@Brian cool! tho it was just mainly mark reed who saw it first and brought it here

wait a minute i thought the intersections only count if they are on an integer value??

why is there a 379.5 in there?

if u r counting intersections from anywhere within the day then im pretty sure that "critical days" would appear more often than what the problem statement intends

for example, the 23-day graph intersects at 23/2 * 10 = 115, and the 33-day graph intersects at 33/2 * 7 = 115.5. Assuming that the birthdate is at 12 AM (not entirely likely but just assume so for the sake of argument), then these two intersections technically occur in the same day and would constitute a double critical day

but this would obviously not be covered by any of 322 379.5 462 or 10,626

does anyone else agree with my viewpoint here or am i going crazy

cuz this kind of logic would make the problem much harder, as we would then have to detect when the intersections have the same integer value or something along the lines of that

honestly it probably still occurs in cycles but u get my point

another example would be 23/2 * 11 = 126.5 and 28/2 * 9 = 126 for the 23-day and 28-day periodicities

but maybe smth like 28/2 * 13 = 182 and 33/2 * 11 = 181.5 wont count becuz 181.5 occurs within the 181th day while the 182 occurs exactly at the start of the next day, the 182th day. then that also depends on the birthtime within the birthdate, becuz if the person was born after the halfway mark (12 PM), then 181.5 and 182 would be on the same day. for example, if the person was born on 5 PM then 181.5 would refer to 5 AM on a certain day, while 182 would refer to 5PM on that same day

@LdBeth omw to new dialect that has all those glyphs, definitelyᗕ sort up and ᗒ sort down

Terminology question, how do you express the idea that 'foo' 'bar' 'spam' and '123' '456' '7890' have the same number of items and each of their items have the same number of items too? It seems insufficient to say they have the same "shape", because e.g. 'foo' 'bar' 'spam' ≡⍥⍴ '123' '456' '789' is true too.

That's a good word, thanks!

@AidenChow You're not crazy... at least this doesn't indicate so, if you are. :) I think the 379.5 is there because they tried to keep the calculation of the pairwise periods relatively straightforward, but introducing the fraction does rather muddle up the whole problem statement.

I think it works, though. If you just use the numbers as given the result is that you are assumed to have downward critical days on the day after the between-day crossing in the odd cycles. So day 115 isn't a double because the intellectual critical on 115.5 rounds to 116, but day 380 is a double because both cycles cross at 379.5.

@RubenVerg How about monadic < and > or maybe more precise, ≤ and ≥ for that?