Well, /sci/?

>>16695486 (OP)
This is easy, because I'm not a retard.
When you say something, you note the current conditions. That conditions change afterwards does not impact what is said.
1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1.
>the fundamental difference between is and will be

1,6,3,3,1,1,2,1,1,1
1,11,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1

>>16695523
>...of the digit 0 is 1
>...of the digit 1 is 2
>...of the digit 2 is 2
But now it's used 3 times, but if you say 3, then it's only used twice. Self referential questions like this often have this "problem", I say "problem" because it's often by design.

>>16695523
>That conditions change afterwards does not impact what is said.
In this case, it does impact whether the resulting sentence is true or not. Your answer is wrong.

>>16695553
>>16695558
>two fucking retards fail to note the fucking greentext
Read, you stupid fucking twats.

>>16695486 (OP)
>1,1,11,2,1,1,1,1,1,1
Not sure about the second one.
>>16695575
You're wrong and an actual retard.

>>16695578
>gets it wrong
>calls me a retard for using the words correctly
Use better words, and learn to count.
1732111211 if I accept the syntax error, and this is only the obvious solution.

>>16695591
Lol, lmao. Kill yourself nigga.

>>16695591
Ah shit, you're right. That 11 should be in the 1 position. Only a typo thoughbeit.
>1,11,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1

>>16695545
>>16695599
Okay now show your work. You didn’t get to the answer naturally you just looked it up.

>>16695523
>>16695545
>>16695578
>>16695591
>>16695599
All wrong. You did not account for the digits in the instructions.

>>16695636
The instructions aren't in the sentence.

>>16695638
You won’t find the answer because it actually requires you to solve the problem rather than look up the solution.

>>16695642
I'm not interested in new riddle of induction adjacent word games. I'm just correcting you for your poor reading.

>>16695575
Your answer is wrong.
Name calling doesn't change that, it just further undermines your credibility.

>>16695523
You fill in the blank and then read the sentence and it's wrong. Thus, you're wrong.

>>16695646
These are mathematical systems. The fact you refer to them as word games proved you don’t understand the problem and looked up the answer without understanding how you got there.

You’re on the science board, please at least pretend to be a scientist you underage douchebag.

>>16695665
If you're the same anon, you failed at reading and spammed a bunch of posts with your own failure. I didn't answer the problem or look up the problem. I'm only here to bully you for being a dumb asshole lol.

>>16695668
Are you 5 years old? Why are you calling me an asshole over the fact that you aren’t able to solve a system of equations?

>>16695670
You're an obnoxious tool who failed to read the question and spammed the thread like a retarded barking dog. You're also almost certainly a pedophile with two posts in a row now fantasizing about underaged 5 year olds.

>>16695634
First you prove that the biggest number on the right can't have more than 2 digits. Then you prove that there at most two 2 digit numbers on the right. Then you prove there is at most one two digit number. Then you prove it can't be bigger than 13. Then you prove that it can't sit beside anything other than 1. Then you prove that it can't be anything other than 11.
>This is where you find one solution that contains eleven
Then you prove that beside 0 must sit 1. Then that beside 8,9 also must be one.
>This is where you find the seven solution
Then you do a clever bounding argument for why there are no more solutions.

Threve

Aren't you supposed to file paperwork?

>>16695486 (OP)
Any theorems about fixed points of self referential statements?

>>16695634
I just filled every slot (except 1) with one, then counted the number of 1s (so there's 10 1's). But writing 10 adds a 1 (so there's 11 1's now), and we've also increased the number of 0s, so write 11 instead. Now there's 12 1's. But we can just remove a 1 by replacing the value at 2 with 2. So now there's still 11 1's.

Just some simple deductions really. You could probably do this more formally, but I'm not skilled enough for that.

>>16695650
>name calling doesn't
Did you miss the part where I explained exactly what I did? Did it occur to you at any point that my explanation was indication that I understood exactly what I was doing?
Is this about the rules lawyering, or your inability to follow along?
>interpret "is" in the strictest sense, with the sentence occurring chronologically

>>16695916
>I explained exactly what I did?
And what you did was wrong lol

>>16695486 (OP)
second solution:
1
6
3
2
1
1
2
1
1
1

I don't know why you all overcomplicated this bullshit.

>>16696038
Also, there are infinitely many solutions.

>>16695545
First solution is wrong.

>/sci/: retarded puzzles for underaged morons

>>16696062
Nah, man, this is just good math puzzle fun.
What spoils /sci/ are anons like you who make disparaging remarks. They're not appropriate -- not here and especially not irl.

>>16696040
No there aren't. There are exactly 3 solutions.

>>16696512
>No there aren't
For every base-x for every x>10 there exists a solution of x-1 repeating after the decimal for every slot. So .A..., .B..., .C..., etc.

As there are infinitely many bases>10, there are infinitely many solutions.

>>16696594
Infinity is not a number. So there cannot exist infinitely many solutions

>>16696750
>Infinity is not a number
Countably infinitely many solutions then.

>>16695486 (OP)
one
one
one
etc...

>>16696768
one isn't a numerical digit.