Guardian 25971 by Paul

45 comments on “Guardian 25971 by Paul”

1. Thanks, UY. Happy little puzzle from Paul with a nice mix of difficulty, I thought.

   Isn’t “old daily, perhaps?” the definition of OFTTIMES?

2. I saw “perhaps” as the definition

3. I enjoyed the puzzle, and finished it correctly, but I didn’t understand ‘upsetting’ and ‘wet and windy’. I thought ‘upsetting’ had something to do with beating you at your own game, and couldn’t explain ‘wet and windy’ at all.

   Thanks, Uncle Yap, and thanks, Paul.

4. UY, surely the FT is a single newspaper title?

5. I found this puzzle easier to solve than to parse, so I needed Uncle Yap’s help to parse 14d, 11a, 15a, 8a, and on reading this blog I realise that I hadn’t parsed 22/22 which I now think is very clever.

   My favourites in this puzzle were 18d, 20d, 19a, 2d, 1a, 23d, and 10a (last in).

   Thanks for the blog, Uncle Yap.

6. SUPERJET was very cunning. Thanks to Uncle Yap for the parsing of WET AND WINDY and to ‘Paul’ for the puzzle.

   BTW, those heading to Malaysia for a coastal holiday should check the monsoon situation first. Those heading for the east coast of peninsular Malaysia will want to avoid November-March, while those travelling to Penang, Langkawi and the west coast will not want to go in May-September.

7. A theorem is something that is proven. Why does it appear to be defined as unproven in 17d?

8. Mr A Writinghawk @7
   I think it’s a partial & lit clue, ie the whole thing is the definition. If you can’t prove your theorem your article probably won’t get published!

   Very neat cluing today – An very succinct. I was wondering if it’s the lowest word count ever.

9. Perhaps Paul is a Popperian, with proofs only in logic?

10. Thoma99, I think you must be right about the intended meaning, but if you can’t prove it then it isn’t a theorem. I think this may qualify as what a friend of mine used to call an ‘& s*it’. Nice crossword otherwise though.

    Ulaca, @9, but there are theorems in logic. @6, I will bear your advice in mind should the occasion arise, but is this some kind of coded message? Or am I missing some context? ‘The supply of game for London is going steadily up’ …

11. (Reads UY’s introduction again) Ah, I have spotted the context. Perhaps I should have read that first. Though I think I enjoyed the comment more when it appeared to be completely out of left field.

12. Mr A Writinghawk @10 – indeed, but prototypically, for the average Joe, they are associated with the sciences (taken to include maths, to be consistent with the nature of this highly unspecialised observation).

13. Flipping heck, this is all getting a bit philosophical. We’ll be talking about Popperian hypothetico-deductivism next.

    A lovely puzzle from Paul, which I much enjoyed. Gentle enough theme, plenty of smiles. GASTROPUB and SATCHEL tickled me today.

    Thanks to setter and blogger.

14. Thanks UY.

    I found this enjoyable and easier than the usual Paul (but lacking any of his trade mark risque clues).

    I don’t see the MARS = ASTRO in 5d GASTROPUB; it’s a very loose connection, unless I am missing something. The question mark is not sufficient to explain it? And ASTRO is not a word by itself.

    I agree with Mr A Writinghawk @ 7.

15. Mr A Writinghawk @10

    I agree that the idea of an unproved theorem is paradoxical, arguably ludicrous, but I thought that was part of the joke. If a theorem is so bad it isn’t even proved, i.e. isn’t even a theorem, then it’s less likely (that’s the real joke – the understatement) to get published. It’s a bit absurd, but not excessively left-field for a crossword definition, surely? There is the question mark too…

16. Gödel’s theorem is both proved and disproved isn’t it? But loads of articles have been published about it. Not sure how that helps.

17. Thanks, UY.

    Fun puzzle from Paul. It took me a while to get 21a, as the def is somewhat vague, but once I had that the rest was quite straightforward.

    I must admit the illogicality of THEOREM hadn’t struck me (the sense of the clue would have worked for ‘theory’); having got the M from the write-in EDAM the solution to 17d went straight in without my thinking too much about it.

    Some nicely misleading definitions: ‘black line’, ‘I’m going’. Amusing clues for some of the linked words: I liked 8a, 10a, 24,6, but the best is definitely the ingenious 22, 22d.

    Dave Ellison @14 misses the usual ribaldry. Quite so, although there is plenty of humour of a rather more restrained kind. But I have to say that the juxtaposition of ‘bottom’ and ‘football team’ in 18d made it difficult to get ‘arse’ out of my head…

18. Pleasant Paulian, a little easier than some, I thought. No toilet humour visible and no need for Mrs Google.

    Thanks UY; I forgot about the black line on the Underground.

    I’ll wade into the THEOREM debate – Chambers gives: ‘a proposition to be proved,’ which is, surely therefore, unproven? And The Free Dictionary gives: ‘Mathematics – A proposition that has been or is to be proved on the basis of explicit assumptions.’

    I particularly enjoyed SUPERJET, SATCHEL and THAILAND.

19. Thanks Paul and Uncle Yap.

    Lovely little puzzle. A quick solve as soon as 21 fell (which was pretty early – the crossing letters from 13 and 17 were gimmes, and once I had ?O?E???? and guessed there must be CA in there somewhere the answer just leapt out) but there was so much wit and fun all over the place the only regret was that it didn’t last a bit longer.

    The conversation above intrigues me. First of all, there is a question mark at the end of the clue, suggesting that being unproven is not the only state that a theorem can occupy. And one dictionary source has “a theoretical proposition, statement, or formula embodying something to be proved from other propositions or formulas.” I accept that strictly speaking an unproven theorem should be called a conjecture, but probably the most famous mathematical theorem, Fermat’s Last, remained unproven by anyone except Fermat himself for 358 years. Given that Fermat himself never bothered to write down his “very elegant proof” in 1637 so that others could check it, to all intents and purposes “no three positive integers a, b, and c can satisfy the equation a^n + b^n = c^n for any integer value of n greater than two” had the status of “unproven theorem” until Andrew Wiles cracked it in 1995.

20. Mitz @19: I think you’ve nailed the THEOREM question here, with a reference to dear old Fermat (actually, I reckon that of Pythagoras is probably more famous, but no matter). Strictly, an ‘unproved theorem’ is a ‘conjecture’, but some of these celebrated mathematical musings have traditionally been referred to as theorems long before their eventual proof (Fermat, four colour), whilst others were always generally known as conjectures (Poincaré, Kepler).

21. Thanks UY and Paul

    An enjoyable and generally well-clued puzzle.

    I very much agree with Mitz’s summary above re ‘theorem’ and was myself just about to introduce the term ‘conjecture’ into the discussion. The issue arose once for me (and a co-author) in a short paper published some years ago about an eccentric anthropologist’s contribution to number theory – http://www.chu.cam.ac.uk/~RGA1000/rga-9.pdf – (deliberately) misnamed ‘Fortune’s Last Theorem’.

    I failed to parse Estonia satisfactorily having seen it as possibly E(a)S(t) + (Charl)TON + I(r)A(q).

    I ticked 9a, 27a, 14d, 17d, and 23d among many pleasing clues.

22. Thank you, Uncle Yap. A lovely puzzle from Paul, not too difficult, but with a really pleasing light touch. My way into the theme was STORMY WEATHER.

    Lots to enjoy here, but my favourites were THAILAND, SATCHEL and ESTONIA — and now that I’ve seen how it works WET AND WINDY.

    SUPERJET was my last and and the other one I couldn’t parse.

23. What a lovely paper, tupu – thanks very much for sharing. Dr Fortune sounds like a great person to have a chat with over a brandy or two…

24. This was much more fun! (After a couple of weeks, I think I’m slowly getting to understand the type of mindset I need.)

    As a couple of times last week, I got the theme from clues other than 21a. Loved 9a.

    Haven’t ever seen NN for News before; am I to assume it’s similar to pp for pages and cc for copies? (Though it isn’t plural…)

25. More than one “new” would be “news”

26. Many thanks for the parsings of 11, 22, 5, and 20.

    I thought 11’s reference to the Northern line was a bit unfair on anyone living outside London, and I share Dave Ellison’s doubts @14 about the tenuous connection between Mars and astro in 5.

27. Dave Ellison @14 re Astro/Mars (5d)

    It is a bit loose but I quite like the implication that if you opened a bar on Mars (a Mars bar) it could be an “Astropub”, or perhaps actually be called “The Astropub”. Strictly speaking the Astropub should be built on a star, not on Mars, but we are quite used to the idea that “Astro-” can mean “to do with space in general”. This is probably mainly because “Astronauts” have never gone to stars, or looked likely to. (Also astronomers look at planets, moons etc. as well as stars, and don’t astrologers go on about planets too?)

    I suppose another reason why you’re going to call this pub of yours the Astropub is because the clientele is going to be mainly astronauts having a quick one for the road.

28. Printer problem produced crossword with three across lines missing, so 11a, 19a, part 25a, 6d, part 14d and 22d not printed. Nevertheless proudly completed with a bit of guesswork!

29. Tremendous fun thank you Paul. I put ‘dots’ by the clues I like and today it is a very spotty piece of paper. The East End Charlton made me laugh out lound.

    Thanks to UY too.

30. Thomas @ 99. Thanks, that seems like an acceptable explanation. I (as UY, I think) had read it as “Mars” and “bar” rather than “Mars bar”; that, along with the ? seems OK.

31. Thomas99 @8:
    Recently the term ‘extended definition’ was used here to describe what you call ‘partial &lit’.
    I think your case for THEOREM is a little weak but Paul is partial to this kind of thing.
    He did a very nice hidden answer for NASH a while ago and in this EDAM is a good example.

32. Thank you Uncle Yap for explaining WET AND WINDY, very clever!

    I have no problems with the use of Theorem as something unproven, the meaning doesn’t have to mathematically correct, just in common enough useage to get into the dictionary.

33. Fermat’s Last Theorem was unproven for yonks, even though he said he had himself found a proof for it. It was both proven and unproven, it would thus seem. But I wouldn’t personally have regarded the unproven FLT as less ‘likely’ for being so. Nevertheless, in the clue today the definition part seems fine on its own, especially with its attendant QM, and the bits up front work without a hitch.

34. Just as an aside, the above discussion made me check THEORUM using the WordWeb app. I really seriously had to laugh! It had never heard of it! Using it’s link to Wiktionary showed a similar laughable lack!

    Good stuff this internet malarky innit?

35. Thanks to Paul and Uncle Yap
    I loved WET AND WINDY and had a real “Oh I see”moment with SATCHEL, which was also one of my favourites. I parsed ESTONIA as tupu did @21 – the correct parsing is far more satisfactory. Charlton Heston simply didn’t occur to me – I was thinking of famous English footballers to start with!

36. So much for my prediction after I had finished Jambazi’s puzzle in the Indie this morning that I would be in for a second smutty puzzle when I got around to doing this one this evening. It was enjoyable nonetheless, if a little on the easy side for a Paul.

    I actually solved all of the themed clues before the gateway clue. I have no problem with a possible bar on Mars being called an astropub, especially with the question mark. HANGNAIL was the last one to fall after I finally parsed SATCHEL.

37. Boy:

    The parsing for “northern” and “wet and windy” floored me.

    1:0 to Paul.

38. Good week up to now.

    Another good Paul puzzle. I parsed WET AND WINDY but failed to parse ESTONIA.

    Thanks to UY and Paul

    By the way after all the arguments the SOED has the following:

    Theorem

    …….

    Geometry something to be proved.

39. Another typical fun puzzle by Paul.

    Nowadays he is one of the few setters whose crosswords we can easily solve without aids and far away from home. In fact, to be honest, we find Paul’s puzzles easier to complete than e.g. a Rufus. Gosh, did I really say that? Yep.

    No bums, bottoms and other smut – happily so.
    If you missed these today, please turn to Jambazi (aka Tramp) on the Indy site.

    Good puzzle.
    Even a write-in like EDAM (26ac) was thoughtful: the cheese is usually wrapped in red paper (and is mild too)!

40. Great puzzle – very enjoyable solve.

    OK – theorems – even though some defs speak of proofs it’s also normal to talk of a “theorem and its proof”, which suggests that the two are distinct.

    Pure mathematicians are not to be trusted; impure ones even less so. It’s all just theory – or is that theorems? Paul Erd?s doubted the validity of the Monty Hall problem until a computer simulation was run for him. James May verified it quite simply on Man Lab using only 300 cans of beer, heroically none of which he drunk – a far more convincing approach.

41. @SIl #39 – Edam’s supposed to come in red wax – but yes – a nifty clue.

42. Aha! Thank you, Mitz…

43. JS @41, that’s what I meant actually, the red wax coating.
    “Pure mathematicians are not to be trusted; impure ones even less so” ?
    Be careful with what you say – I belong to either one or the other ….. 🙂

44. Thomas99 @16:

    > Gödel’s theorem is both proved and disproved isn’t it?

    Er, no. Godel’s theorem has been proved, that’s why it’s a theorem.

45. Thanks Paul and UY

    Again interesting to see how we’re all different – was only able to finish this one earlier today – by finally getting WET AND WINDY instead of my fruitless attempt at justifying HOT AND HANDY :). Was also held up with the REFLOATED / OFTTIMES cross – having originally written in READOPTED.

    It was with pleasure that we were able to finally tick this one off. Many very witty and cleverly constructed clues.

Comments are closed.