Watching Mark solve this without SET Theory was one of the most impressive and insane things I have ever seen. This is why Mark is such an exciting solver to watch.
46:48 ... my break-in involved SET theory: . . . ... r5 + c5 = 90, then consolidate cells into the center box and subtract the center box to get r1c5+r9c5+r5c1+r5c5+r5c8+r5c9=45; from there, r5c8+r5c9 can be 4-9 (in some order) at max, and all other digits must in fact max out to hit 45. I'm thrilled to have successfully used SET theory to find a way through! Nice puzzle!
Doing set on rows and columns 4 and 6 vs boxes 2, 4, 6 and 8 breaks this puzzle wide open. Mark getting through using the high low digit logic is quite amazing.
Yes, I feel like row5+col5 vs box 5 was the intended break-in, the geometry being just right to force the maximum total down to exactly 45 with the two whisper cells in box6. But the reason I was suspecting SET from the very start was because of the video having such a title :D
Actually, I think the intended method uses SET on *column 5* (set A) versus *box 5* (set B). Just two very small 9-digit sets. Without losing equivalence between their *total values,* you can remove: 🔹 their common cells (central column of box 5) from both of them 🔹 the blue segments from *A* 🔹 the corresponding totals from *B* Then you just need to rearrange *B,* by substituting the north-east and south-west corners of *box 5* with the corresponding "blue arrows" in *row 5.* (The four corners of *box 5* act as they were arrow circles, with the corresponding *blue arrows* in boxes 2, 4, 6, and 8) You get: 🔹 just *2* cells in *A,* adding up to at most *17* 🔹 *5* cells in *B,* adding up to at least *15*
The logic you used was absolutely breathtaking, but you could have done it a lot easier by using set theory on row 5 and column 5 vs box 5. You're left with r5 c1/5/89, r1c5 and r9c5 adding up to 45 which is 4789 + 89
Yup that's how I cracked it too. The layout just screamed Set to me. It was finding the right set that took a while, and I liked Simon's approach too, which was a much smaller set.
Actually, I think the intended method uses SET on *column 5* (set A) versus *box 5* (set B). Just two very small 9-digit sets. Without losing equivalence between their *total values,* you can remove: 🔹 their common cells (central column of box 5) from both of them 🔹 the blue segments from *A* 🔹 the corresponding totals from *B* Then you just need to rearrange *B,* by substituting the north-east and south-west corners of *box 5* with the corresponding "blue arrows" in *row 5.* (The four corners of *box 5* act as they were arrow circles, with *blue arrows* in boxes 2, 4, 6, and 8) You get: 🔹 just *2* cells in *A,* adding up to at most *17* 🔹 *5* cells in *B,* adding up to at least *15*
@@Paolo_De_LevaThat's a nice approach, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't the setter's intended path. The name of the puzzle is secret crossing. From using a cross of row 5 and column 5, you get a remainder that sums to the secret. I think that's the source of the puzzle's name.
Oh wow this is way easier than the set theory I stumbled upon. I put rows and columns 3, 5, and 7 against boxes 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 then cancelled out Phistomefels set from the result and after narrowing down the common sums and digits, I was left with the same digits as your set summing to 45. As always, I was feeling pretty clever until I came to the comments. It sounds like Mark might have solved it without using set at all though which kind of blows my mind. About to watch his solve to see how.
What a surprise! Thank you Mark for this wonderful solve. I enjoyed every minute and I love the elegant way you found to resolve the crossing. Excellent stuff ❤ I want to take a moment to express my gratitude to Mark and Simon and everyone in this community. I don't chat much at all, but this place continues to be a lovely place to come when I need a sanctuary from the busyness and stress of daily life. Thank you for all that you do.
I finished in 49:56 minutes. I am so proud of solving this puzzle. I am very averse to SET Theory, mostly because I'm bad at spotting, but I was able to use column 5 and row 5 minus box 5 to get the remaining digits equal to 45. This forces the minimum by use of the German Whisper in box 6. I am so happy to have spotted. I feel like I have improved since I first started doing Sudokus. It seems like a simple SET, but for me, it was an excellent breakthrough. The rest of the puzzle was just as fun. I feel good. Great Puzzle!
Quite remarkable that Mark managed to break into this without using SET. As a few a have already mentioned, I feel like SET was the intended break-in, as it fits in with the title of secret crossing. I started by colouring box 5. I then used the equal sum lines to shift the corners of box 5 into row 5 and column 5. This gives a crossing that has a sum equal to the secret, 45 - hence (I think) the title of the puzzle. You can then highlight all of row 5 in another colour for a second set that sums to 45. Remove the common digits and you end up with six digits in column 5 (minimum sum 21) equalling three outer digits in row 5. Thanks to two of those being a domino on a German Whisper, the maximum for those three digits is also 21 (4+8+9). So you get 8 ... 9 4 in row 5, and 1-6 in some order down column 5, leaving r5c5 as a naked single 7, and the end digits of column 5 being an 89 pair. While admiring Mark's tenacity, I think it's a shame he missed the elegant break-in with SET.
If you do set theory on R5,C5, and cancel with Box 5, then you will see 6 digits that need to sum to a Secret number, and they are forced. I think it is a lovely break-in.
Thank you so much for saying so. You are completely correct. That was the intended path to find and hinted at in the title. 😊 Mark's alternative route was deeply fulfilling to watch anyways
23:45 for me using this approach. It took me a bit to figure out what sets to use, but the geometry of the lines were screaming set to me, so I stuck with it. Lovely setting!
Here is what I admired most in Mark's solve (you might be surprised): @29:31, he corner-pencilmarked *2* into the north-west *green square.* This made the disambiguation of the *6-9 pair* much easier than it was for me... Snyder's notation is a powerful tool‼ 👏👏👏👏👏👏 However, he did not use SET (Set Equivalence Theory) in the first part of his solve. I described my SET approach earlier, in a separate comment.
Rules: 03:10 Let's Get Cracking: 04:03 What about this video's Top Tier Simarkisms?! The Secret: 6x (02:46, 02:49, 06:30, 17:01, 17:04, 39:58) Three In the Corner: 1x (38:30) Maverick: 1x (01:52) And how about this video's Simarkisms?! Ah: 4x (05:26, 13:33, 30:09, 36:05) Bother: 3x (06:07, 11:55, 18:55) Hang On: 3x (07:43, 07:43, 07:43) Symmetry: 3x (06:40, 06:49, 06:55) Weird: 3x (15:13, 21:00, 26:07) Sorry: 2x (08:35, 10:55) Clever: 2x (39:02, 39:53) Bingo: 2x (30:13, 30:13) In Fact: 2x (36:11, 38:11) Obviously: 2x (06:12, 11:40) What on Earth: 1x (06:30) What a Puzzle: 1x (39:02) Stuck: 1x (13:52) Brilliant: 1x (40:14) Gorgeous: 1x (30:20) By Sudoku: 1x (32:47) Bizarre: 1x (27:50) Progress: 1x (26:13) Most popular number(>9), digit and colour this video: Fifteen, Twenty Four (6 mentions) Two (72 mentions) Blue (21 mentions) Antithesis Battles: Low (59) - High (26) Even (3) - Odd (2) Higher (3) - Lower (2) Column (12) - Row (11) FAQ: Q1: You missed something! A1: That could very well be the case! Human speech can be hard to understand for computers like me! Point out the ones that I missed and maybe I'll learn! Q2: Can you do this for another channel? A2: I've been thinking about that and wrote some code to make that possible. Let me know which channel you think would be a good fit!
I had a complete different approach. Guess it´s been the first time I thought about Simon´s "Sack of Numbers"-Method by my own. Normally I am more like Mark´s way to think so I totally apreciate to see his way of thoughts. Amazing puzzle to have 2 ways to solve - and neither is easy at first glace. 30´´ for me
Fantastic work, Mark! As others have pointed out, SET is probably the way to go and I had a feeling that might be it when I couldn’t get any traction to start the puzzle. But, I was unable to figure out what the proper SET was (thanks to others’ comments for the help 😅). The fact that you were able to solve the way you did is impressive!
This is hard. In about 1 hour I was not able to ask myself the right question and could not place any digit. However, it is a fascinating challenge. 😏👍👍👍 Whether I solve it or not, I will definitely need to watch Mark's video to learn whatever I can about his way to figure out the right questions, when no standard question seems to have an answer. Is it SET? I can't find any SET configuration... 🤔
I see Mark did not use SET. I used SET on *column 5* (set A) versus *box 5* (set B). Just two very small 9-digit sets. Without losing equivalence between their *total values,* you can remove: 🔹 their common cells (central column of box 5) from both of them 🔹 the blue segments from *A* 🔹 the corresponding totals from *B* Then you just need to rearrange *B,* by substituting the north-east and south-west corners of *box 5* with the corresponding "blue arrows" in *row 5.* (The four corners of *box 5* act as they were arrow circles, with the corresponding *blue arrows* in boxes 2, 4, 6, and 8) You get: 🔹 just *2* cells in *A,* adding up to at most *17* 🔹 *5* cells in *B,* adding up to at least *15*
Watching Mark solve this without SET Theory was one of the most impressive and insane things I have ever seen. This is why Mark is such an exciting solver to watch.
Mark approached this like a tennis player wielding a shovel in place of a racquet, yet still won the first SET to love. Genius.
*badum tsss*🥁
46:48 ... my break-in involved SET theory:
.
.
.
... r5 + c5 = 90, then consolidate cells into the center box and subtract the center box to get r1c5+r9c5+r5c1+r5c5+r5c8+r5c9=45; from there, r5c8+r5c9 can be 4-9 (in some order) at max, and all other digits must in fact max out to hit 45.
I'm thrilled to have successfully used SET theory to find a way through!
Nice puzzle!
Doing set on rows and columns 4 and 6 vs boxes 2, 4, 6 and 8 breaks this puzzle wide open.
Mark getting through using the high low digit logic is quite amazing.
I did it similarly to Mark, didn't notice there was set involves at all, was still an enjoyable solve for me
I used set on row 5 and column 5 vs box 5 and after removing equal sums I got 6 cells with a total of 45.
Yes, I feel like row5+col5 vs box 5 was the intended break-in, the geometry being just right to force the maximum total down to exactly 45 with the two whisper cells in box6.
But the reason I was suspecting SET from the very start was because of the video having such a title :D
I used lows + highs as well. Really fun solve
Actually, I think the intended method uses SET on *column 5* (set A) versus *box 5* (set B). Just two very small 9-digit sets.
Without losing equivalence between their *total values,* you can remove:
🔹 their common cells (central column of box 5) from both of them
🔹 the blue segments from *A*
🔹 the corresponding totals from *B*
Then you just need to rearrange *B,* by substituting the north-east and south-west corners of *box 5* with the corresponding "blue arrows" in *row 5.* (The four corners of *box 5* act as they were arrow circles, with the corresponding *blue arrows* in boxes 2, 4, 6, and 8)
You get:
🔹 just *2* cells in *A,* adding up to at most *17*
🔹 *5* cells in *B,* adding up to at least *15*
Fascinating. I love how different sorts of lines interact, and this was quite interesting to watch you solve, Mark. Thanks for undertaking it!
Watching this was an absolute joy.
The logic you used was absolutely breathtaking, but you could have done it a lot easier by using set theory on row 5 and column 5 vs box 5. You're left with r5 c1/5/89, r1c5 and r9c5 adding up to 45 which is 4789 + 89
Wow... and the number of digit that gives is really something.
Yup that's how I cracked it too. The layout just screamed Set to me. It was finding the right set that took a while, and I liked Simon's approach too, which was a much smaller set.
Actually, I think the intended method uses SET on *column 5* (set A) versus *box 5* (set B). Just two very small 9-digit sets.
Without losing equivalence between their *total values,* you can remove:
🔹 their common cells (central column of box 5) from both of them
🔹 the blue segments from *A*
🔹 the corresponding totals from *B*
Then you just need to rearrange *B,* by substituting the north-east and south-west corners of *box 5* with the corresponding "blue arrows" in *row 5.* (The four corners of *box 5* act as they were arrow circles, with *blue arrows* in boxes 2, 4, 6, and 8)
You get:
🔹 just *2* cells in *A,* adding up to at most *17*
🔹 *5* cells in *B,* adding up to at least *15*
@@Paolo_De_LevaThat's a nice approach, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't the setter's intended path. The name of the puzzle is secret crossing. From using a cross of row 5 and column 5, you get a remainder that sums to the secret. I think that's the source of the puzzle's name.
Oh wow this is way easier than the set theory I stumbled upon.
I put rows and columns 3, 5, and 7 against boxes 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 then cancelled out Phistomefels set from the result and after narrowing down the common sums and digits, I was left with the same digits as your set summing to 45.
As always, I was feeling pretty clever until I came to the comments. It sounds like Mark might have solved it without using set at all though which kind of blows my mind. About to watch his solve to see how.
What a surprise! Thank you Mark for this wonderful solve. I enjoyed every minute and I love the elegant way you found to resolve the crossing. Excellent stuff ❤
I want to take a moment to express my gratitude to Mark and Simon and everyone in this community. I don't chat much at all, but this place continues to be a lovely place to come when I need a sanctuary from the busyness and stress of daily life. Thank you for all that you do.
Great puzzle. I found it was really creative. Even after the set breakin using the "crossing" the puzzle had to worked on.
Thank you so much for this beautiful puzzle.
I finished in 49:56 minutes. I am so proud of solving this puzzle. I am very averse to SET Theory, mostly because I'm bad at spotting, but I was able to use column 5 and row 5 minus box 5 to get the remaining digits equal to 45. This forces the minimum by use of the German Whisper in box 6. I am so happy to have spotted. I feel like I have improved since I first started doing Sudokus. It seems like a simple SET, but for me, it was an excellent breakthrough. The rest of the puzzle was just as fun. I feel good. Great Puzzle!
What an absolutely brilliant solve by Mark! This was very difficult, and he smashed it
"But I'm not going to because I've done it already."
LOL
My goodness, that's a top tier break in if I've ever seen one.
Absolutely loved the SET break-in. Finding the break-in took just under ten minutes. Finished in 30:34. Now to see how Mark brute forced it.
Magnificent work Mark!
Quite remarkable that Mark managed to break into this without using SET. As a few a have already mentioned, I feel like SET was the intended break-in, as it fits in with the title of secret crossing.
I started by colouring box 5. I then used the equal sum lines to shift the corners of box 5 into row 5 and column 5. This gives a crossing that has a sum equal to the secret, 45 - hence (I think) the title of the puzzle.
You can then highlight all of row 5 in another colour for a second set that sums to 45. Remove the common digits and you end up with six digits in column 5 (minimum sum 21) equalling three outer digits in row 5. Thanks to two of those being a domino on a German Whisper, the maximum for those three digits is also 21 (4+8+9).
So you get 8 ... 9 4 in row 5, and 1-6 in some order down column 5, leaving r5c5 as a naked single 7, and the end digits of column 5 being an 89 pair.
While admiring Mark's tenacity, I think it's a shame he missed the elegant break-in with SET.
This was really exciting. Nice solve, Mark.
If you do set theory on R5,C5, and cancel with Box 5, then you will see 6 digits that need to sum to a Secret number, and they are forced. I think it is a lovely break-in.
Thank you so much for saying so. You are completely correct. That was the intended path to find and hinted at in the title. 😊 Mark's alternative route was deeply fulfilling to watch anyways
23:45 for me using this approach. It took me a bit to figure out what sets to use, but the geometry of the lines were screaming set to me, so I stuck with it. Lovely setting!
I was on edge too!! Wow! Great puzzle!! But somehow, my instincts told me purple was 3! I don't know why I just knew it!! hahaha
That was a heck of a solve!
Here is what I admired most in Mark's solve (you might be surprised): @29:31, he corner-pencilmarked *2* into the north-west *green square.*
This made the disambiguation of the *6-9 pair* much easier than it was for me...
Snyder's notation is a powerful tool‼
👏👏👏👏👏👏
However, he did not use SET (Set Equivalence Theory) in the first part of his solve. I described my SET approach earlier, in a separate comment.
Rules: 03:10
Let's Get Cracking: 04:03
What about this video's Top Tier Simarkisms?!
The Secret: 6x (02:46, 02:49, 06:30, 17:01, 17:04, 39:58)
Three In the Corner: 1x (38:30)
Maverick: 1x (01:52)
And how about this video's Simarkisms?!
Ah: 4x (05:26, 13:33, 30:09, 36:05)
Bother: 3x (06:07, 11:55, 18:55)
Hang On: 3x (07:43, 07:43, 07:43)
Symmetry: 3x (06:40, 06:49, 06:55)
Weird: 3x (15:13, 21:00, 26:07)
Sorry: 2x (08:35, 10:55)
Clever: 2x (39:02, 39:53)
Bingo: 2x (30:13, 30:13)
In Fact: 2x (36:11, 38:11)
Obviously: 2x (06:12, 11:40)
What on Earth: 1x (06:30)
What a Puzzle: 1x (39:02)
Stuck: 1x (13:52)
Brilliant: 1x (40:14)
Gorgeous: 1x (30:20)
By Sudoku: 1x (32:47)
Bizarre: 1x (27:50)
Progress: 1x (26:13)
Most popular number(>9), digit and colour this video:
Fifteen, Twenty Four (6 mentions)
Two (72 mentions)
Blue (21 mentions)
Antithesis Battles:
Low (59) - High (26)
Even (3) - Odd (2)
Higher (3) - Lower (2)
Column (12) - Row (11)
FAQ:
Q1: You missed something!
A1: That could very well be the case! Human speech can be hard to understand for computers like me! Point out the ones that I missed and maybe I'll learn!
Q2: Can you do this for another channel?
A2: I've been thinking about that and wrote some code to make that possible. Let me know which channel you think would be a good fit!
Add "Giddy" to the list lol
26:22 :)
I had a complete different approach. Guess it´s been the first time I thought about Simon´s "Sack of Numbers"-Method by my own.
Normally I am more like Mark´s way to think so I totally apreciate to see his way of thoughts.
Amazing puzzle to have 2 ways to solve - and neither is easy at first glace. 30´´ for me
Fantastic work, Mark! As others have pointed out, SET is probably the way to go and I had a feeling that might be it when I couldn’t get any traction to start the puzzle. But, I was unable to figure out what the proper SET was (thanks to others’ comments for the help 😅). The fact that you were able to solve the way you did is impressive!
Finished in 20:46 with help from the video.
Brilliant puzzle.
Mark is it possible so that you make an alternative solve of this puzzle with theory set, please? or even a short video?
Great solve
What a solve Sir.
This is hard. In about 1 hour I was not able to ask myself the right question and could not place any digit.
However, it is a fascinating challenge. 😏👍👍👍
Whether I solve it or not, I will definitely need to watch Mark's video to learn whatever I can about his way to figure out the right questions, when no standard question seems to have an answer. Is it SET? I can't find any SET configuration...
🤔
It was just a SET comparison between the smallest possible sets: one box and one column.
Yet it eluded me for ages❗ 🤦♂
I feel stupid...
I see Mark did not use SET.
I used SET on *column 5* (set A) versus *box 5* (set B). Just two very small 9-digit sets.
Without losing equivalence between their *total values,* you can remove:
🔹 their common cells (central column of box 5) from both of them
🔹 the blue segments from *A*
🔹 the corresponding totals from *B*
Then you just need to rearrange *B,* by substituting the north-east and south-west corners of *box 5* with the corresponding "blue arrows" in *row 5.* (The four corners of *box 5* act as they were arrow circles, with the corresponding *blue arrows* in boxes 2, 4, 6, and 8)
You get:
🔹 just *2* cells in *A,* adding up to at most *17*
🔹 *5* cells in *B,* adding up to at least *15*
Tricky. I could smell the set throry but couldnt quite crack it thqt way. 2 hours :(
10:18 for me. I immediately went for SET, which makes the puzzle a lot easier. Curious to see how Mark managed to solve it without using that.
90 minutes