h a l f b a k e r yWhat was the question again?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Just like ordinary playing cards, except these have a thin, pre-printed film. Each layer is guaranteed to be a randomly shuffled full deck (i.e. 52 cards + 2 Jokers).
The first time a card is dealt (or picked up); the recipient must peal-off the next sheet to reveal the card to be played. (At the
end of play, a pile of films / and clashing cards provide proof of fairplay.)
If a card pealed reveals a Joker, say, and Jokers aren't in play, the card is simply discarded, and a new card dealt/picked up.
Magic Erasable Whiteboard A1 25 sheets White
http://www.ryman.co...1-25-sheets/Product
A a dry-wipe marker whiteboard on any wall. Static-cling sheets [Dub, Jan 19 2011]
Best Riffle Shuffle-based idea *Ever*
Bread_20and_20Chees...20Shuffle_20Machine
Sorry. [Jinbish, Jan 19 2011]
Riffle Shuffle maths
http://mathworld.wo.../RiffleShuffle.html
[Jinbish, Jan 19 2011]
[link]
|
| |
In my mind's eye, Top Layer - (Layer 1), say, might contain a normal deck of cards in a normal Ace-King of Spades, Clubs, Hearts, Diamonds sequence - so that they could be used in exactly the normal way - i.e. you'd have to shuffle them by hand.
The next layer (Layer 2) might contain another complete set *but* in random order (i.e. what was Ace Clubs becomes 8 Hearts, what was thr duce of clubs is the 7 Spades, say).
The key is that at any given time, the cards in play all have the same layer-n showing.
I imagined the layers would be of a similar material to the static-cling whiteboard sheets you can get{linky}. So the entire sheet (opaque), with card suit, and number is replaced for each layer.
Re: QI, No. But I would have said 6 times.(2^6=64>54) |
|
| |
//But I would have said 6 times.(2^6=64>54)//
Seems to me that the first perfect shuffle (if the cards are labeled 1 to 52), would be 1, 27, 2...and then the job is just to calculate how long card 27 takes to get back in position 27. Using X's to fill in for other cards--
(1) 1, 27 [position 2]
(2) 1, X, 27 [3]
(3) 1, X, X, X, 27 [5]
(4) 1, 7X, 27 [9]
(5) 1, 15X, 27 [17]
(6) 1, 31X, 27 [33]
Now card 27 is in the second half of the deck, in position 7, and thus ends up in position 14 of the full deck on the next shuffle--
(7) 1, 12X, 27 [14]
Now it's back in the first half so that--
(8) 1, 25X, 27 [27]
So we're back with the original sequence, so long as we start with 52 cards. If we start with 54 (2 jokers), then it works the same way until shuffle 7, which puts card 28 in position 6 of the second half of the deck--
(7) 1, 10X, 28 [12]
(8) 1, 21X, 28 [23]
And it doesn't work. Card 28 is in position 23.
|
|
| |
A deck of 52 cards is returned to order after 8 perfect riffle out-shuffles or 52 perfect in-shuffles. |
|
| |
Also, if you shuffle completely terribly 8 times in a row (or any even number of times), the pack is returned to its original order. |
|
| |
//presumably this is the difference between an in-shuffle,
or an out-shuffle//
That's right. |
|
| |
I just love this place!
Just an odd thought on a full moon, and this is what I get! Magic! |
|
| |
[zen] - your Java shuffle would work better if combined with a random 'cut' before the shuffle wouldn't it? |
|
| |
//what is the biggest number, n of sub-packs that can be riffle-combined into a single, shuffled pack?// 54 |
|
| |
You really have too much time on your hands. |
|
| |