`pageok`
`pageok`
 `pageok` [Puzzleblogger Kevan Choset, January 12, 2006 at 11:35am] Trackbacks Number Sequence: What's the next number in this sequence? 13, 14, 6, 7, 12, 8, 16, 9, 13, 10, 15, 11, 12, 23, 6, 1, 2, ___ (link) srg (mail): Strictly speaking, the correct answer is "any number in the world." For example, if the series were 1, 2, 3, then the next number might be 5, not 4, because the series might begin 1,2,3,5,1,2,3,5 or 1,2,3,5,2,3,4,6, etc. 1.12.2006 12:39pm (link) Apodaca: Beats me, but my initial speculation leads me to pose a separate puzzle: What's the next number in this sequence? 4, 9, 12, 24, 24, 2, 23, ___ (If you bother to guess, please indicate that it's for this one and not Kevin's question.) 1.12.2006 12:46pm (link) Mark Buehner (mail) (www): Working on it, interesting sequence. There are an inordinate amount of prime numbers. 1.12.2006 12:53pm (link) David Matthews (mail): Kevan's sequence: 18. Amazingly, thse are the numbers on my last three losing Powerball ticket purchases. What are the odds? 1.12.2006 12:58pm (link) John Armstrong (mail): I'm almost positive it's not a math answer. It doesn't show up at all in the encyclopedia of integer sequences. 1.12.2006 1:08pm (link) Mark Buehner (mail) (www): Got it, its 8. These are the jersey numbers of the Chicago Bears quarterbacks over the last 3 seasons. 1.12.2006 1:15pm (link) Cornellian (mail): There's an "Encylopedia of Integer Sequences?" Wow. 1.12.2006 1:15pm (link) steveh2 (mail): This has something to do with those numbers on "Lost", right? 1.12.2006 1:30pm (link) nombody: Kevan's Sequence: Some statistic about one of the judiciary committee members. 1.12.2006 1:36pm (link) Michael Patrick Gibson (mail): I'm guessing 13. The missing number is the 21st of the series. Divide all the numbers into sets of three, the first set being (13, 14, 6) for example. Now each set contains at least one meaningful number, the first set's meaningful number being 6. The next set has two meaningful numbers (7, 12, 8), the meaningful numbers being 7 and 8. A meaningful number is the simply the next number greater than the previous, starting with 6 in the first set. So the third set has one meaningful number, 9. And so on, until the last set. Both given numbers, 1 and 2 are meaningless. The missing number is the next in the meaningful series. That happens to be 13. 1.12.2006 1:57pm (link) Michael Patrick Gibson (mail): I mean 18th of the series. 1.12.2006 2:00pm (link) Bleepless (mail): If it's the Judiciary Committee, it probably is IQ. 1.12.2006 2:20pm (link) David Matthews (mail): Perhaps it's the number of minutes of response time each of the questioners has allowed Judge Alito; but then "1, 2" would suggest that Biden had two consecutive half-hour blocks.... 1.12.2006 2:27pm (link) MariaE81: Well, then only pattern I have found is 13, x, x, x, 12, x, x, x, 13, x, x, x, 12, x, x, x which leads me to think the next number is 13. 1.12.2006 2:46pm (link) Blar (mail) (www): It could be the number of questions asked of Alito by each of his questioners. I'm not going to take the time to look that up. 1.12.2006 3:17pm (link) Borodino: A random idea I don't have the time to track down: It could be a reference to the numbers of the amendments to the Constitution. (Organized by length, perhaps?) 1.12.2006 4:01pm (link) Iwazaru (www): Since the highest number is 23, could the numbers represent letters? 1.12.2006 4:04pm (link) Andy Ratto (mail) (www): Kevin: Every time you post a new puzzle, would it perhaps be possible if the very first comment is you posting the answer to the previous puzzle? That way, interested readers could keep up with all the previous answers without having to bookmark the previous puzzles to check back later or scrolling back through the Conspiracy history to see if the previous puzzle had been answered. Thanks for your consideration. 1.12.2006 4:33pm (link) Bruce Cleaver (mail): MariaE81: I was thinking along the same lines, but the last '12' has *four* numbers after it, not three.... 1.12.2006 5:44pm (link) Lee Stillman (mail): The answer is 16. note the last 4 in the sequence: John VI John Paul I John Paul II Benedict XVI 1.12.2006 6:50pm (link) Silicon Valley Jim: Well, It was Paul VI, not John VI (it was John XXIII before him), but it looks to me as if you're right. Very impressive job! 1.12.2006 7:03pm (link) David Matthews (mail): Nice work, Lee. Reading from the right, rather than the left, and knowing the answer, it's obvious.... 1.13.2006 10:50am (link) Kevan Choset (mail): Well done, Lee. Andy: I will indeed begin posting each day's solution as a comment to the next day's post. 1.13.2006 9:41pm (link) Andy Ratto (mail) (www): Kevan: thanks! And sorry for misspelling your name... 1.13.2006 9:59pm `pageok` `pageok`