(In reply to re(2): Solution (as interpreted)
by ed bottemiller)
apologies for the wording, but it did undergo a lot of scrutiny, and even then some seemed a little unsure of it.
It was difficult to arrive at something hopefully unambiguous. Charlie did pass me some comments before it was finally passed for publication.
What he has published however is not quite what I had expected. I not that he has limited himself to the number 81 as being "the lowest value base 10 square".
Note the setence below the second grid. Charlie did offer me solutions, other than 81, for which the rules were obeyed.
My solution is actually obscured somewhere on "page 2" of his print-out.
Posted by brianjn
on 2010-07-07 04:00:28