Jelly, 12 bytes
L!_UÆ¡$œ?J’U
Try it online!
Explanation
We can basically see the two lists (the input and the output) as encoding an integer; the input encodes an integer in factorial base, and the output encodes an integer as a permutation. Luckily, Jelly has builtins that are already very ...
@JonathanAllan You may create a nice puzzle solver - for e.g. a stenography solver which finds the hidden letters to make a meaningful sentence. I guess you have worked on Enigma as well(I remember lurking in your repo days back) ;)
As you say, you are implementing a type of Douglas Engel's puzzle, an "Enigma". Given the colour set and the fact that you are ignoring the orientation of the triangular wedges ("corners" in twisty puzzle lingo) in your implementation makes it a either a "Turnstile" or "Avenger" (I believe one wi...
@JonathanAllan It's looping through the given array 9999ṃ[9,0,2,1] gives [0, 9, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2] while 9998m[9,,0,2,1] gives [0,9,2,1,1,2,0]. Essentially it increments the starting digit by one each time you increase the m[].
(got it about 2 arguments) My preliminary conclusion is that this is a slightly buggy way to produce (blank). Most inputs I tried work flawlessly, but ones with numbers seem to produce numbered error codes.
Two numbers go at the $?$s, what are they and why?
$733,\space \space 716,\space \space 645,\space \space 565,\space \space 324,\space \space 276,\space \space 77,\space \space 75,\space \space 64,\space \space 56,\space \space ?,\space \space ?$
Hints
and another thing, @boboquack, ... . . . ... that i so much enjoy about 3 gates and a drop of acid is that it involves only 3 gates and a drop of acid, and still is a fine puzzle. (okay, okay, I'll give it a break, just didn't slip that in last time)
@Matt perhaps I'll add a worksheet/wiki-answer to the puzzle. It would mention things like video frame rate ~= 25/sec, minimum audible frequency ~= 20 cycles/sec, maximum typing speed ~= 10 keys/sec, maximum spoken syllables/sec ~= 15/sec
Thanks to your mentioning brain waves, most of those could be included too! All these fundamental rates are in the same range for humans.
If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense; nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't, and contrary-wise what it is it wouldn't and what it wouldn't be it would, you see?
it's not that I'm worried about being sniped, it's that I really want to know the answer for completeness' sake, and I don't think anyone else is after it right now
I don't understand physics. :( I mean, I like to watch documentaries, read books/magzines about it, show interest in things related to physics, but I can't think about it umm mathematically..or say theoretically with sorts of equations and all. I will chose to die instead of solving a huge integration/derivative based equation or may be drawing a graph based on it :D
@Techidiot , I don't get much pleasure from cranking through equations but i do from working out graphs somewhat intuitively. A friend thinks i can "sculpt" functions.
I have no idea how they work. I see your diagrams, I upvote it for the artistic work behind it and that's it. I can't dare to solve however easier they might be :D
To see how any formula was written in any question or answer, including this one, right-click on the expression it and choose "Show Math As > TeX Commands". (When you do this, the '$' will not display. Make sure you add these. See the next point.)
For inline formulas, enclose the formula in $......
(And I'm not at all serious about MathJax being for making us feel like losers. Good luck finding anyone here more MathJax-happy. Some are tied, to be sure.)