Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Ponder This Consciousness

Blog post # 179:
(179 = a prime.)

My pictures for this post:

Inadequate Viciousness

Submersion Of Balance

Laughable Selfishness


Stupidest anagram first:

As dimensions in prayer
A sinner's noise-pyramid


Fist to head
It's of death.


Anagram puzzle:

If you are thrown in the ocean, it would show "wisdom" if you...
(2 words.)

(I will forego giving the answer, since this is so easy.)


My two poems first, then a numbers puzzle below:
(Written yesterday and today.)

Configuration Of Our Ambivalence

The lower-left curl is
floating above its descent.
It is a semi-spiral contained
in the exaggeration
Of tangents. And it flies,
but hovers,
Before the circularity
beneath and left
Of the halving of this duality.

And the upper-right curl
is slanted; yet its
Thickness is round,
and its cusp is turned
Only once. Oh,
it does not float,
Yet it rises as
such contradiction. Yes,
It bulges as such
semi-spirals counterbalanced
By protrusion,
by equilibrium and exception.

There between them, though,
the strings and strands
Droop and are absurd.
Three spikes of such
Extend unto their sequences.
But there below,
Intermediacy is intermittent.
And a triangle and its
Liquids fall from reality's
one juxtaposition, fall
As flaps, as adroit
summations once mathematical.
Alternating is the configuration
of our ambivalence.
It is positioned within that
leftmost and rightmost
Coiling, within those
still loops, ad infinitum.
Yes, inwardly, the
binary forms cease this
Asserted parameterization.
They cease this
Topological defiance of
bisections, this defiance of
Balance arcing as curls,
arcing as our metaphorical
Configuration's idealistic gimmickry.


Odd Id

An odd id is this limbic corpse.
Such a bulb of
Conjured science contains
its droplet, contains the
Unbent spike jutting
into beneath, unto between.

Oblivious is that grasp
never seeing viscous visions
Of these superstitions or of glass.
But the id is my
Abstinence, and it holds within it
its parallelism; it
Holds within us its
algorithms all ludicrous.

Oh, an id oddly of our
denied minds, it is
Derived via a
pretentious psychology. It is
Derided in its sickness,
and is damned in
Its purposeless flesh.
Yet this anthropomorphism is
Anti-transcendent, indeed.
And it renders those
Fluids damp. For, such knots
of nothingness and of
Imbecilic psychoses are
quite selfish but laughable.

And odd is the id,
despite its conformity. Ha,
Odd are these inexact instincts
of our immaturity;
Odd are these inexact ids
of our entropies becoming
Unthinkably maniacal but
temptingly morbid, becoming
Odd but clangorous,
as do our brains each weird
And methodical or somehow crazed.


A numbers puzzle/solitaire-game:

Make an 3-by-3 grid on paper.

Fill the grid with UNIQUE positive integers, one integer per square of the grid. The numbers need not be consecutively valued necessarily.

Your score is the largest integer m such that integers 1 through m all occur as sums within the grid (without missing any positive integers <=m).

A "sum" is of any number of addends (3, 2, or just 1) that are all *consecutively placed* within a row of the grid or a column of the grid. (No diagonals in this variation.)

So, for example, if we have the following 3-by-3 grid:

2 9 8
3 1 10
7 6 15

...the sums 1 through 19 all occur in this grid. So, I get a score of 19.
(Notice that some values of sums occur more than once.)

For example, the number 4 = the 3 plus 1 in the middle horizontal row. And the number 14 equals the sum of all three terms in the middle row.
And 5 = the 2 plus 3 of the leftmost column.
And the 1 is just the number 1, while the 2 is the number 2, etc.
And 10 occurs as just the 10, and as 3+7 (in left column), and as 9+1 (in middle column).

Note that the addends must be consecutive in the grid, however. 3 + 10 = 13 would not be allowed, because they are separated by the 1 in the middle. (Although, 13 occurs as a sum somewhere else.)

All numbers from 1 through 19 occur as sums. But 20 doesn't occur. That is why I get a score of 19.

You can "play" someone else by both of you trying to score as well as you can on same-sized grids. Just try to outscore your opponent.

Note: I personally scored a 20 with another grid, but someone using a computer scored a 26, which I think is the best score possible.



1 comment:

The Quiet Riot said...

See, I really do come to look and read!