arrow_circle_left arrow_circle_up arrow_circle_right
AVMA Take 2
help
Yes, it's another round of that classic guessing game - Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, Abstract [or any combination thereof]. This effort - '03/'04 should address any queries, but then again, may just serve to confuse and baffle which some might say is the point of the game. Patience, integrity and a decent search engine may be useful ....
arrow_circle_up
[INJ] Sliced diagram? NO
[Projoy] Numerical? YES *more applause from the audience*
[Software] What's the chance? NO
Prime number(s)?
Pascal's triangle?
INJ's got it.
Planck's Constant?
Please, miss, can I have another go?
Pythagorus' Theorem?
No, not a theory. How about Fermat's Conjecture?
[INJ] Itself and one? NO
[Rosie1] Triangular numbers? NO
[Rosie2] Quantum mechanics? NO
[Projoy1] Square of the Hypotenuse? N- *audience explodes into applause* NO
[Projoy2] Pythagoras no greater than two? N- *audience applauds even louder, if that's even possible* NO
I'm probably spiraling out from the core but (it goes by a number of names) -"The Golden Square"?
Phi, the Golden Ratio?
If this is right, the winner should really be Dujon.
[Dujon, Rosie] Shiny yellow maths? NO *audience shout "Colder!"*
Pythagoreanism?
Poincaré's conjecture?
Had forgotten it started with P...
(a) Perfect Number(s)?
[Software] Mathematician Philosophy? NO *a few claps from audience*
[Projoy] Ball manifolds? NO
[INJ] Something we've yet to hear from Colin Sell? NO *audience ooh quietly*
Are we in the world of geometry here?
(I was about to suggest a platonic solid, but then realised that the whole point of them is that they don't exist in the real world.)
Oh, it's not a (mathematical) proof, is it?
Can I just say, btw, that this AVMA is (a) bloody hard and (b) very enjoyable.
[Projoy] Shaping the world? YES
(Taking the other one as a question as well) [Projoy2] Demonstrating true maths? YES
Glad you like it. I still hope that it's not taking this long because I'm answering the questions wrong. Just for another hint though; one of the questions I answered NO to earlier has got something to do with the answer, but I took the question to mean the definite article, as it were, because that's what I suspect it was intended as.
Pappus' Theorem?
Getting a bit arcane.
Polynomials?
A protractor?
I know it's wrong but I have to get it out of my head. I generally think it's a bad thing to know the first letter. Leads to all kinds of weird guesses.
Does the answer include the name of a mathematician?
I was sure Software was right until I noticed the answer to the "proof" question.
Is it, in fact a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem?
[Rosie] Surface areas? NO
[Software] Maths expression? NO
[Projoy] Angle measurer? NO
[CdM] Clue in the name? YES *audience applause*
[Projoy2] Proving the square? YES *more applause*
A Pythagorean Triple?
We're there.
[Rosie] Correct, it was indeed a Pythagorean Triple!
My confusion with some of the earlier questions arose when trying to work out whether mathematics could be classed as a science or not. But by reaching the correct answer I can rest easy knowing that if any of my answers were wrong, they weren't so wrong as to block out the answer completely.

One triangular baton handed over to Rosie.
(I can't resist pointing out that although I had never previously heard of "a Pythagorean triple", I still came quite close to winning that round! Good clues.)
*can't resist pointing out that she has never heard of a Pythagorean Triple and didn't even come close to asking any relevant questions but happily embraces fresh knowledge*
3,4,5 and all that
(Projoy, Chalky) Yes, I'd agree it doesn't quite trip off the tongue in the same way that Pythagorean Triangle does though it is a quite genuine mathematical term. BTW, did you know that 3 cubed plus 4 cubed plus 5 cubed equals 6 cubed?
OK, this is ANIMAL
Human?
(Projoy) Human? - YES.
Watt?
I'll go away now.
Still Alive?
(Dujon) Mr Steam Engine? - alas, NO.
(GL) Alive? - YES. Still alive? - A separate question
In entertainment?
Fictional?
(Softers) Entertainment? - NO, and for some, not in any way whatsoever.
(Projoy) Fictional? - NO. You may have been misled by my supplementary to Gusset Login in which I had taken his question to be "Alive and very old?" This person exists.
Born before 21st December 1969?
Born before 1940?
(Gusset Login) - A fortified over-forty? - YES.
(Projoy) At least a couple of years older than me? - YES.
Begins with P?
This question definitely coloured the last round strongly, although I'm not sure for better or for worse.
(Tuj) - Won't help here - does not begin with P.
Would a wheelchair come into this equation?
(Dujon) - Wheelchair-bound? - NO
Male?
(Gusset Login) - Male? - He is.
Political?
British?
(Softers) - Political? - NO .
(Projoy) - British? - NO.
Scientific?
American?
(Softers) - Scientist? - NO.
(Projoy)- American? - YES.
An entertainer?
(Chalky) - Entertainer? - Strictly speaking NO, but see Softers' first question. *some scattered mild applause*
Sporting?
(Projoy) - Sporting connection? - NO, none known.
Professorial?
(Softers) - Not a professor
Journalist?
(Projoy) - Hacking away? - NO.
In architecture?
(Projoy) - NO, not an architect. I know very little about American architects.
Does he belong in the broad category of 'religious'
(Dujon) - Known for his religion? - NO, although he is actually quite devout. Happy Christmas, mate.
A writer?
Would this man have connection with Jazz (perhaps as a clarinet player)?
DAMN!
Please ignore that question, Rosie.
(Projoy) - Not a writer.
(Dujon) OK, if you insist. *audience turn to each other, bewildered.*
Military?
You brushed aside 'entertainer' (Chalky's query and Software's earlier reference). As I find jazz entertaining therefore my second thought.
Would this man have connection with Jazz (perhaps as a clarinet player)?
I'm a glutton for punishment, me.
(Dujon) A jazzer? - He certainly is. *audience cheers and applauds*
(Projoy) - Not a military man.
Are you really saying you don't class jazz as entertainment?
(Projoy) It can be, and the subject of this AVMA is undoubtedly grateful for the money it generates but he would not be flattered to be called merely an entertainer, unlike say a comedian, who needs an audience above all else.
An instrumentalist (i.e. not a singer)?
(Projoy) - Instrumentalist? - YES.
Plays a brass instrument?
Was this gentleman once a part of Lawrence Welk's orchestra?
(Projoy) - Brass instrument? - NO.
(Dujon) - A middle-of-the-roader? - NO. *audience splutters in embarrassed amusement*
Is the man known for his artistry with a 'free reed' instrument.
I'm just narrowing the field.
(Dujon) - Reed instrument - NO.
Is this jazz instrumentalist NOT particularly entertaining?
:-) :-)
Given Chalky's drum roll: A percussionist?
Dave Brubeck?
(Chalky) - YES, not always easy listening, you could say.
(Dujon) Someone who hangs around with musicians? - well, actually he does, of course, because PROJOY has it. It's the great DAVE BRUBECK, 89 the other day. Well persisted, Pj. Your go.
Gosh! I must clearly take more pains in future to be less entertained when I listen to Blue Rondo à la Turk...

The next is ABSTRACT/ANIMAL...
Figurative?
Animal human?
(Proj) Me too, but not everybody. Have you tried playing it? Brubeck must have colossal maulers.
Begins with P?
[Raak] Figurative? KIND OF. Not sure which is the most helpful answer.
[Rosie] Human? YES and NO, but then again, NO
[Tuj] P-headed? NO
Mortality?
[Rosie] Le Grand Mort? NO (for that would also apply to vegetable matter, I think)
Does this apply to Life in the David Attenborough sense?
[Rosie] I'm not quite sure how to interpret the question.
Incidentally, I now realise there should have been some *applause* for your "Mortality" question.
Music-y?
Does it represent a state of mind?
(Pj) penult. question - Yes, it is a bit obscure. I was knackered and not totally sober after a prolonged bout of pub piano-tuning and payment in kind.
[Chalks] Musical? NO
[Rosie] State of mind? NO
Is it an observation on the behaviour of animals, including humans?
Sentience?
[Rosie] Observation? NO, a bit less abstract than that.
[Dujon] Sentience? NO
Was it invented?
[Proj] "YES and NO, but then again, NO" was a beautiful answer.
[Tuj] Invented? YEEES, I guess so. Not in the same sense as seed drills and nuclear reactors were, tho.
To do with ghosties and ghoulies?
A theory of behaviour?
[Chalky] Grabbed by the... NO, but you're moving in the right direction.
[Rosie] Theory? NO
Fictional?
Tough start here!
Is this a human idea or construct?
I think I see a glimmer of light...
[Tuj] Fictional? YES *a single pedantic audience member (probably Breadmaster) clears his throat disapprovingly at this answer, but everyone else ignores him*
[Duj] A human construct? YES
connected with Religion?
[Chalky] Religious connection? YES! *applause*
A dietary proscription?
[Rosie] Thou shalt not scoff? NO
Nativity thingy?
[Softers] Nativity? NOT AT ALL *audience laughter*
The Koran
May Allah forgive me.
The Priory of Sion?
[Duj] In the name of... NO
[GL] Dan Brown fuel? NO
Specific to one religion?
The Resurrection?
[Rosie] Specific to one religion? YES
[Chalky] And on the third day? NO
A form of sacrifice?
Nirvana?
[Rosie] Virgins and stone tables? NO
[GL] Smells Like Jain Spirits? NO
Quick and helpful New Year recap, disregarding unhelful byways: This is fictional*, connected with religion, and the audience have reacted positively to "mortality" and negatively to "nativity".
* unless you're amazingly pedantic
(oh, and the animal part is human to some extent, but then again not at all)
A particular (i.e. specific) god?
[Duj] A specific god? YES *audience applause*
Buddah?
In the ancient Greek pantheon?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord