Another little game?

@MichaelT nope :)

@sumojumo Have you got the correct answer?

@MichaelT not yet, but @Caprice found such a beautiful pattern that I had to accept is as the answer. However, I am still looking for the right answer

@sumojumo 44 and 88

@MichaelT nope, I posted the answer if you are curious.

@MichaelT Yes, that pattern does exist.

43-23=20
23* 2= 46
20-3= 17
46-17= 29
29*2= 58
17-3= 14
58-14= 44
44*2= 88

@Miram indeed, there are a lot of interesting patterns that one can fit on (especially such a short) sequence. Look e.g. the answer by Caprice, which I think is pretty nice. What I was looking for was the simple(st) explanation, which is listed below. Thanks for playing Miram.

@sumojumo I did. Caprice answer is wrong because there is no mathematical consistency in finding the third raw of values.

23-20= 3
23-17= 6
29-17=12
53-29= 24
101-58= 48

@Miram you mean in 3, 6, 12, 24, 48? I think this is a nice sequence, don't you?

@Miram Haha Analytical logic doesn't care for how we feel about it. It is an invalid answer because the way the values are derived is not a pattern. It is random.

@Miram Miram thanks for explaining

@Miram I am not sure I understand this, you are saying 3,6,12,24,48 is random?

What about 3 times 2 = 6 times 2 equals 12 times 2 equals 24 times 2 equals 48?

That does not look random to me.

@sumojumo


But that set is not related to the previous set at all. Unless you apply random calculations. There is no logical pattern.

Observe how they derived the set.

23-20= 3
23-17= 6
29-17=12
53-29= 24
101-58= 48

@sumojumo a logical pattern would look like this:

23-20= 3
23-17= 6
29-17=12
[b]29-53=-24[/b]
53-29= 24
53-101=-48
101-53= 48
101- some other value
How you calculate and pick values has be consistent otherwise it is not a pattern. It is random.

@Miram those numbers are related to the original sequence, they are exactly the difference between successive elements.

@sumojumo Not really. The elements aren't being calculated successively but randomly. Just try to solve it her way on your own and you'll understand what I mean.

@Miram 😃, oh dear lord, yes I missed it, the next two numbers should be 53 and 106 based on that system. Ok, now I see, thank you for catching this one. I think the pattern surprised me, so I did not check thorougly.