Monday 4 February 2013

Spot The Leopard

Even a puzzle at the humble level of a wordsearch demonstrates interesting enigmatic features.  
First of all, because it involves a finite search space, effort— particularly if undertaken in a systematic way— is bound to be rewarded (Seek and ye shall find).
If you want to be systematic, it raises the strategic question: what might an efficient searching procedure be?(In this case, as you need to find LEOPARD you might, for example, first locate the Ls).
Now you might consider that such tasks have little intrinsic merit. In fact they teach focus, tenacity and reframing. Children enjoy them, and they also can find their uses in cognitive rehabilitation. It is more a question of finding what sort of puzzle is of use to whom.
In everyday life most problems are difficult or partially insoluble, and involve stress because they have consequences. Doing simple kinds of puzzle and tasks without consequences in the external world can return one for a while the feeling of being in control. Even the illusion of control, can be recreative and de-stressing.
Finally notice that the square contains all the information required, but it is not immediately perceivable. (You can't see the wood for the trees.) In fact if you hadn't been told that there was a word hidden there you might not stumble across it.
This tells us something about our perceptual system, that we do not merely see what is there, unmediated, but only that which is perceived (ultimately from Latin percipio: meaning I seize upon, or I take in, and hence I observe). This is because, although the image falls upon the eye, and is therefore in that sense not invisible, it is not immediately construable as the word LEOPARD on a background of irrelevant dross. That is the task the brain must perform in turning some of what enters the eye into what we see. That is the puzzle the brain must solve in enabling us to understand what we are seeing.
The fact that this task can be harder or easier to perform is the essential ingredient of camouflage in animals, where the game is to fool the perceptual system of the predator.
But revenons à nos moutons. There are 12 animals in all (the leopard being one of them). Do any of the words in the word search be diagonal? Might some go up and some down? That's for you to find out.

B Q M H H G M O Q P S M
C R F Q P Y T N T M Y M
Z S R T P I Y P E L X T
G T V G T H D L E M A C
S F Y O R P M O O Y I A
R U Y H Z F P N F B A T
M T J E W A K H N O I L
S C M G R E H D O G F L
G W I D Y G E L E R G C
A M I E F F A R I G S W
E R C H T N A H P E L E
V E T T L Y A U T R K C


Tuesday 22 January 2013

Pointy-lism

When do arrows point at right angles to the direction they refer to?


One answer is in street signs, where a vertical arrow can mean 'straight on'. This sign seemed ambiguous at first glance... I saw it in Oxford on my way to lectures.


Friday 4 January 2013

N'exagérons pas

One used to hear remarks and jokes to the effect that 1 in 5 babies born were Chinese. I haven't heard such talk recently. I thought it might be PC encroaching, until I caught sight of this book: 




In a similar vein, I was once upstairs on a London bus and heard someone asking her companion "So what language do they speak in Switzerland, then?"

Came the reply, "Cantonese."


No doubt she would have thought this book meant that we're all Swiss now.  




Wednesday 2 January 2013

¡No pasarán!




Assume this sign is for the sighted as the PC say. What's wrong with the punctuation?

Thursday 16 August 2012

A Picture Poser

This picture (taken in The Missing Bean, in Oxford coffee and service both good, and it's  just across the way from Lincoln College) enables you to imagine I don't have a beard. Our perceptual experience of objects leads us to 'construe' what we see (so much for 'objective' reality'!). As most people are pogonally challenged those who have not seen me before naturally fill in the missing part beardlessly. Those who know me fill it in with a beard. But, of course, I might have shaved in the mean-time. 


This phenomenon of 'filling-in' or 'perceptual completion' as it is called in the trade—is made more visible when it fails, as with this photo of a ho-o-o-rse doing the rounds on the Internet, or when a picture is ambiguous. Without this 'filling in' we could not 'see' pictures or cartoons or photographs at all.



But I digress. The motivation for the picture isn't pictorial or psychological, but enigmatic.  Solve the easy clue!

(6, 3, 5)

Sunday 22 April 2012

Straight TALK


concerning the longest words in English which when written in block capitals use only letters made entirely of straight lines
I've spent so much time inventing puzzles, that you might think I would now have a reasonable idea of what people like. Thank goodness I can still be surprised.
Pyrgic No. 5 for April 7th 2012 had quite humble and unpretentious beginnings. I wrote:

5 What is the longest word you can make using only block capitals requiring 3 straight lines?
I then gave KAYAK as a tentative knowing this was a fairish answer (and palindromic, too) but one which left room for reader participation.
Le mieux, say the French, est l'ennemi du bien. (In English we might render this: leave well alone!) At the proof-reading stage I decided this wording was a bit loose and rewrote it to read:
5 What is the longest word you can make using only block capital letters each made up of straight lines only?

INATTENTIVELY
Admittedly this does make the wording a lot tighter. But— spot the difference!— I had inadvertently omitted the vital '3'. Curiously neither I nor any of the proofreaders spotted the omission. After you've been through the same text so many times you stop seeing what you are reading... Well, that's how I see it (or not, as the case might be).
What followed was an avalanche of letters from readers. Did I really consider that KAYAK was the longest word makeable with straight-lines only? How feeble! Why even moderate INITIATIVE would have got me as far as WEAKLY or TEATIME.
I MAKE A MIFTAKE
Well, that is all very embarrassing for me and a field day for the readers. But it is useful to learn something from mistakes; so why did a fairly straight-forward lapse in a make-weight of a puzzle prompt more letters from readers than all the ingenious pyrgicacity of all the other puzzles accompanying it?
I put it down to the Pratfall effect. This was a technique I often used to good effect when teaching bright but disaffected pupils physics and maths . You set a problem and solve it but you make a deliberate mess of the procedure. If you made this clumsy enough and make yourself look as if you need metaphorically helping across the road some pupils will leap up and put you out of your misery (metaphorically) and unwittingly help themselves in the process.

MANY E-MAILZ
Readers, unaware that I had missed a '3' out, saw my feeble answer to Pyrgic number 5 and thought, 'I can do better'. And of course they could! Much better. And the same thing often applies to questions where I haven't made a mistake. Hence all those clamorous e-mails crammed with creative observations and ideas for further puzzles.

  The best answers to the Puzzle I didn't intend to set are as follows:
GOLD MEDAL: 13 letters
INATTENTIVELY
Professor Colin Ratledge, Phil Holland of Thornbury, Janet Whitehouse, Caljo Holon, Bill Eckerslyke, Brian Fleetwood, David Price, Chris Robins.
SILVER MEDAL: 11 letters
ELEMENTALITY, ATTAINMENT, TENTATIVELY,
ENTITLEMENT, ALLEVIATE, ANTENATALLY, FLANNELETTE
Ian Stokes (St Neots), Sue McCabe, Kevin Smith, Richard Saunders (Dagenham), Paul Hagan, Phil Allaker, Andrew Rolph, Donal Walsh (London), Nigel Brook, Rolf Meyer
BRONZE MEDAL: 10 letters
MILLENNIAL, FEMININITY, INFINITELY, IMMINENTLY, VEHEMENTLY, INITIATIVE
Nancy Lawson, Geoff Brambles, Becca Atkey and Mark, Will Dodwell (Taunton), Keith Albans (Sheffield), Shane Wood (Hackney)
UNOBTAINIUM MEDAL:
for longest word that beats them all if we hadn't (reluctantly) disallowed chemical names
David Wilson for HEXAMETHYLAMINE (15)
Special Mention
Rod Searle lamented MY LAXITY and suggested LAXATIVE (I fear that might have the opposite effect)
Dick Quibell embodied the idea of the task with MAXIMIZE and FILAMENT suggested illumination
David Price had TWINKLE and MANHATTAN
Stefan Kucharczyk (Leeds) let in some fresh air VENTILATE
F McLelland put forward, given 'Chris Maslanka's liking for trick questions' (really!) INFINITY (what could be longer?)
Nigel Campbell who worked with hyphens to give TWENTY-TWELVE
Rolf Meyer of Totnes had ANTE-HIMALAYAN
Nigel Brook's [KAYAK?] ANTENATALLY - A MAXIMAL ELEVEN I THINK was the longest bit of continuous prose in straight letters only.
Will Dodwell (Taunton) had: EVEN MY MILKMAN whom I MET on a HILLWALK, was struck WITH AMAZEMENT THAT THE best you could come up WITH was KAYAK.
Nigel Tasker of Bristol deserves special praise for using the the word PYRGING:, as in "I always enjoy Pyrging on Saturday."
Honourable Menschen
Tony Miles, Sarah Rutson, Alison Readman, Dave Were, Bob Costa, Alan Evans, David Cheetham, Louise Brown, Ed Williams (Cambridge), John Riddell, Eleanor Nesbitt, John Rostron, Will Jones
Nobody wrote to say that FIFTEEN is larger than 13.
In conclusion INATTENTIVELY has it, which is apt as it was the manner in which this unintended puzzle was created.

I think we can draw a line under this...