Thread:Oioiaussie/@comment-5116140-20120821223134/@comment-5116140-20120822021853

Question 3 of 3: Which Prehistoric Professor is Correct

Well the two dino profs have been arguing about those expansion anomalies.

Can you sort out which one is correct?

Let's see what they are fighting about.

Define the added pixels obtained in the nth expansion as PixelCount(n).

where n ranges from 1 to 32, the last expansion.

Now Professor OneStone believes that PixelCount(n) is obtained using a formula.

Therefore, if any fundamental constants in that formula got messed up, then that would explain the strange reports of 4 pixels or 2 pixels or even 1 pixel instead of the usual 3.

Professor TwoStone has a completely different theory. He recalls how the archaeopteryx is able to fly high up into the sky and obtain precise EggCounts for each dino by looking at the eggs in the Great Spinning Dino Egg Drum. Thanks to the Archae's reports, the EggCounts are known constants, and are not obtained from formulas. TwoStone asks why can't the Archae fly high over other vllages (esp. those that are expanding) and simply count how  many pixels are being added at each stage. If the archae could do that, then PixelCount(n) would not need a formula, but would be a collection of constants, just like the EggCounts.

The problem would then be that these constants are no longer being accessed correctly or used correctly. Probably due to misuse of parallel structures. (A bad practice indeed.)

So, is OneSTone correct, PixelCount(n) must be obtained using "invisible" formulas because the archaeopteryx just can't fly that high. Or can in fact the Archae see exactly how many pixels should be added at each stage, but for some reason those constants are getting mangled?

Is PixelCount(n) obtained from a formula or is it set as a constant that can be directly seen, say by the sharp-eyed archae?

I am rooting for Prof OneStone.

PS: Freely Edit this if that archae is flying to close to the scorching sun.