 4 heads?
    – Joshua
    yesterday






  • 3




    I don't think you should assume that the number of heads is limited to 100. Also, the question clearly states that if you remove all the heads, none will grow back, so if you slash a hydra with 17 heads, you get a hydra with no heads, so it does not grow five new ones.
    – David Richerby
    yesterday







1




1




If there are 17 heads left and he slashes, does hydra die before heads grow back, or will it live with 5 heads?
– mathreadler
yesterday




If there are 17 heads left and he slashes, does hydra die before heads grow back, or will it live with 5 heads?
– mathreadler
yesterday












I am assuming that the head die and come back at the same time, so it will live with 5 heads.
– Dance
yesterday




I am assuming that the head die and come back at the same time, so it will live with 5 heads.
– Dance
yesterday




3




3




@Dance: If that is the rule, then how can the hydra be killed at all? From any state?
– Henning Makholm
yesterday




@Dance: If that is the rule, then how can the hydra be killed at all? From any state?
– Henning Makholm
yesterday




1




1




What happens if he slashes when the hydra has 16 heads? If the answer is 4 heads, what happens if he slashes when the hydra has 4 heads?
– Joshua
yesterday




What happens if he slashes when the hydra has 16 heads? If the answer is 4 heads, what happens if he slashes when the hydra has 4 heads?
– Joshua
yesterday




3




3




I don't think you should assume that the number of heads is limited to 100. Also, the question clearly states that if you remove all the heads, none will grow back, so if you slash a hydra with 17 heads, you get a hydra with no heads, so it does not grow five new ones.
– David Richerby
yesterday




I don't think you should assume that the number of heads is limited to 100. Also, the question clearly states that if you remove all the heads, none will grow back, so if you slash a hydra with 17 heads, you get a hydra with no heads, so it does not grow five new ones.
– David Richerby
yesterday










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote



accepted










Yes it is enough proof. Another way to say it is that




  1. $21x=3cdot 7 cdot x$ is always divisible by 3


  2. $27y=3cdot 9 cdot y$ is always divisible by 3


  3. $6z = 3cdot 2 cdot z$ is always divisible by 3


  4. $100=3cdot 33+1$ gives rest 1 when divided by 3

And if you add something not divisible by 3 to something which is divisible by three you can never get something divisible by 3.



Another way to say it is left hand side will always be 1 modulo 3 and right hand side will always be 0 modulo 3. Numbers which have different modulos cannot be the same numbers.






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • Awesome, thank you so much. Still trying to get the hang of modulo, thank you for helping me understand.
    – Dance
    yesterday

















up vote
9
down vote













The proof here is similar in spirit to the arbuzoid problem.



The net change of each operation to the number of heads is always a multiple of 3. Furthermore, the final operation must leave 0 heads before new heads grow back, which means that the number of heads before this operation must be the number of heads the operation removes in its first phase.



Together these two constraints imply that any successful strategy must end with an operation where 100 minus the number of heads removed in that operation is a multiple of 3. We check those differences:
$$100-17=83$$
$$100-6=94$$
$$100-14=86$$
$$100-2=98$$
None of these is a multiple of 3. Thus there is no winning strategy.



There remains no winning strategy if we assume that heads die and grow at the same time, since 100 itself is not a multiple of 3.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Thank you for clarifying, appreciate it a lot!
    – Dance
    yesterday










Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);






Dance is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2945659%2farmed-with-a-sword-and-a-shield-a-proud-knight-combats-a-monstrous-hydra-with-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest






























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
4
down vote



accepted










Yes it is enough proof. Another way to say it is that




  1. $21x=3cdot 7 cdot x$ is always divisible by 3


  2. $27y=3cdot 9 cdot y$ is always divisible by 3


  3. $6z = 3cdot 2 cdot z$ is always divisible by 3


  4. $100=3cdot 33+1$ gives rest 1 when divided by 3

And if you add something not divisible by 3 to something which is divisible by three you can never get something divisible by 3.



Another way to say it is left hand side will always be 1 modulo 3 and right hand side will always be 0 modulo 3. Numbers which have different modulos cannot be the same numbers.






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • Awesome, thank you so much. Still trying to get the hang of modulo, thank you for helping me understand.
    – Dance
    yesterday














up vote
4
down vote



accepted










Yes it is enough proof. Another way to say it is that




  1. $21x=3cdot 7 cdot x$ is always divisible by 3


  2. $27y=3cdot 9 cdot y$ is always divisible by 3


  3. $6z = 3cdot 2 cdot z$ is always divisible by 3


  4. $100=3cdot 33+1$ gives rest 1 when divided by 3

And if you add something not divisible by 3 to something which is divisible by three you can never get something divisible by 3.



Another way to say it is left hand side will always be 1 modulo 3 and right hand side will always be 0 modulo 3. Numbers which have different modulos cannot be the same numbers.






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • Awesome, thank you so much. Still trying to get the hang of modulo, thank you for helping me understand.
    – Dance
    yesterday












up vote
4
down vote



accepted







up vote
4
down vote



accepted






Yes it is enough proof. Another way to say it is that




  1. $21x=3cdot 7 cdot x$ is always divisible by 3


  2. $27y=3cdot 9 cdot y$ is always divisible by 3


  3. $6z = 3cdot 2 cdot z$ is always divisible by 3


  4. $100=3cdot 33+1$ gives rest 1 when divided by 3

And if you add something not divisible by 3 to something which is divisible by three you can never get something divisible by 3.



Another way to say it is left hand side will always be 1 modulo 3 and right hand side will always be 0 modulo 3. Numbers which have different modulos cannot be the same numbers.






share|cite|improve this answer












Yes it is enough proof. Another way to say it is that




  1. $21x=3cdot 7 cdot x$ is always divisible by 3


  2. $27y=3cdot 9 cdot y$ is always divisible by 3


  3. $6z = 3cdot 2 cdot z$ is always divisible by 3


  4. $100=3cdot 33+1$ gives rest 1 when divided by 3

And if you add something not divisible by 3 to something which is divisible by three you can never get something divisible by 3.



Another way to say it is left hand side will always be 1 modulo 3 and right hand side will always be 0 modulo 3. Numbers which have different modulos cannot be the same numbers.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered yesterday









mathreadler

14k72059




14k72059











  • Awesome, thank you so much. Still trying to get the hang of modulo, thank you for helping me understand.
    – Dance
    yesterday
















  • Awesome, thank you so much. Still trying to get the hang of modulo, thank you for helping me understand.
    – Dance
    yesterday















Awesome, thank you so much. Still trying to get the hang of modulo, thank you for helping me understand.
– Dance
yesterday




Awesome, thank you so much. Still trying to get the hang of modulo, thank you for helping me understand.
– Dance
yesterday










up vote
9
down vote













The proof here is similar in spirit to the arbuzoid problem.



The net change of each operation to the number of heads is always a multiple of 3. Furthermore, the final operation must leave 0 heads before new heads grow back, which means that the number of heads before this operation must be the number of heads the operation removes in its first phase.



Together these two constraints imply that any successful strategy must end with an operation where 100 minus the number of heads removed in that operation is a multiple of 3. We check those differences:
$$100-17=83$$
$$100-6=94$$
$$100-14=86$$
$$100-2=98$$
None of these is a multiple of 3. Thus there is no winning strategy.



There remains no winning strategy if we assume that heads die and grow at the same time, since 100 itself is not a multiple of 3.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Thank you for clarifying, appreciate it a lot!
    – Dance
    yesterday














up vote
9
down vote













The proof here is similar in spirit to the arbuzoid problem.



The net change of each operation to the number of heads is always a multiple of 3. Furthermore, the final operation must leave 0 heads before new heads grow back, which means that the number of heads before this operation must be the number of heads the operation removes in its first phase.



Together these two constraints imply that any successful strategy must end with an operation where 100 minus the number of heads removed in that operation is a multiple of 3. We check those differences:
$$100-17=83$$
$$100-6=94$$
$$100-14=86$$
$$100-2=98$$
None of these is a multiple of 3. Thus there is no winning strategy.



There remains no winning strategy if we assume that heads die and grow at the same time, since 100 itself is not a multiple of 3.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Thank you for clarifying, appreciate it a lot!
    – Dance
    yesterday












up vote
9
down vote










up vote
9
down vote









The proof here is similar in spirit to the arbuzoid problem.



The net change of each operation to the number of heads is always a multiple of 3. Furthermore, the final operation must leave 0 heads before new heads grow back, which means that the number of heads before this operation must be the number of heads the operation removes in its first phase.



Together these two constraints imply that any successful strategy must end with an operation where 100 minus the number of heads removed in that operation is a multiple of 3. We check those differences:
$$100-17=83$$
$$100-6=94$$
$$100-14=86$$
$$100-2=98$$
None of these is a multiple of 3. Thus there is no winning strategy.



There remains no winning strategy if we assume that heads die and grow at the same time, since 100 itself is not a multiple of 3.






share|cite|improve this answer














The proof here is similar in spirit to the arbuzoid problem.



The net change of each operation to the number of heads is always a multiple of 3. Furthermore, the final operation must leave 0 heads before new heads grow back, which means that the number of heads before this operation must be the number of heads the operation removes in its first phase.



Together these two constraints imply that any successful strategy must end with an operation where 100 minus the number of heads removed in that operation is a multiple of 3. We check those differences:
$$100-17=83$$
$$100-6=94$$
$$100-14=86$$
$$100-2=98$$
None of these is a multiple of 3. Thus there is no winning strategy.



There remains no winning strategy if we assume that heads die and grow at the same time, since 100 itself is not a multiple of 3.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited yesterday

























answered yesterday









Parcly Taxel

34.6k136991




34.6k136991











  • Thank you for clarifying, appreciate it a lot!
    – Dance
    yesterday
















  • Thank you for clarifying, appreciate it a lot!
    – Dance
    yesterday















Thank you for clarifying, appreciate it a lot!
– Dance
yesterday




Thank you for clarifying, appreciate it a lot!
– Dance
yesterday










Dance is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









 

draft saved


draft discarded


















Dance is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Dance is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











Dance is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2945659%2farmed-with-a-sword-and-a-shield-a-proud-knight-combats-a-monstrous-hydra-with-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































Popular posts from this blog

How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

Bahrain

Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay