Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, dhkendall, trainman, econgator

seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 4410
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by seaborgium » Wed Feb 15, 2017 5:25 pm

MarkBarrett wrote:
SpoilerShow
$50,000
Though it might be difficult to operate, if the iPod Nano actually measured a nanometer across, it would be how wide?
A: 1 thousandth of a meter
B: 1 millionth of a meter
C: 1 billionth of a meter
D: 1 trillionth of a meter
Next:
SpoilerShow
During this week the players get a 4th lifeline to Cut the question and have it replaced with another one of the same value. That is what Josh did. The correct answer was: C: 1 billionth of a meter
I wonder whether this decision reflected
SpoilerShow
ignorance of what the "nano" prefix means
, or
SpoilerShow
a misunderstanding of the question as requiring knowledge of the iPod Nano's proportions.
If the latter,
SpoilerShow
he could/should have realized that no iPod has proportions of 1:1,000 or 1:1,000,000. I'm going to assume he just didn't know what "nano" meant.

User avatar
Volante
Harbinger of the Doomed Lemur
Posts: 4915
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Volante » Wed Feb 15, 2017 6:15 pm

IronNeck wrote:Amusingly, the question he skipped (which simply required knowing what the prefix nano meant, very commonly used in science) was probably the easiest and quickest one.
How often were you exposed to 'nano-' by age 13, though?

seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 4410
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by seaborgium » Wed Feb 15, 2017 6:44 pm

Volante wrote:
IronNeck wrote:Amusingly, the question he skipped (which simply required knowing what the prefix nano meant, very commonly used in science) was probably the easiest and quickest one.
How often were you exposed to 'nano-' by age 13, though?
I'd heard of a nanosecond (and what it meant) before my age was double digits.

MinnesotaMyron
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:53 pm

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by MinnesotaMyron » Wed Feb 15, 2017 6:47 pm

seaborgium wrote:
MarkBarrett wrote:
SpoilerShow
$50,000
Though it might be difficult to operate, if the iPod Nano actually measured a nanometer across, it would be how wide?
A: 1 thousandth of a meter
B: 1 millionth of a meter
C: 1 billionth of a meter
D: 1 trillionth of a meter
Next:
SpoilerShow
During this week the players get a 4th lifeline to Cut the question and have it replaced with another one of the same value. That is what Josh did. The correct answer was: C: 1 billionth of a meter
I wonder whether this decision reflected
SpoilerShow
ignorance of what the "nano" prefix means
, or
SpoilerShow
a misunderstanding of the question as requiring knowledge of the iPod Nano's proportions.
If the latter,
SpoilerShow
he could/should have realized that no iPod has proportions of 1:1,000 or 1:1,000,000. I'm going to assume he just didn't know what "nano" meant.
SpoilerShow
I agree. It took me a couple re-reads to work out that "measured...across" and "how wide" were synonyms. From there it was easy.

IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 981
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by IronNeck » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:48 pm

Volante wrote:
IronNeck wrote:Amusingly, the question he skipped (which simply required knowing what the prefix nano meant, very commonly used in science) was probably the easiest and quickest one.
How often were you exposed to 'nano-' by age 13, though?
I was probably 8 or 9 by the time I learned that "nano" was 10^-9. That's besides the point, though.

The 13 year-old on the show knew or reasoned out far more difficult questions that I would NOT have gotten at either 13 or even 23. He has played very well. So in that sense it's amusing that he skipped what was the easiest one of the lot.

User avatar
MarkBarrett
JBOARDIE OF THE MONTH!
Posts: 6424
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by MarkBarrett » Thu Feb 16, 2017 4:29 pm

The 2/16 show opened with Josh Darrow returning to see this question:
SpoilerShow
$250,000 and no lifelines remaining
Image
Next:
SpoilerShow
Josh did not want to risk a guess even though he felt he could eliminate Denmark and Norway as being Scandinavian and too north. He walked with his $100,000 although of course Chris had him make a guess for fun. Josh said, "Netherlands" and would have been correct.
Next:
SpoilerShow
Uma Upamaka began play and did not use a lifeline until the $10,000 question.

In order to boast that their age is a prime number, a math-loving nonagenarian must be how old?
A: 91
B: 93
C: 97
D: 99
Next:
SpoilerShow
Uma did not know and would not/did not/could not figure it out, so used the CUT lifeline to play a new question. The correct answer was of course C: 97 and that was the one she thought it was not.
Next:
SpoilerShow
I've added these extra lines just to make it less obvious that Josh walked on the first question he saw. Uma knew the replacement Q for 10K and got the 20K one after using her 50:50 so she will return tomorrow with two lifelines remaining.

IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 981
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by IronNeck » Thu Feb 16, 2017 4:52 pm

MarkBarrett wrote:The 2/16 show opened with Josh Darrow returning to see this question:
SpoilerShow
$250,000 and no lifelines remaining
Image
Next:
SpoilerShow
Josh did not want to risk a guess even though he felt he could eliminate Denmark and Norway as being Scandinavian and too north. He walked with his $100,000 although of course Chris had him make a guess for fun. Josh said, "Netherlands" and would have been correct.
SpoilerShow
Given the show's aversion to parting with prize money, I'm surprised the $250k clue ended up being reasonable. (I knew it cold) I was rooting for Josh to win a huge sum, too. Oh well, $100k is still an excellent haul, and very rare nowadays.

Also, I was probably much worse at trivia than Uma when I was in junior high, but I would have gotten that prime number question when I was 8 years old, let alone 13-14. That's because it's not trivia.

User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 4955
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by alietr » Thu Feb 16, 2017 4:56 pm

SpoilerShow
Seriously. Leiden was an instaget. I would have doubled over laughing if I saw that as a $250K.

User avatar
triviawayne
Got a Congratulations Email!
Posts: 734
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 9:50 pm

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by triviawayne » Thu Feb 16, 2017 6:41 pm

I've taken notice both kids weeks have been really heavy on the math questions
Total game show career losings = $171,522

MinnesotaMyron
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:53 pm

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by MinnesotaMyron » Thu Feb 16, 2017 6:56 pm

triviawayne wrote:I've taken notice both kids weeks have been really heavy on the math questions
Indeed. I suppose the contestant test selects for that. And speaking of which:
MarkBarrett wrote:
Next:
SpoilerShow
Uma Upamaka began play and did not use a lifeline until the $10,000 question.

In order to boast that their age is a prime number, a math-loving nonagenarian must be how old?
A: 91
B: 93
C: 97
D: 99
Next:
SpoilerShow
Uma did not know and would not/did not/could not figure it out, so used the CUT lifeline to play a new question. The correct answer was of course C: 97 and that was the one she thought it was not.
SpoilerShow
93 and 99 I can cast out threes to quickly see they aren't prime, but what's the quick way to know that 91 isn't? Maybe (49x2)-7? Is there a trickier way?

Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1252
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Golf » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:06 pm

MinnesotaMyron wrote:
SpoilerShow
93 and 99 I can cast out threes to quickly see they aren't prime, but what's the quick way to know that 91 isn't? Maybe (49x2)-7? Is there a trickier way?
SpoilerShow
Threes are obvious, fives are obvious, next step is to divide by 7. Done.

Not real hard regardless of age to divide by all odd numbers until reaching the halfway point. But perhaps that's not the obvious way to solve this simply?

User avatar
econgator
Let's Go Mets!
Posts: 6745
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by econgator » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:42 pm

Golf wrote:
MinnesotaMyron wrote:
SpoilerShow
93 and 99 I can cast out threes to quickly see they aren't prime, but what's the quick way to know that 91 isn't? Maybe (49x2)-7? Is there a trickier way?
SpoilerShow
Threes are obvious, fives are obvious, next step is to divide by 7. Done.

Not real hard regardless of age to divide by all odd numbers until reaching the halfway point. But perhaps that's not the obvious way to solve this simply?
That's it. Odds can't have an even factor, so work your way up the odds like you said.

IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 981
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by IronNeck » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:43 pm

Golf wrote:
MinnesotaMyron wrote:
SpoilerShow
93 and 99 I can cast out threes to quickly see they aren't prime, but what's the quick way to know that 91 isn't? Maybe (49x2)-7? Is there a trickier way?
SpoilerShow
Threes are obvious, fives are obvious, next step is to divide by 7. Done.

Not real hard regardless of age to divide by all odd numbers until reaching the halfway point. But perhaps that's not the obvious way to solve this simply?
SpoilerShow
Your method is fine. You only need to test numbers (at most) up to the whole square root of the number. That would mean up to 9 in this case, which is divisible by 3, which was already tested. So 7 is literally the last prime divisor one has to look at. And voila, 13*7= 91

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 8038
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Bamaman » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:16 pm

SpoilerShow
It is made easier as it obviously isn't divisible by 3 or 5.

User avatar
triviawayne
Got a Congratulations Email!
Posts: 734
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 9:50 pm

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by triviawayne » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:47 pm

IronNeck wrote:
Golf wrote:
MinnesotaMyron wrote:
SpoilerShow
93 and 99 I can cast out threes to quickly see they aren't prime, but what's the quick way to know that 91 isn't? Maybe (49x2)-7? Is there a trickier way?
SpoilerShow
Threes are obvious, fives are obvious, next step is to divide by 7. Done.

Not real hard regardless of age to divide by all odd numbers until reaching the halfway point. But perhaps that's not the obvious way to solve this simply?
SpoilerShow
Your method is fine. You only need to test numbers (at most) up to the whole square root of the number. That would mean up to 9 in this case, which is divisible by 3, which was already tested. So 7 is literally the last prime divisor one has to look at. And voila, 13*7= 91
Not quite

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xkbQDEXJy2k
Total game show career losings = $171,522

User avatar
Vermonter
2003 College Champion
Posts: 1862
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 4:57 pm

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Vermonter » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:18 pm

Golf wrote:
MinnesotaMyron wrote:
SpoilerShow
93 and 99 I can cast out threes to quickly see they aren't prime, but what's the quick way to know that 91 isn't? Maybe (49x2)-7? Is there a trickier way?
SpoilerShow
Threes are obvious, fives are obvious, next step is to divide by 7. Done.

Not real hard regardless of age to divide by all odd numbers until reaching the halfway point. But perhaps that's not the obvious way to solve this simply?
SpoilerShow
You don't even have to get to the halfway point – just to the "square root" point.
Hate bad wagering? Me too. Join me at The Final Wager.

User avatar
MarkBarrett
JBOARDIE OF THE MONTH!
Posts: 6424
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by MarkBarrett » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:59 pm

Uma Upamaka returned on the 2/17 show and faced this question:
SpoilerShow
$30,000
Image
Next:
SpoilerShow
Image
Next:
SpoilerShow
Image
She left with $5,000 and her +1 unused. Yeah, thanks a lot audience.

bomtr
Just a Man Like Any Other
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:45 pm

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by bomtr » Fri Feb 17, 2017 8:43 pm

never ask the audience about geography. americans don't know shit about geography.

IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 981
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by IronNeck » Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:06 pm

Yikes. And I thought I was bad at geography. (Knew that one, though, and any adult should immediately be able to disqualify A and D)

Do you think some of the audience members might have been messing with her, though?

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 8038
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Millionaire 2016-17 Season Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Bamaman » Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:08 pm

Unless she did something to piss everyone off, I can't imagine why.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests