Can anybody solve this? Make the equations valid. You can only

>>8933844
btw you can't break up the numbers either and you can't use logs.

I can get 1, 2, 3, but not 4

10/10 * 10/10 = 1
10/10 + 10/10 = 2
(10+10+10)/10 = 3
>10 10 10 10 = 4
(10 * 10) / (10 + 10) = 5
>10 10 10 10 = 6
>10 10 10 10 = 7
10 - (10 + 10)/10 = 8
>10 10 10 10 = 9
10 + (10 - 10)/10 = 10

>>8933877

((10 x 10) - 10) / 10 = 9

>>8933855
>>8933877
I think 4, 6, and 7 are impossible

>>8933904
Yeah, me too.

I've just sat here running in my head all the operation combinations that I can think of to get 4, and with one more 10 in the set I can easily do it, but with 4 sets of 10, I don't think so...

>>8933904
my professor said are all possible, but that it took him hours to get those three. he's a pretty smart dude too

>>8933844
10-10+10/10=1, (10/10)(10/10)=1
(10/10)+(10/10)=2
(10+10+10)/10=3
???
(10/(10+10))10=5
???
???
10-(10+10)/10=8
((10*10)-10)/10=9
10+(10-10)/10=10
>>8933919
Place the given operators in a way so that
10 10 10 10=10
makes sense.
This task is possible if and only if there is a way to write 10 10 10=1, 10 10 10=20, 10 10 10=0, 10 10 10=100.
I would really love to see 7 but I just can't do it.

>>8934055
Yeah, I was able to get all of the other ones no problem except 4,6 and 7, I would like to see a 4 solution because all of the solutions I can think of require at least one more 10 in the set.

>>8934055
Assume there's a way to write
10 10 10 10=7

Then, there's a way to write
10 10 10=7/10 OR 10 10 10=70 OR 10 10 10=-3/10 OR 10 10 10=20.
I'm pretty sure all of these are impossible. But I would love to be proved wrong.

>>8934077
In the operations for any of the '10 10 10 10' set in this solution range of [1,10], there has to be a division operation somewhere, to eliminate a factor of 10, so that really leaves you with three possible operations to take in order to get a value that only needs to be divided by 10.

We can brute force this.
All possible numbers obtainable with +,-,*,/ with two tens:
>100, 1, 20, 0 (1)
All possible numbers obtainable with +,-,*,/ with three tens:
>-90, -10, -9, 0, 0.1, 0.5, 2, 9, 10, 11, 30, 90, 110, 200, 1000 (2)
It is now easy to determine that solutions don't exist for 4, 6, and 7.

>>8933919
Your professor is wrong or you made a mistake in phrasing the problem.

>>8933844
4, 6 and 7 are seemingly impossible to solve

>>8933919
At this point I gotta ask, I cannot come up with the solution for a quad 10 set that is equivalent to 4. Any operations I can think of are either outside of parameters or requires a larger set of 10s.

I would love to see how your Prof. solved for 4, because frankly at this point any insight can only be educational.

>>8934098
Great, thanks anon

File: tfw2smartformemes[1].jpg (1MB, 4030x4096px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4030x4096px

>>8933877
>>8933904
>>8933909
1+0 1+0 1+0 1+0 = 4

>>8934098
I was thinking about writing a quick script to essentially solve for all possible solutions to a quad 10 set given a +,-,*,/ operation set, and then just search through the results and see if 4,6,7 pop up anywhere.

I may do that, though it is rather late right now and I spent a good hour mentally computing for a set of operations that would give a solution of 4 to a quad 10 set.

Anyway thanks Anon for that, if OP delivers the solution, I would love to, at this point, be taken to school on how to solve the 4,6,7 ones.

>>8934109
Oh get out of here with that.

My original idea to bullshit the problem is to change the base for the 4 problem.

Essentially I would change that specific quad '10' set from base 10 to base 2, making 10 in base 2 equal to 2 in base 10.

Then I would do 10 + 10 - 10 + 10 = 4 or in base 10 : 2 + 2 - 2 + 2 = 4.

>>8934110
The solution is there, it takes just a glance to see that there is no way to add/multiply/subtract/divide 10 to the numbers (2) in >>8934098 to obtain 4,6, and 7.

>>8934118
did your professor specifically say that you're not allowed to put the math symbols between the 1 and 0 in the numbers 10?

You are adding limitations that don't exist, which is transforming this possible problem into an impossible one

>>8933844
Holy shit, you can use a 10 if you turn it into a zero. And no one said you werent allowed to use zeros.

10*0+10*0+10*0+10*(whateverthefuckyouwant/10)

File: brain sun.jpg (429KB, 1589x646px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1589x646px

>>8933844
10+10+10+10=1 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{39}[/math]
10+10+10+10=2 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{38}[/math]
10+10+10+10=3 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{37}[/math]
10+10+10+10=4 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{36}[/math]
10+10+10+10=5 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{35}[/math]
10+10+10+10=6 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{34}[/math]
10+10+10+10=7 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{33}[/math]
10+10+10+10=8 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{32}[/math]
10+10+10+10=9 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{31}[/math]
10+10+10+10=10 in [math]\mathbb{Z}_{30}[/math]

>>8934131
>the answer is whatever the answer is

File: brain city.png (880KB, 1895x1181px) Image search: [Google]

880KB, 1895x1181px

>>8934140
Yes, this is the true wisdom of the math deity.

4, 6, 7 are impossible

I wrote a quick and dirty python script to try random ones, this is what I got.

0
3 10/(((10)+(10)/10)) 0
4 10/(10)*10/10 1
17 10/10+10/10 2
20 10+(10)*((10-(10))) 10
218 (((10*10-10))/(10)) 9
221 (10-(10+10)/10) 8
888 10*10/(10+10) 5
935 (10+(10)+(10))/(10) 3
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
900000
1000000
1100000
1200000
1300000
1400000
1500000
1600000
1700000
1800000
1900000
2000000

You see the 8 possible ones were found within 1000 random tries, then I ran 2,000,000 and didn't get any. I also ran this multiple times, no answers. Unless it's using some other operations or something unconventional, they're impossible.

>>8934109
cheating piggot

>>8935688
>random tries
doesn't prove anything

>>8935688
are there really even 2000000 combinations of operations and parenthesis? Can you just do an exhaustive search?

>>8935705
Yeah I know it's not a proof, obviously math doesn't work like that. I'm just too lazy to figure out a way to enumerate all the possible expressions and 2 million probably covers them all.

Brute forced it. Here are all the numbers you can get. 4, 6, 7 are impossible.
-990
-900
-190
-100
-99
-90
-80
-20
-19
-10
-99/10
-19/2
-9
-8
-10/9
-1
-9/10
-1/9
0
1/100
1/20
1/11
1/9
1/5
1/3
9/10
10/11
1
11/10
10/9
2
3
5
8
9
19/2
99/10
10
101/10
21/2
11
12
19
20
21
40
80
90
99
100
101
110
120
190
200
210
300
400
900
990
1010
1100
2000
10000

>>8934125
Brainlet