Kakuro Puzzles

Placement of A

+p

nada by +u

4:35

Possibilities and orphans.

nasda good puzzle

+p, but it's a nada

Continuing from nada discussion yesterday. If you just “see it” but can’t explain it to anybody else, you didn’t see it. Understanding is in the explaining of it. If lost for words (or numbers) then the tools of the understanding don’t exist.

Aspie, I agree, Nada= No Orphans, No possibiliteis and No guessing

Nada. Aspie, very deep. As a lawyer, I'm never at a loss for words, but I may not have the tools of understanding. Thanks.

@Aspie & Luca - I call those 'intuitive nada'. But I don't claim them as nada. Nada means that you prove the result as you go, without calculating orphans or entering possibilities. You have to be able to explain your reasoning.
@Mike - lol.

-o-p. Probably wouldn't meet the nada test.

I posted yesterday instead of today so here it is repeated.

Nice philosophical discussion. I favor the viewpoint that logical intuition is a legitimate outgrowth of empirical practice. If a human can speed read or excel at athletic or martial arts a human can 'see' a solution in a kakuro More...

Without guessing.

Plum, you are moving the goalposts. Nobody said anything about “illegitimate”, or that mIke can do puzzles any way he likes. We are talking about use of words. The word nada was invented, not by mike btw, to mean no orphans no possibilities and no guesses. We communicate using “nada” to mean that. If Mike wants to invent a new word for “solving by desiring the solution”, fine. I suggest guessing.

Completely agree with Aspie. We challenge ourselves to do these puzzles and ultimately find the nada. When we can't and others can. We want to find out what we missed. Those who truly claim nada often post how they logically arrived at their solution, thus helping the rest of us. There is no More...

Couldn't find nada in this one, if any one can tell me waphat I missed!

Aspie +++++++++

forgot to set timer!!

Aspie: I completely agree with you that 'nada' has a pre-existing meaning, that Mike has every right to solve puzzles any way he wants, that it's confusing if he uses the word 'nada' in a non-standard way, and that I'd prefer he didn't do that.

On the other hand, I also contend that 'solve' More...

willo, I usually add +unique if used, or make a walkthrough if the puzzle is interesting enough. sometimes I forget, or think it was too trivial or whatever. Will try and remember better in future.
we discussed this in hte past, i think. Kakuro puzzles are generated by software, and then More...

Straightforward with orphans.

Nada, the key is on G, 7 or 6

Aspie: Thanks for your comments. It's of course fine for us to disagree about this. I appreciate your adding +u when you use it, but I also recognize that this is entirely up to you. I just thought it was interesting to point out the parallel between how I think of your position and how we both think of Mike's position.

Willo, how are they parallel? uniqueness is explainable with a logical base. “just seeing it” with no explanation when asked, has no logical base. Nobody can verify it. Use of +u is entirely verifible, with the sole difference being whether ir not one wants to use (alleged) unique natire of the puzzles

Willo, how are they parallel? uniqueness is explainable with a logical base. “just seeing it” with no explanation when asked, has no logical base. Nobody can verify it. Use of +u is entirely verifible, with the sole difference being whether ir not one wants to use (alleged) unique nature of the puzzles, or not.

Aspie: The parallel, it seems to me, is between 'just seeing it' and 'just knowing the solution is unique'. Yes, there is a lot more empirical basis for the latter, but I see it as equally indefensible from a logical viewpoint.