The New Sudoku Players' Forum

[aman]

My sudoku creation for November 2008 is called "LCM Sudoku". It was posted on http://www.chinasudoku.com/

[aman]

Another LCM Sudoku variant was invented by me in April 2008 as shown in http://nrich.maths.org/public/viewer.php?obj_id=6018

A popular sudoku variant invented by me in November 2006 is the Twin Corresponding Sudoku as shown in http://nrich.maths.org/public/viewer.php?obj_id=5477

I also designed it for the Second World Sudoku Championship 2007 at Prague.

[tarek]

A popular sudoku variant invented by me in November 2006 is the Twin Corresponding Sudoku as shown in http://nrich.maths.org/public/viewer.php?obj_id=5477

For a reminder www.sudoku.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=5066

[aman]

Thank you, tarek, for reminding me that I am also the inventor of Twin Equivalent Sudoku.

So far this variant has neither been tested in any national sudoku championship nor World Sudoku Championship. If any organiser wishes to test it for their national sudoku championship, I am willing to contribute one free of charge for his championship.

[aman]

One of my friends just pointed out that he found a so-called "Substitution Twin Sudoku" on one website. The puzzle is similar in every way to my "Twin Corresponding Sudoku" except for its name and its position in a vertical direction. This "new" puzzle was published in 2008 while my puzzle was invented and first published in 2006.

I have to thank that person for liking my "Twin Corresponding Sudoku" so much that he changed its name entirely. It won't be surprising that in the future I shall find other "fans" of mine playing similar jokes on me by pubishing my "Twin Corresponding Sudoku" under other names such as "Replacment Twin Sudoku", "Twin Replacement Sudoku", "Similar Twin Sudoku", "Twin Substitution Sudoku", etc.

[aman]

With my friends and even some strangers, I have discussed the problem of my sudoku variants popping up here and there like mushrooms on some websites, in books and some international championships. Among them, the opinion of one person, who has a deep interest in Zen, is particularly interesting.

I almost fell off from my chair when he said that such happening shows that my sudoku variants are a great success and it should be viewed as a positive development. He said that my task is to make it "more positive" by thanking whoever is interested in my sudoku concepts and encouraging him to use more of my ideas, whether on websites or in books! He said that I cannot force others to advertise for me, but others cannot stop me from advertising myself . He said I can never stop others from using my ideas, and similarly others can never stop me from trying to get the maximum benefit out of the whole situation.

Now I am putting the advice of that "Zen master" into practice to see how successful it works.

First I have to thank http://www.sudokumasters.in for using my idea of "Twin Corresponding Sudoku" in its so-called "Substitution Twin Sudoku".

I also have to thank http://wsc2008.com for designing a so-called "Group Sum" which is identical to my "Corner Squad Sudoku" in http://www.ageofpuzzles.com/Collections/CornerSquadSudoku/CornerSquadSudoku.htm except that the small clue-numbers in the "new" puzzle are circled.

An article in http://www.notelay.com/articles/did_you_know/what_is_sudoku/ has this interesting comment about sudoku: "Because Sudoku is logic-based, other puzzles could be created that use the same concept and replace the numbers with other objects, such as colours, letters or shapes."

I have used graphics, Chinese words and the alphabet for my Twin Corresponding Sudoku. Please refer to the following websites:

http://nrich.maths.org/public/viewer.php?obj_id=5518

http://www.ageofpuzzles.com/Collections/TwinSudokus/TwinSudokus.htm

http://www.chinasudoku.com/

I have to thank http://wsc2008.com for designing its so-called "Alphabet Substitution Twins". Whatever name the "new" puzzle is called, it is still identical to my "Twin Corresponding Sudoku".

Finally, I hope more people will use my sudoku ideas freely on their websites and in their books, but at the same time as the Chinese saying goes, "remember the source whenever you drink water", so please don't keep me totally out of your limelight.

[evert]

Sudoku variants – like all other abstract mathematical ideas – exist undependently from human beings.
They are not yours to claim as your own creations, and you cannot regard yourself as source.
Wasn’t it Plato who mentioned something similar?

Anyway your effort and dedication in exploring these variants ought te be appreciated.

[aman]

Dear evert,

It seems to me that you don't know what you are talking about. Let me quote the following statements from http://www.imprint.co.uk/pdf/Lakoff_Voorhees.pdf

(Begin quote)
"In this Platonic view, mathematics is a pleroma that can never be exhausted by finite human minds. Hence, a distinction is made between the world of transcendental mathematics and the mathematics that is humanly comprehensible; between what Gödel (1995) called objective and subjective mathematics. Human mathematicians are in the position of explorers and mathematical results are discoveries rather than inventions or human creations; reports on territory that mathematicians have explored." (End quote)

Many "mathematical explorers" left behind legacies which were named after them such as Taylor’s Theorem, Fermat’s Last Theorem, Wilson’s Theorem, Puiseux’s Theorem, Dirichlet’s Theorem, Ramsey’s Theorem, Minkowski’s Fundamental Theorem, Ptolemy’s Theorem, Pythagoras' Theorem, Descartes Rule of Signs and Heron’s Formula even as what argument implies, abstract mathematical ideas were not theirs to claim as their own creations, and they could not regard themselves as source.

I rephrase a statement in the above website in the following way:

Human sudoku or puzzle makers are in the position of explorers and sudoku/puzzle results are discoveries rather than inventions or human creations; reports on territory that sudoku/puzzle makers have explored."

I give an example of a discovery of mine in mathematics. For instance, when I was a small boy, I accidentally stumbled upon the following interesting fact 5x5=(3x3)+(4x4) for a right-angled triangle with sides of 5cm, 4cm and 3cm. Later when I went to secondary school, I discovered that interesting fact was an example of the so-called Pythagoras' Theorem. Then according to your argument, the so-called "Pythagoras' Theorem" was not Pythagoras' to claim as his own creation, and he could not regard himself as source. In this case, do I have the right to rename it as Henry Kwok's Theorem? Ethically, can I claim the same right as Pythagoras as being the first discoverer of Pythagoras' Theorem?

It would be chaos and utter disaster for the whole sudoku/puzzle world if every person has the moral right to rename a sudoku variant or puzzle according to his own fancy, with the result that sudoku variants or other types of puzzles each eventually turns up with more than a thousand names. Do you like to see such things happen in the sudoku/puzzle world?

I, like the early mathematical explorers, regard myself as an explorer and discoverer of my sudoku variants. I make it a policy to thank any person who has used the fruits of my discoveries, and invite all people to use my discoveries as much as possible.

There is a Chinese saying, "Whenever you drink water, please remember its source". It does not matter whether you don't know this Chinese saying or intentionally ignore me as the source of discovery of my sudoku variants. It is fair to me, to you and to all mankind to leave the final judgment of the issue to history. If anybody can come up with a documentary proof that he has discovered similar sudoku variants earlier than me, good luck to him!

Finally, I invite you to use my sudoku ideas as much as possible if you have not done so. However, please don't be afraid to keep me informed about it, as I don't charge you a cent for it ! By keeping me informed about the use of my sudoku ideas, I won't miss a single chance to thank you. At the same time, I can save less time in my current survey on the popularity and success of my fruits of discovery and exploration in the sudoku/puzzle world.

[evert]

Finally, I invite you to use my sudoku ideas as much as possible if you have not done so. However, please don't be afraid to keep me informed about it, as I don't charge you a cent for it !

I myself actually had never seen or used or thought about any kind of LCM or twin-like sudoku – under whatever name – until I read this particular topic. Maybe therefore I missed some background information for joining this topic in the first place.
Good luck with it anyway.

[evert]

Sudoku variants – like all other abstract mathematical ideas – exist undependently from human beings.
They are not yours to claim as your own creations, and you cannot regard yourself as source.
Wasn’t it Plato who mentioned something similar?

Anyway your effort and dedication in exploring these variants ought te be appreciated.

No idea where my sudden philosofical mood came from but indeed this observation was not to the point in your discussion so excuse me for the disturbance.

[aman]

Dear evert,

I appreciate your effort in bringing up the philosophical aspect of the issue. However, the main point of the issue is being the "first" in doing, whether we call the action invention, discovery, creation, exploration, research, making, designing, recognition, knowing or whatever name we like. Since the dawn of history, the recognition of being the "first" in doing has been the accepted standard practice in all areas of human endeavours including scientific theories, abstract mathematical ideas, sudoku/puzzle concepts. Thus, even though many people may have "discovered" the same theorem after Pythagoras, none of them can ever have the honour of getting the theorem named after them simply because they were not the "first" when compared with Pythagoras.

Here I take the opportunity to correct a sentence in my last message. That sentence should be written as follows:

"Many 'mathematical explorers' left behind legacies which were named after them such as Taylor’s Theorem, Fermat’s Last Theorem, Wilson’s Theorem, Puiseux’s Theorem, Dirichlet's Theorem, Ramsey's Theorem, Minkowski’s Fundamental Theorem, Ptolemy's Theorem, Pythagoras' Theorem, Descartes Rule of Signs and Heron’s Formula even as what your argument implies, abstract mathematical ideas were not theirs to claim as their own creations, and they could not regard themselves as source."

I have found that you are a reasonable person and I enjoy the discussion with you. Please don't hesitate to bring up any point whatever mood you have at the moment of discussion.