Generating numbers with cubesGenerating Roman numerals with diceCalendar Cubes are Impossible!Counting numbers with 3 diceCounting numbers with 3 diceNumbers with distinct digitsA Lazy Way to Make Two Dice from ManyCalendar Cubes are Impossible!Superellipse on a square budgetGenerating NumbersErnie and the Superconducting BoxesGenerating Roman numerals with dicePaint numbers from 1 to 8 with two colours

Simple Markdown viewer for Windows

Is Bitlocker secure enough for portable storage devices?

Odd wiring setup in light switch

Why only sine waves?

What would happen if the Queen died immediately before a general election?

getResource is deprecated, what is the alternative?

Schemes/ Mechanisms that could provide one time decryption?

Is this the correct pronunciation of "heinous" in any English-speaking country?

What does this "ICAgICAg…" mean in public key certificates and messages?

In OOP, 'protected' keyword is not required?

QGIS WMS/WMST referer

Did Roger Rabbit exist prior to the film "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?"

Please help me spot the error in my "proof" that the sum of two irrational numbers must be irrational

How to reuse a component in different pages in SXA?

Controlling a robot blindfolded on a 9x9 grid

How not to let text in selection mode go to registers

Miscited in a bachelor thesis

What happens if bite wound abscesses in cats left untreated?

Is there a way to identify colours in a mesh

Should I perform my first oil change at 1000 miles, or when the manual says?

Is this DIN connector suited for MIDI devices?

Is there a “special edition” version of The Elder Scrolls Online?

A new way of approaching the pole of the Riemann zeta function - and a new conjectured formula

Generate array of integers that sum to zero



Generating numbers with cubes


Generating Roman numerals with diceCalendar Cubes are Impossible!Counting numbers with 3 diceCounting numbers with 3 diceNumbers with distinct digitsA Lazy Way to Make Two Dice from ManyCalendar Cubes are Impossible!Superellipse on a square budgetGenerating NumbersErnie and the Superconducting BoxesGenerating Roman numerals with dicePaint numbers from 1 to 8 with two colours






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;

.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;








13















$begingroup$


I saw an interesting calendar in a shop. It is composed of two cubes with numbers written on their 6 sides. By placing these cubes side by side one can make any day of the month from 1 to 31 (even 32). This tickled my mathematical curiosity and made me wonder: what is the largest contiguous range of numbers you can make with 3 cubes? Bonus question: what happens if you allow cubes to be flipped, so 6 can become 9 and vice versa?



This problem is similar to this Counting numbers with 3 dice
but here we don't require 0-padding, so the answer is different. For example, here we can use a single die to represent single-digit numbers.



Good luck!










share|improve this question











$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    Possibly relevent: puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/48453/…
    $endgroup$
    – Dr Xorile
    Sep 26 at 1:29







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Am I allowed to turn the 1 on it's side to make a minus sign?
    $endgroup$
    – Joel Rondeau
    Sep 27 at 13:37

















13















$begingroup$


I saw an interesting calendar in a shop. It is composed of two cubes with numbers written on their 6 sides. By placing these cubes side by side one can make any day of the month from 1 to 31 (even 32). This tickled my mathematical curiosity and made me wonder: what is the largest contiguous range of numbers you can make with 3 cubes? Bonus question: what happens if you allow cubes to be flipped, so 6 can become 9 and vice versa?



This problem is similar to this Counting numbers with 3 dice
but here we don't require 0-padding, so the answer is different. For example, here we can use a single die to represent single-digit numbers.



Good luck!










share|improve this question











$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    Possibly relevent: puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/48453/…
    $endgroup$
    – Dr Xorile
    Sep 26 at 1:29







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Am I allowed to turn the 1 on it's side to make a minus sign?
    $endgroup$
    – Joel Rondeau
    Sep 27 at 13:37













13













13









13


1



$begingroup$


I saw an interesting calendar in a shop. It is composed of two cubes with numbers written on their 6 sides. By placing these cubes side by side one can make any day of the month from 1 to 31 (even 32). This tickled my mathematical curiosity and made me wonder: what is the largest contiguous range of numbers you can make with 3 cubes? Bonus question: what happens if you allow cubes to be flipped, so 6 can become 9 and vice versa?



This problem is similar to this Counting numbers with 3 dice
but here we don't require 0-padding, so the answer is different. For example, here we can use a single die to represent single-digit numbers.



Good luck!










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




I saw an interesting calendar in a shop. It is composed of two cubes with numbers written on their 6 sides. By placing these cubes side by side one can make any day of the month from 1 to 31 (even 32). This tickled my mathematical curiosity and made me wonder: what is the largest contiguous range of numbers you can make with 3 cubes? Bonus question: what happens if you allow cubes to be flipped, so 6 can become 9 and vice versa?



This problem is similar to this Counting numbers with 3 dice
but here we don't require 0-padding, so the answer is different. For example, here we can use a single die to represent single-digit numbers.



Good luck!







mathematics combinatorics






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Sep 26 at 0:58







Dmitry Kamenetsky

















asked Sep 26 at 0:30









Dmitry KamenetskyDmitry Kamenetsky

4,9746 silver badges48 bronze badges




4,9746 silver badges48 bronze badges














  • $begingroup$
    Possibly relevent: puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/48453/…
    $endgroup$
    – Dr Xorile
    Sep 26 at 1:29







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Am I allowed to turn the 1 on it's side to make a minus sign?
    $endgroup$
    – Joel Rondeau
    Sep 27 at 13:37
















  • $begingroup$
    Possibly relevent: puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/48453/…
    $endgroup$
    – Dr Xorile
    Sep 26 at 1:29







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Am I allowed to turn the 1 on it's side to make a minus sign?
    $endgroup$
    – Joel Rondeau
    Sep 27 at 13:37















$begingroup$
Possibly relevent: puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/48453/…
$endgroup$
– Dr Xorile
Sep 26 at 1:29





$begingroup$
Possibly relevent: puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/48453/…
$endgroup$
– Dr Xorile
Sep 26 at 1:29





1




1




$begingroup$
Am I allowed to turn the 1 on it's side to make a minus sign?
$endgroup$
– Joel Rondeau
Sep 27 at 13:37




$begingroup$
Am I allowed to turn the 1 on it's side to make a minus sign?
$endgroup$
– Joel Rondeau
Sep 27 at 13:37










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes


















14

















$begingroup$

I really enjoy puzzles like these.




The largest number with 3 dice would have to be 98 (without flipping), since we
would need two occurrences of every digit from 1-9 to get past the multiples of
11, plus a 0 somewhere for the tens.

This adds up to 19 (2 x 9 + 1), but we only
have 18 (3 x 6) faces. So my solution for without flipping is:

[ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

[ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

[ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9 ]

Which can count to 98. The procedure for building up the dice is simply counting
up and making sure to have two of each number (except 0) on difference dice.




Bonus question:




As for flipping, we can remove the 9, since 6s can be used.

Now we can get up to 99, but for 100 we need another 0.

So I tried swapping the 9 for 0:

[ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

[ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

[ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 0 ]

This allows counting up to 110, but it can not make 111, since that requires three 1s, which we don't have.




Curiosity:




I played around with 2 dice, and without flipping, the maximum is indeed 32:

[ 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 ]

[ 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 ]

But with flipping, the maximum is 43 (since 44 is unreachable):

[ 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7]

[ 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8]







share|improve this answer












$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Perfect answer, thank you!
    $endgroup$
    – Dmitry Kamenetsky
    Sep 26 at 3:31


















10

















$begingroup$

I think this is different enough to warrant its own answer for the bonus question. Starting with Matthew Jensen's configuration, swap the last cube to get




[ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

[ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

[ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10 ]



This should be fine, since nobody ever said the "number" on each face had to be a digit.
Moreover, the 10 can be flipped over to yield 01. This gives us 111 (01 1 1) up through 119.
We don't lose 100-110, since we can just use (10 0-9) and (1 10) to make them.
We can get 120-139 using the cubes regularly.
140-149 use the 01 again: (01 4 0-9).
150-169 are normal. 170-179 use the 01, 180-199 are normal.



200 is not possible, so we stop here.



Edit: I mentioned this in a comment below, and then decided maybe it was worth adding.
The question doesn't specify that numbers need to be positive, so we could certainly rotate a 1 face 90 degrees to get a minus sign.
If we allow awkward constructions like -011 (- 01 1), this gets us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
If we disallow -011, we can get to -10 for a range of 210.



One last improvement. In the case above where we got stuck at -39, I think we can swap the 8 from Cube 3 with the 4 from Cube 1 without causing any problems. It changes some other constructions (e.g. the 140s are now normal and the 180s use the 01), but this allows us to push much further in the negative direction. We can get to -69 now. So my best solution is



[ 0, 1, 3, 6, 7, 8 ]

[ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

[ 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 ]



Assuming the most liberal rules (1 can be rotated to a minus sign and "-011" is valid), and assuming I haven't overlooked something, this gets us to 269 consecutive numbers.







share|improve this answer












$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Wow great work in pushing the boundary!
    $endgroup$
    – Dmitry Kamenetsky
    Sep 26 at 3:33










  • $begingroup$
    This is also the maximum. 200 itself would be doable with 20 and 50 (flipped giving 05 and 02), but then you would lose 122 and 155.
    $endgroup$
    – Zizy Archer
    Sep 26 at 10:52






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Yes, without resorting to behavior that I think is outside of the spirit of the question, that's the best you can do. There are truly silly things like turning an 8 on its side to make two zeros, or turning the 10 on its side to make an underlined zero. But maybe less silly would be to turn a 1 on its side to make a minus sign, since the question doesn't specify that the numbers need to be positive. Doing so would get us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
    $endgroup$
    – hdsdv
    Sep 26 at 11:00










  • $begingroup$
    Potentially, with the 2-digit faces, you could 'hide' one digit behind another block. For example: [ 2 ][ 0 ]0 ] with [ 10 ] hiding behind the [ 0 ]. But as hdsdv said, that's far beyond the spirit of the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Matthew Jensen
    Sep 26 at 20:36


















3

















$begingroup$


To make a sequence of 100 consecutive numbers you need two of each digit (0-8). As this uses all 18 faces, we cannot have a third occurrence of any digit. The largest contiguous range is 111 numbers in the range 0 to 110.







share|improve this answer










$endgroup$





















    3

















    $begingroup$

    As long as you have all the digits, you can make all the 1-digit numbers. So the question becomes: how far can you get with the 2-digits, which start at 10



    Without allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped:




    Start with:

    First two dice: 0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,,,_

    Third dice: 1,2,3,4,5,6

    and you'll get to 65.


    So, throw in a 6 in the first/second dice and you can get to 87 provided you separate your first two carefully:

    0,1,2,3,4,7

    5,6,7,8,9,_

    1,2,3,4,5,6


    and I haven't even used everything yet. It must be possible to improve on that!


    Edit: And it is. There are 560 ways to get to 98. eg

    (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8), (3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7)

    (2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7), (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8)

    This turns out the be the maximum (brute force search).




    Allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped opens up a few extra possibilities:




    If you repeat the 7,8 on your first two dice:

    7,8,0,1,2,3
    7,8,4,5,69,0
    1,2,3,4,5,69

    you can get to 110 (which is the biggest possible as @DanielMathias points out in his answer).







    share|improve this answer












    $endgroup$





















      0

















      $begingroup$

      I find it strange that this answer is missing and I hope it's within what was asked, even if a bit impractical to use at first and rather different from the other answers.



      Base question (no flipping):




      The idea is to use a base that better fits cubes, like base 6. This solution uses cubes [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and to convert it back to the usual decimal base you just need to do a A*36 + B*6 + C, where A, B and C are the three cubes. With this it's possible to cover 6³ = 214 combinations.


      But as it was said that not all cubes must be present, than it should be allowed to consider numbers differently based on the total number of cubes. Specifically it's possible to consider an offset to avoid duplicates. 1 cube no offset. 2 cubes +6, 3 cubes +42. In this case it's possible to reach 6 + 6² + 6³ = 6 + 36 + 216 = 258 values.


      I believe this to be inside the question as were considered valid both multi digit cubes and using a rotated 1 to get a -. Additionally it's not that uncommon to use numbers outside base 10, just think about the dates themselves which can roughly be approximated to a mixed base number (days in base 31 and months in base 12).




      Bonus question with flipping.




      This is a bit more stretched, but if the base part was fine than I guess this one is fine too. I wrote it mostly in case anyone is curious to the natural extension of my solution to the base question to the bonus one.


      If it's possible to rotate a number so that 6 becomes 9 and that 1 becomes -, than each digit has four possible rotations. To keep track of the rotation a line can be wrote under the digit. This means that we can add to the senary digit a +4*Rotation. If it's straight you have +0, if it's turned on the left +6, if it's upside down +12 and if it's turned on the right +18. This makes the cubes able to represent any digit of base 24 and using the math of the base question we have 13824 distinct and consecutive values if adding an offset based on the number of digits is not allowed and 14424 if it is.


      While this was a bit far from the other answers, they are still normal numbers just in different base. For example this is not that far from Babylonian numerals as their digit was a compound in the same way my digits are, just in different bases and with a different writings.







      share|improve this answer










      $endgroup$















        Your Answer








        StackExchange.ready(function()
        var channelOptions =
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "559"
        ;
        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',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader:
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        ,
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        );



        );














        draft saved

        draft discarded
















        StackExchange.ready(
        function ()
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f89557%2fgenerating-numbers-with-cubes%23new-answer', 'question_page');

        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown


























        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes








        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        14

















        $begingroup$

        I really enjoy puzzles like these.




        The largest number with 3 dice would have to be 98 (without flipping), since we
        would need two occurrences of every digit from 1-9 to get past the multiples of
        11, plus a 0 somewhere for the tens.

        This adds up to 19 (2 x 9 + 1), but we only
        have 18 (3 x 6) faces. So my solution for without flipping is:

        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9 ]

        Which can count to 98. The procedure for building up the dice is simply counting
        up and making sure to have two of each number (except 0) on difference dice.




        Bonus question:




        As for flipping, we can remove the 9, since 6s can be used.

        Now we can get up to 99, but for 100 we need another 0.

        So I tried swapping the 9 for 0:

        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 0 ]

        This allows counting up to 110, but it can not make 111, since that requires three 1s, which we don't have.




        Curiosity:




        I played around with 2 dice, and without flipping, the maximum is indeed 32:

        [ 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 ]

        [ 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 ]

        But with flipping, the maximum is 43 (since 44 is unreachable):

        [ 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7]

        [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8]







        share|improve this answer












        $endgroup$













        • $begingroup$
          Perfect answer, thank you!
          $endgroup$
          – Dmitry Kamenetsky
          Sep 26 at 3:31















        14

















        $begingroup$

        I really enjoy puzzles like these.




        The largest number with 3 dice would have to be 98 (without flipping), since we
        would need two occurrences of every digit from 1-9 to get past the multiples of
        11, plus a 0 somewhere for the tens.

        This adds up to 19 (2 x 9 + 1), but we only
        have 18 (3 x 6) faces. So my solution for without flipping is:

        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9 ]

        Which can count to 98. The procedure for building up the dice is simply counting
        up and making sure to have two of each number (except 0) on difference dice.




        Bonus question:




        As for flipping, we can remove the 9, since 6s can be used.

        Now we can get up to 99, but for 100 we need another 0.

        So I tried swapping the 9 for 0:

        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 0 ]

        This allows counting up to 110, but it can not make 111, since that requires three 1s, which we don't have.




        Curiosity:




        I played around with 2 dice, and without flipping, the maximum is indeed 32:

        [ 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 ]

        [ 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 ]

        But with flipping, the maximum is 43 (since 44 is unreachable):

        [ 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7]

        [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8]







        share|improve this answer












        $endgroup$













        • $begingroup$
          Perfect answer, thank you!
          $endgroup$
          – Dmitry Kamenetsky
          Sep 26 at 3:31













        14















        14











        14







        $begingroup$

        I really enjoy puzzles like these.




        The largest number with 3 dice would have to be 98 (without flipping), since we
        would need two occurrences of every digit from 1-9 to get past the multiples of
        11, plus a 0 somewhere for the tens.

        This adds up to 19 (2 x 9 + 1), but we only
        have 18 (3 x 6) faces. So my solution for without flipping is:

        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9 ]

        Which can count to 98. The procedure for building up the dice is simply counting
        up and making sure to have two of each number (except 0) on difference dice.




        Bonus question:




        As for flipping, we can remove the 9, since 6s can be used.

        Now we can get up to 99, but for 100 we need another 0.

        So I tried swapping the 9 for 0:

        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 0 ]

        This allows counting up to 110, but it can not make 111, since that requires three 1s, which we don't have.




        Curiosity:




        I played around with 2 dice, and without flipping, the maximum is indeed 32:

        [ 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 ]

        [ 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 ]

        But with flipping, the maximum is 43 (since 44 is unreachable):

        [ 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7]

        [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8]







        share|improve this answer












        $endgroup$



        I really enjoy puzzles like these.




        The largest number with 3 dice would have to be 98 (without flipping), since we
        would need two occurrences of every digit from 1-9 to get past the multiples of
        11, plus a 0 somewhere for the tens.

        This adds up to 19 (2 x 9 + 1), but we only
        have 18 (3 x 6) faces. So my solution for without flipping is:

        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9 ]

        Which can count to 98. The procedure for building up the dice is simply counting
        up and making sure to have two of each number (except 0) on difference dice.




        Bonus question:




        As for flipping, we can remove the 9, since 6s can be used.

        Now we can get up to 99, but for 100 we need another 0.

        So I tried swapping the 9 for 0:

        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 0 ]

        This allows counting up to 110, but it can not make 111, since that requires three 1s, which we don't have.




        Curiosity:




        I played around with 2 dice, and without flipping, the maximum is indeed 32:

        [ 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 ]

        [ 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 ]

        But with flipping, the maximum is 43 (since 44 is unreachable):

        [ 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7]

        [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8]








        share|improve this answer















        share|improve this answer




        share|improve this answer








        edited Sep 26 at 2:27

























        answered Sep 26 at 2:04









        Matthew JensenMatthew Jensen

        4514 bronze badges




        4514 bronze badges














        • $begingroup$
          Perfect answer, thank you!
          $endgroup$
          – Dmitry Kamenetsky
          Sep 26 at 3:31
















        • $begingroup$
          Perfect answer, thank you!
          $endgroup$
          – Dmitry Kamenetsky
          Sep 26 at 3:31















        $begingroup$
        Perfect answer, thank you!
        $endgroup$
        – Dmitry Kamenetsky
        Sep 26 at 3:31




        $begingroup$
        Perfect answer, thank you!
        $endgroup$
        – Dmitry Kamenetsky
        Sep 26 at 3:31













        10

















        $begingroup$

        I think this is different enough to warrant its own answer for the bonus question. Starting with Matthew Jensen's configuration, swap the last cube to get




        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10 ]



        This should be fine, since nobody ever said the "number" on each face had to be a digit.
        Moreover, the 10 can be flipped over to yield 01. This gives us 111 (01 1 1) up through 119.
        We don't lose 100-110, since we can just use (10 0-9) and (1 10) to make them.
        We can get 120-139 using the cubes regularly.
        140-149 use the 01 again: (01 4 0-9).
        150-169 are normal. 170-179 use the 01, 180-199 are normal.



        200 is not possible, so we stop here.



        Edit: I mentioned this in a comment below, and then decided maybe it was worth adding.
        The question doesn't specify that numbers need to be positive, so we could certainly rotate a 1 face 90 degrees to get a minus sign.
        If we allow awkward constructions like -011 (- 01 1), this gets us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
        If we disallow -011, we can get to -10 for a range of 210.



        One last improvement. In the case above where we got stuck at -39, I think we can swap the 8 from Cube 3 with the 4 from Cube 1 without causing any problems. It changes some other constructions (e.g. the 140s are now normal and the 180s use the 01), but this allows us to push much further in the negative direction. We can get to -69 now. So my best solution is



        [ 0, 1, 3, 6, 7, 8 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 ]



        Assuming the most liberal rules (1 can be rotated to a minus sign and "-011" is valid), and assuming I haven't overlooked something, this gets us to 269 consecutive numbers.







        share|improve this answer












        $endgroup$













        • $begingroup$
          Wow great work in pushing the boundary!
          $endgroup$
          – Dmitry Kamenetsky
          Sep 26 at 3:33










        • $begingroup$
          This is also the maximum. 200 itself would be doable with 20 and 50 (flipped giving 05 and 02), but then you would lose 122 and 155.
          $endgroup$
          – Zizy Archer
          Sep 26 at 10:52






        • 1




          $begingroup$
          Yes, without resorting to behavior that I think is outside of the spirit of the question, that's the best you can do. There are truly silly things like turning an 8 on its side to make two zeros, or turning the 10 on its side to make an underlined zero. But maybe less silly would be to turn a 1 on its side to make a minus sign, since the question doesn't specify that the numbers need to be positive. Doing so would get us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
          $endgroup$
          – hdsdv
          Sep 26 at 11:00










        • $begingroup$
          Potentially, with the 2-digit faces, you could 'hide' one digit behind another block. For example: [ 2 ][ 0 ]0 ] with [ 10 ] hiding behind the [ 0 ]. But as hdsdv said, that's far beyond the spirit of the question.
          $endgroup$
          – Matthew Jensen
          Sep 26 at 20:36















        10

















        $begingroup$

        I think this is different enough to warrant its own answer for the bonus question. Starting with Matthew Jensen's configuration, swap the last cube to get




        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10 ]



        This should be fine, since nobody ever said the "number" on each face had to be a digit.
        Moreover, the 10 can be flipped over to yield 01. This gives us 111 (01 1 1) up through 119.
        We don't lose 100-110, since we can just use (10 0-9) and (1 10) to make them.
        We can get 120-139 using the cubes regularly.
        140-149 use the 01 again: (01 4 0-9).
        150-169 are normal. 170-179 use the 01, 180-199 are normal.



        200 is not possible, so we stop here.



        Edit: I mentioned this in a comment below, and then decided maybe it was worth adding.
        The question doesn't specify that numbers need to be positive, so we could certainly rotate a 1 face 90 degrees to get a minus sign.
        If we allow awkward constructions like -011 (- 01 1), this gets us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
        If we disallow -011, we can get to -10 for a range of 210.



        One last improvement. In the case above where we got stuck at -39, I think we can swap the 8 from Cube 3 with the 4 from Cube 1 without causing any problems. It changes some other constructions (e.g. the 140s are now normal and the 180s use the 01), but this allows us to push much further in the negative direction. We can get to -69 now. So my best solution is



        [ 0, 1, 3, 6, 7, 8 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 ]



        Assuming the most liberal rules (1 can be rotated to a minus sign and "-011" is valid), and assuming I haven't overlooked something, this gets us to 269 consecutive numbers.







        share|improve this answer












        $endgroup$













        • $begingroup$
          Wow great work in pushing the boundary!
          $endgroup$
          – Dmitry Kamenetsky
          Sep 26 at 3:33










        • $begingroup$
          This is also the maximum. 200 itself would be doable with 20 and 50 (flipped giving 05 and 02), but then you would lose 122 and 155.
          $endgroup$
          – Zizy Archer
          Sep 26 at 10:52






        • 1




          $begingroup$
          Yes, without resorting to behavior that I think is outside of the spirit of the question, that's the best you can do. There are truly silly things like turning an 8 on its side to make two zeros, or turning the 10 on its side to make an underlined zero. But maybe less silly would be to turn a 1 on its side to make a minus sign, since the question doesn't specify that the numbers need to be positive. Doing so would get us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
          $endgroup$
          – hdsdv
          Sep 26 at 11:00










        • $begingroup$
          Potentially, with the 2-digit faces, you could 'hide' one digit behind another block. For example: [ 2 ][ 0 ]0 ] with [ 10 ] hiding behind the [ 0 ]. But as hdsdv said, that's far beyond the spirit of the question.
          $endgroup$
          – Matthew Jensen
          Sep 26 at 20:36













        10















        10











        10







        $begingroup$

        I think this is different enough to warrant its own answer for the bonus question. Starting with Matthew Jensen's configuration, swap the last cube to get




        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10 ]



        This should be fine, since nobody ever said the "number" on each face had to be a digit.
        Moreover, the 10 can be flipped over to yield 01. This gives us 111 (01 1 1) up through 119.
        We don't lose 100-110, since we can just use (10 0-9) and (1 10) to make them.
        We can get 120-139 using the cubes regularly.
        140-149 use the 01 again: (01 4 0-9).
        150-169 are normal. 170-179 use the 01, 180-199 are normal.



        200 is not possible, so we stop here.



        Edit: I mentioned this in a comment below, and then decided maybe it was worth adding.
        The question doesn't specify that numbers need to be positive, so we could certainly rotate a 1 face 90 degrees to get a minus sign.
        If we allow awkward constructions like -011 (- 01 1), this gets us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
        If we disallow -011, we can get to -10 for a range of 210.



        One last improvement. In the case above where we got stuck at -39, I think we can swap the 8 from Cube 3 with the 4 from Cube 1 without causing any problems. It changes some other constructions (e.g. the 140s are now normal and the 180s use the 01), but this allows us to push much further in the negative direction. We can get to -69 now. So my best solution is



        [ 0, 1, 3, 6, 7, 8 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 ]



        Assuming the most liberal rules (1 can be rotated to a minus sign and "-011" is valid), and assuming I haven't overlooked something, this gets us to 269 consecutive numbers.







        share|improve this answer












        $endgroup$



        I think this is different enough to warrant its own answer for the bonus question. Starting with Matthew Jensen's configuration, swap the last cube to get




        [ 0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10 ]



        This should be fine, since nobody ever said the "number" on each face had to be a digit.
        Moreover, the 10 can be flipped over to yield 01. This gives us 111 (01 1 1) up through 119.
        We don't lose 100-110, since we can just use (10 0-9) and (1 10) to make them.
        We can get 120-139 using the cubes regularly.
        140-149 use the 01 again: (01 4 0-9).
        150-169 are normal. 170-179 use the 01, 180-199 are normal.



        200 is not possible, so we stop here.



        Edit: I mentioned this in a comment below, and then decided maybe it was worth adding.
        The question doesn't specify that numbers need to be positive, so we could certainly rotate a 1 face 90 degrees to get a minus sign.
        If we allow awkward constructions like -011 (- 01 1), this gets us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
        If we disallow -011, we can get to -10 for a range of 210.



        One last improvement. In the case above where we got stuck at -39, I think we can swap the 8 from Cube 3 with the 4 from Cube 1 without causing any problems. It changes some other constructions (e.g. the 140s are now normal and the 180s use the 01), but this allows us to push much further in the negative direction. We can get to -69 now. So my best solution is



        [ 0, 1, 3, 6, 7, 8 ]

        [ 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 ]

        [ 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 ]



        Assuming the most liberal rules (1 can be rotated to a minus sign and "-011" is valid), and assuming I haven't overlooked something, this gets us to 269 consecutive numbers.








        share|improve this answer















        share|improve this answer




        share|improve this answer








        edited Sep 26 at 21:03

























        answered Sep 26 at 2:26









        hdsdvhdsdv

        2,2534 silver badges18 bronze badges




        2,2534 silver badges18 bronze badges














        • $begingroup$
          Wow great work in pushing the boundary!
          $endgroup$
          – Dmitry Kamenetsky
          Sep 26 at 3:33










        • $begingroup$
          This is also the maximum. 200 itself would be doable with 20 and 50 (flipped giving 05 and 02), but then you would lose 122 and 155.
          $endgroup$
          – Zizy Archer
          Sep 26 at 10:52






        • 1




          $begingroup$
          Yes, without resorting to behavior that I think is outside of the spirit of the question, that's the best you can do. There are truly silly things like turning an 8 on its side to make two zeros, or turning the 10 on its side to make an underlined zero. But maybe less silly would be to turn a 1 on its side to make a minus sign, since the question doesn't specify that the numbers need to be positive. Doing so would get us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
          $endgroup$
          – hdsdv
          Sep 26 at 11:00










        • $begingroup$
          Potentially, with the 2-digit faces, you could 'hide' one digit behind another block. For example: [ 2 ][ 0 ]0 ] with [ 10 ] hiding behind the [ 0 ]. But as hdsdv said, that's far beyond the spirit of the question.
          $endgroup$
          – Matthew Jensen
          Sep 26 at 20:36
















        • $begingroup$
          Wow great work in pushing the boundary!
          $endgroup$
          – Dmitry Kamenetsky
          Sep 26 at 3:33










        • $begingroup$
          This is also the maximum. 200 itself would be doable with 20 and 50 (flipped giving 05 and 02), but then you would lose 122 and 155.
          $endgroup$
          – Zizy Archer
          Sep 26 at 10:52






        • 1




          $begingroup$
          Yes, without resorting to behavior that I think is outside of the spirit of the question, that's the best you can do. There are truly silly things like turning an 8 on its side to make two zeros, or turning the 10 on its side to make an underlined zero. But maybe less silly would be to turn a 1 on its side to make a minus sign, since the question doesn't specify that the numbers need to be positive. Doing so would get us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
          $endgroup$
          – hdsdv
          Sep 26 at 11:00










        • $begingroup$
          Potentially, with the 2-digit faces, you could 'hide' one digit behind another block. For example: [ 2 ][ 0 ]0 ] with [ 10 ] hiding behind the [ 0 ]. But as hdsdv said, that's far beyond the spirit of the question.
          $endgroup$
          – Matthew Jensen
          Sep 26 at 20:36















        $begingroup$
        Wow great work in pushing the boundary!
        $endgroup$
        – Dmitry Kamenetsky
        Sep 26 at 3:33




        $begingroup$
        Wow great work in pushing the boundary!
        $endgroup$
        – Dmitry Kamenetsky
        Sep 26 at 3:33












        $begingroup$
        This is also the maximum. 200 itself would be doable with 20 and 50 (flipped giving 05 and 02), but then you would lose 122 and 155.
        $endgroup$
        – Zizy Archer
        Sep 26 at 10:52




        $begingroup$
        This is also the maximum. 200 itself would be doable with 20 and 50 (flipped giving 05 and 02), but then you would lose 122 and 155.
        $endgroup$
        – Zizy Archer
        Sep 26 at 10:52




        1




        1




        $begingroup$
        Yes, without resorting to behavior that I think is outside of the spirit of the question, that's the best you can do. There are truly silly things like turning an 8 on its side to make two zeros, or turning the 10 on its side to make an underlined zero. But maybe less silly would be to turn a 1 on its side to make a minus sign, since the question doesn't specify that the numbers need to be positive. Doing so would get us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
        $endgroup$
        – hdsdv
        Sep 26 at 11:00




        $begingroup$
        Yes, without resorting to behavior that I think is outside of the spirit of the question, that's the best you can do. There are truly silly things like turning an 8 on its side to make two zeros, or turning the 10 on its side to make an underlined zero. But maybe less silly would be to turn a 1 on its side to make a minus sign, since the question doesn't specify that the numbers need to be positive. Doing so would get us down to -39 for a total range of 239.
        $endgroup$
        – hdsdv
        Sep 26 at 11:00












        $begingroup$
        Potentially, with the 2-digit faces, you could 'hide' one digit behind another block. For example: [ 2 ][ 0 ]0 ] with [ 10 ] hiding behind the [ 0 ]. But as hdsdv said, that's far beyond the spirit of the question.
        $endgroup$
        – Matthew Jensen
        Sep 26 at 20:36




        $begingroup$
        Potentially, with the 2-digit faces, you could 'hide' one digit behind another block. For example: [ 2 ][ 0 ]0 ] with [ 10 ] hiding behind the [ 0 ]. But as hdsdv said, that's far beyond the spirit of the question.
        $endgroup$
        – Matthew Jensen
        Sep 26 at 20:36











        3

















        $begingroup$


        To make a sequence of 100 consecutive numbers you need two of each digit (0-8). As this uses all 18 faces, we cannot have a third occurrence of any digit. The largest contiguous range is 111 numbers in the range 0 to 110.







        share|improve this answer










        $endgroup$


















          3

















          $begingroup$


          To make a sequence of 100 consecutive numbers you need two of each digit (0-8). As this uses all 18 faces, we cannot have a third occurrence of any digit. The largest contiguous range is 111 numbers in the range 0 to 110.







          share|improve this answer










          $endgroup$
















            3















            3











            3







            $begingroup$


            To make a sequence of 100 consecutive numbers you need two of each digit (0-8). As this uses all 18 faces, we cannot have a third occurrence of any digit. The largest contiguous range is 111 numbers in the range 0 to 110.







            share|improve this answer










            $endgroup$




            To make a sequence of 100 consecutive numbers you need two of each digit (0-8). As this uses all 18 faces, we cannot have a third occurrence of any digit. The largest contiguous range is 111 numbers in the range 0 to 110.








            share|improve this answer













            share|improve this answer




            share|improve this answer










            answered Sep 26 at 1:46









            Daniel MathiasDaniel Mathias

            2,2492 silver badges14 bronze badges




            2,2492 silver badges14 bronze badges
























                3

















                $begingroup$

                As long as you have all the digits, you can make all the 1-digit numbers. So the question becomes: how far can you get with the 2-digits, which start at 10



                Without allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped:




                Start with:

                First two dice: 0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,,,_

                Third dice: 1,2,3,4,5,6

                and you'll get to 65.


                So, throw in a 6 in the first/second dice and you can get to 87 provided you separate your first two carefully:

                0,1,2,3,4,7

                5,6,7,8,9,_

                1,2,3,4,5,6


                and I haven't even used everything yet. It must be possible to improve on that!


                Edit: And it is. There are 560 ways to get to 98. eg

                (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8), (3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7)

                (2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7), (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8)

                This turns out the be the maximum (brute force search).




                Allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped opens up a few extra possibilities:




                If you repeat the 7,8 on your first two dice:

                7,8,0,1,2,3
                7,8,4,5,69,0
                1,2,3,4,5,69

                you can get to 110 (which is the biggest possible as @DanielMathias points out in his answer).







                share|improve this answer












                $endgroup$


















                  3

















                  $begingroup$

                  As long as you have all the digits, you can make all the 1-digit numbers. So the question becomes: how far can you get with the 2-digits, which start at 10



                  Without allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped:




                  Start with:

                  First two dice: 0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,,,_

                  Third dice: 1,2,3,4,5,6

                  and you'll get to 65.


                  So, throw in a 6 in the first/second dice and you can get to 87 provided you separate your first two carefully:

                  0,1,2,3,4,7

                  5,6,7,8,9,_

                  1,2,3,4,5,6


                  and I haven't even used everything yet. It must be possible to improve on that!


                  Edit: And it is. There are 560 ways to get to 98. eg

                  (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8), (3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7)

                  (2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7), (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8)

                  This turns out the be the maximum (brute force search).




                  Allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped opens up a few extra possibilities:




                  If you repeat the 7,8 on your first two dice:

                  7,8,0,1,2,3
                  7,8,4,5,69,0
                  1,2,3,4,5,69

                  you can get to 110 (which is the biggest possible as @DanielMathias points out in his answer).







                  share|improve this answer












                  $endgroup$
















                    3















                    3











                    3







                    $begingroup$

                    As long as you have all the digits, you can make all the 1-digit numbers. So the question becomes: how far can you get with the 2-digits, which start at 10



                    Without allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped:




                    Start with:

                    First two dice: 0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,,,_

                    Third dice: 1,2,3,4,5,6

                    and you'll get to 65.


                    So, throw in a 6 in the first/second dice and you can get to 87 provided you separate your first two carefully:

                    0,1,2,3,4,7

                    5,6,7,8,9,_

                    1,2,3,4,5,6


                    and I haven't even used everything yet. It must be possible to improve on that!


                    Edit: And it is. There are 560 ways to get to 98. eg

                    (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8), (3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7)

                    (2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7), (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8)

                    This turns out the be the maximum (brute force search).




                    Allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped opens up a few extra possibilities:




                    If you repeat the 7,8 on your first two dice:

                    7,8,0,1,2,3
                    7,8,4,5,69,0
                    1,2,3,4,5,69

                    you can get to 110 (which is the biggest possible as @DanielMathias points out in his answer).







                    share|improve this answer












                    $endgroup$



                    As long as you have all the digits, you can make all the 1-digit numbers. So the question becomes: how far can you get with the 2-digits, which start at 10



                    Without allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped:




                    Start with:

                    First two dice: 0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,,,_

                    Third dice: 1,2,3,4,5,6

                    and you'll get to 65.


                    So, throw in a 6 in the first/second dice and you can get to 87 provided you separate your first two carefully:

                    0,1,2,3,4,7

                    5,6,7,8,9,_

                    1,2,3,4,5,6


                    and I haven't even used everything yet. It must be possible to improve on that!


                    Edit: And it is. There are 560 ways to get to 98. eg

                    (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8), (3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7)

                    (2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), (0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7), (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8)

                    This turns out the be the maximum (brute force search).




                    Allowing 6 and 9 to be flipped opens up a few extra possibilities:




                    If you repeat the 7,8 on your first two dice:

                    7,8,0,1,2,3
                    7,8,4,5,69,0
                    1,2,3,4,5,69

                    you can get to 110 (which is the biggest possible as @DanielMathias points out in his answer).








                    share|improve this answer















                    share|improve this answer




                    share|improve this answer








                    edited Sep 26 at 2:21

























                    answered Sep 26 at 1:50









                    Dr XorileDr Xorile

                    18.9k3 gold badges35 silver badges103 bronze badges




                    18.9k3 gold badges35 silver badges103 bronze badges
























                        0

















                        $begingroup$

                        I find it strange that this answer is missing and I hope it's within what was asked, even if a bit impractical to use at first and rather different from the other answers.



                        Base question (no flipping):




                        The idea is to use a base that better fits cubes, like base 6. This solution uses cubes [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and to convert it back to the usual decimal base you just need to do a A*36 + B*6 + C, where A, B and C are the three cubes. With this it's possible to cover 6³ = 214 combinations.


                        But as it was said that not all cubes must be present, than it should be allowed to consider numbers differently based on the total number of cubes. Specifically it's possible to consider an offset to avoid duplicates. 1 cube no offset. 2 cubes +6, 3 cubes +42. In this case it's possible to reach 6 + 6² + 6³ = 6 + 36 + 216 = 258 values.


                        I believe this to be inside the question as were considered valid both multi digit cubes and using a rotated 1 to get a -. Additionally it's not that uncommon to use numbers outside base 10, just think about the dates themselves which can roughly be approximated to a mixed base number (days in base 31 and months in base 12).




                        Bonus question with flipping.




                        This is a bit more stretched, but if the base part was fine than I guess this one is fine too. I wrote it mostly in case anyone is curious to the natural extension of my solution to the base question to the bonus one.


                        If it's possible to rotate a number so that 6 becomes 9 and that 1 becomes -, than each digit has four possible rotations. To keep track of the rotation a line can be wrote under the digit. This means that we can add to the senary digit a +4*Rotation. If it's straight you have +0, if it's turned on the left +6, if it's upside down +12 and if it's turned on the right +18. This makes the cubes able to represent any digit of base 24 and using the math of the base question we have 13824 distinct and consecutive values if adding an offset based on the number of digits is not allowed and 14424 if it is.


                        While this was a bit far from the other answers, they are still normal numbers just in different base. For example this is not that far from Babylonian numerals as their digit was a compound in the same way my digits are, just in different bases and with a different writings.







                        share|improve this answer










                        $endgroup$


















                          0

















                          $begingroup$

                          I find it strange that this answer is missing and I hope it's within what was asked, even if a bit impractical to use at first and rather different from the other answers.



                          Base question (no flipping):




                          The idea is to use a base that better fits cubes, like base 6. This solution uses cubes [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and to convert it back to the usual decimal base you just need to do a A*36 + B*6 + C, where A, B and C are the three cubes. With this it's possible to cover 6³ = 214 combinations.


                          But as it was said that not all cubes must be present, than it should be allowed to consider numbers differently based on the total number of cubes. Specifically it's possible to consider an offset to avoid duplicates. 1 cube no offset. 2 cubes +6, 3 cubes +42. In this case it's possible to reach 6 + 6² + 6³ = 6 + 36 + 216 = 258 values.


                          I believe this to be inside the question as were considered valid both multi digit cubes and using a rotated 1 to get a -. Additionally it's not that uncommon to use numbers outside base 10, just think about the dates themselves which can roughly be approximated to a mixed base number (days in base 31 and months in base 12).




                          Bonus question with flipping.




                          This is a bit more stretched, but if the base part was fine than I guess this one is fine too. I wrote it mostly in case anyone is curious to the natural extension of my solution to the base question to the bonus one.


                          If it's possible to rotate a number so that 6 becomes 9 and that 1 becomes -, than each digit has four possible rotations. To keep track of the rotation a line can be wrote under the digit. This means that we can add to the senary digit a +4*Rotation. If it's straight you have +0, if it's turned on the left +6, if it's upside down +12 and if it's turned on the right +18. This makes the cubes able to represent any digit of base 24 and using the math of the base question we have 13824 distinct and consecutive values if adding an offset based on the number of digits is not allowed and 14424 if it is.


                          While this was a bit far from the other answers, they are still normal numbers just in different base. For example this is not that far from Babylonian numerals as their digit was a compound in the same way my digits are, just in different bases and with a different writings.







                          share|improve this answer










                          $endgroup$
















                            0















                            0











                            0







                            $begingroup$

                            I find it strange that this answer is missing and I hope it's within what was asked, even if a bit impractical to use at first and rather different from the other answers.



                            Base question (no flipping):




                            The idea is to use a base that better fits cubes, like base 6. This solution uses cubes [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and to convert it back to the usual decimal base you just need to do a A*36 + B*6 + C, where A, B and C are the three cubes. With this it's possible to cover 6³ = 214 combinations.


                            But as it was said that not all cubes must be present, than it should be allowed to consider numbers differently based on the total number of cubes. Specifically it's possible to consider an offset to avoid duplicates. 1 cube no offset. 2 cubes +6, 3 cubes +42. In this case it's possible to reach 6 + 6² + 6³ = 6 + 36 + 216 = 258 values.


                            I believe this to be inside the question as were considered valid both multi digit cubes and using a rotated 1 to get a -. Additionally it's not that uncommon to use numbers outside base 10, just think about the dates themselves which can roughly be approximated to a mixed base number (days in base 31 and months in base 12).




                            Bonus question with flipping.




                            This is a bit more stretched, but if the base part was fine than I guess this one is fine too. I wrote it mostly in case anyone is curious to the natural extension of my solution to the base question to the bonus one.


                            If it's possible to rotate a number so that 6 becomes 9 and that 1 becomes -, than each digit has four possible rotations. To keep track of the rotation a line can be wrote under the digit. This means that we can add to the senary digit a +4*Rotation. If it's straight you have +0, if it's turned on the left +6, if it's upside down +12 and if it's turned on the right +18. This makes the cubes able to represent any digit of base 24 and using the math of the base question we have 13824 distinct and consecutive values if adding an offset based on the number of digits is not allowed and 14424 if it is.


                            While this was a bit far from the other answers, they are still normal numbers just in different base. For example this is not that far from Babylonian numerals as their digit was a compound in the same way my digits are, just in different bases and with a different writings.







                            share|improve this answer










                            $endgroup$



                            I find it strange that this answer is missing and I hope it's within what was asked, even if a bit impractical to use at first and rather different from the other answers.



                            Base question (no flipping):




                            The idea is to use a base that better fits cubes, like base 6. This solution uses cubes [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and to convert it back to the usual decimal base you just need to do a A*36 + B*6 + C, where A, B and C are the three cubes. With this it's possible to cover 6³ = 214 combinations.


                            But as it was said that not all cubes must be present, than it should be allowed to consider numbers differently based on the total number of cubes. Specifically it's possible to consider an offset to avoid duplicates. 1 cube no offset. 2 cubes +6, 3 cubes +42. In this case it's possible to reach 6 + 6² + 6³ = 6 + 36 + 216 = 258 values.


                            I believe this to be inside the question as were considered valid both multi digit cubes and using a rotated 1 to get a -. Additionally it's not that uncommon to use numbers outside base 10, just think about the dates themselves which can roughly be approximated to a mixed base number (days in base 31 and months in base 12).




                            Bonus question with flipping.




                            This is a bit more stretched, but if the base part was fine than I guess this one is fine too. I wrote it mostly in case anyone is curious to the natural extension of my solution to the base question to the bonus one.


                            If it's possible to rotate a number so that 6 becomes 9 and that 1 becomes -, than each digit has four possible rotations. To keep track of the rotation a line can be wrote under the digit. This means that we can add to the senary digit a +4*Rotation. If it's straight you have +0, if it's turned on the left +6, if it's upside down +12 and if it's turned on the right +18. This makes the cubes able to represent any digit of base 24 and using the math of the base question we have 13824 distinct and consecutive values if adding an offset based on the number of digits is not allowed and 14424 if it is.


                            While this was a bit far from the other answers, they are still normal numbers just in different base. For example this is not that far from Babylonian numerals as their digit was a compound in the same way my digits are, just in different bases and with a different writings.








                            share|improve this answer













                            share|improve this answer




                            share|improve this answer










                            answered Sep 27 at 15:45









                            user62826user62826

                            1




                            1































                                draft saved

                                draft discarded















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Puzzling Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid


                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f89557%2fgenerating-numbers-with-cubes%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown









                                Popular posts from this blog

                                Distance measures on a map of a game The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are Inmin distance in a graphShortest distance path on contour plotHow to plot a tilted map?Finding points outside of a diskDelaunay link distanceAnnulus from GeoDisks: drawing a ring on a mapNegative Correlation DistanceFind distance along a path (GPS coordinates)Finding position at given distance in a GeoPathMathematics behind distance estimation using camera

                                How to get a smooth, uniform ParametricPlot of a 2D Region?How to plot a complicated Region?How to exclude a region from ParametricPlotHow discretize a region placing vertices on a specific non-uniform gridHow to transform a Plot or a ParametricPlot into a RegionHow can I get a smooth plot of a bounded region?Smooth ParametricPlot3D with RegionFunction?Smooth border of a region ParametricPlotSmooth region boundarySmooth region plot from list of pointsGet minimum y of a certain x in a region

                                Genealogie vun de Merowenger Vum Merowech bis zum Chilperich I. | Navigatiounsmenü