Re: Not A Magic Square But Similar

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Not A Magic Square But Similar by kennethk (Abbot) on Sep 06, 2013 at 20:04 UTC
Also: `1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 1 2 3 5 6 7 9 10 11 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 12` [download] Any additive offset to a row or column from a valid state that doesn't cause a value collision also satisfies the permutation condition. `3 6 9 2 5 8 1 4 7 1 2 3 7 8 9 4 5 6 2 1 3 5 4 6 8 7 9` [download] Rotations, row swaps and column swaps also yield valid results. Of course, these are actually a subset of the additive transformation. If you think about it, the 1 .. 9 square is just the all 1's square subjected to 9 row additions and 3 column additions; the minimum necessary number to achieve element uniqueness. The real question for me is are there valid results which are not mappable via addition to the base square. #11929 First ask yourself `How would I do this without a computer?' Then have the computer do it the same way.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: Not A Magic Square But Similar by Limbic~Region (Chancellor) on Sep 08, 2013 at 22:55 UTC
kennethk, The real question for me is are there valid results which are not mappable via addition to the base square Yes and I am kicking myself for not including this in the list of trivial cases I had considered (as this is not my intent). In any event, if I had to make this work I could but I isn't what I was hoping for. Cheers - L~R	[reply]
Re^2: Not A Magic Square But Similar by LanX (Saint) on Sep 06, 2013 at 20:36 UTC
Best solution so far! hdb++ Works also alwaysš for "selections" which are not parallels of a diagonal, like 1-10-7-16. Cheers Rolf ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language) š) prove left for interested readers.	[reply]