Code breaking for treasure

I'm not a great one for putting out press releases as blog posts, but this is one I can't resist sharing. So let me hand you over to the University of Manchester's press office to discover the opportunity to crack a cryptic code and win some movie goodies in honour of Alan Turing (and, yes, the new film with Mr Cumberbatch about him). Luckily, the treasure hunt won't turn out like the infamous Masquerade book, which gave cryptic clues to the burial place of a solid gold hare, and resulted in all manner of places being dug up to the irritation of their owners and embarrassment of the publishers. Here the treasure isn't really buried (and, sadly, isn't real silver ingots as Turing is supposed to have hidden).

So, over to you Manchester U:

A new fiendishly-challenging online brain-teaser, featuring cryptic clues, has been launched by mathematicians at The University of Manchester. The online cryptography competition has been designed to coincide with the launch of the film ‘The Imitation Game’, which tells the real-life story of mathematician Alan Turing, who is credited with cracking the German Enigma Code.

The cryptic conundrum is based around a true story of how in 1940, Alan Turing converted his savings into silver ingots and buried them in Bletchley Park. In real life the silver has never been found, but for the purposes of the competition, a location has been chosen and three coded clues are there to be deciphered. The answers to the clues can then be used to find the location of the silver. Participants submit their solution and winners, who will be drawn at random from correct solutions, receive film-related merchandise kindly donated by StudioCanal, distributors of the film.

Turning, who was a pioneer of computing, artificial intelligence and mathematical biology had close links with the University of Manchester. In 1948 he was appointed Reader in the Mathematics Department and soon afterwards he became Deputy Director of the Computing Laboratory at the University, working on software for one of the earliest true computers - the Manchester Ferranti Mark 1. Actor Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays Turing in the film, also has ties to the city and The University, where he was a former drama student.

Dr Andrew Hazel from the School of Mathematics said, “Having seen our annual online Alan Turing Cryptography Competition, StudioCanal contacted us to propose a one-off competition related to the release of The Imitation Game. We were delighted to take the opportunity to share our enthusiasm for mathematics and cryptography, and to highlight the close ties between the University, Alan Turing and Benedict Cumberbatch.”

The Imitation Game Cryptography Competition will close at midday on 28th November 2014. It is free to enter and open to any resident of the United Kingdom but only one prize will be awarded per household. Full details available online.

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp...

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense...

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5. However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor...

Search This Blog