So, for instance, you can get 1 out of the digits in 2017 in several ways. 1 + (2 + 7) * 0 works, but 2 + 0 – 1 * 7 is better because it uses the digits in the correct order

I don’t see how that’s a better way to get 1, given that 2+0-1*7 = -5

]]>Every year my undergraduate alma mater’s alumni magazine includes a puzzle to get as many numbers from 1 to 100 as you can out of the digits that comprise the current year. (There is no four-digit year for which all of those numbers are attainable.) You are allowed to combine digits into two-digit numbers, and use standard operations including addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, square roots, and exponentiation. The preferred solution uses as few operators as possible (parentheses used for grouping do not count), and for a given number of operators, solutions that use the digits in order are preferred. So, for instance, you can get 1 out of the digits in 2017 in several ways. 1 + (2 + 7) * 0 works, but 2 + 0 – 1 * 7 is better because it uses the digits in the correct order, and 217^0 is even better because it uses only one operator.

]]>In particular the shadow of the bear and the humor of the Pigeon … ]]>

Kitchen renovations are painful. I remember the one I went through, which was 13 years ago, and I didn’t have kids around the house. I basically ate out for the better part of a month. And my kitchen job was quick, as those things go.

]]>And any simulation work done should be easily shareable. If it’s in-house ad-hoc stuff, just publish the scripts. If you’ve got ABAQUS or Gaussian or other proprietary software platforms, at least include whatever scripts/parameters you had as input for them.

]]>