## Puzzle 157 (Endless Labyrinth)

This is a Sunday Endless Labyrinth puzzle

Puzzle 157

There are two ways of doing this one: finding the intended insight, or many successive uses of trial and error (albeit of relatively low depth).

Tags: , , ,

### 10 Responses to “Puzzle 157 (Endless Labyrinth)”

1. Georgi Says:

Hmm, should the loop pass through all squares? Because otherwise it seems to me that there are quite a few solutions.

• Georgi Says:

Yup, has a nice single logical solution but only if all the squares are to be used (a rule, which you removed with your previous Endless Labyrinth).

2. TheSubro Says:

I found singularity within the rules – all numbers pinks and blues must be hit. It just so happened to require all squares – but the singularity was found without that restriction.

Ken

• Georgi Says:

What’s wrong with me, this is the second time in the last few days that I make this sort of mistake. Well don’t mind me then, I’ll just stand in the corner…

3. MellowMelon Says:

So as you might be able to tell, requiring all squares is the “intended insight” and can be the first deduction of the puzzle.

4. Alan Curry Says:

You could figure that out from the beginning? At first, I assumed that all squares would be used, and solved the puzzle that way. Then I realized I wasn’t supposed to assume that, so I did it again, and it was a bit harder. How do you know, for example, that the square between the 5 and the 4 must be used, without having done some other work first?

5. David Scherzinger Says:

After solving it the hard way, I still don’t get why the “insight” is forced by the arrangement of the clues.

Having said that, the look-ahead was never anything worse than what I’ve had to do in the other Endless Labyrinth puzzles, and I enjoyed solving it.

• MellowMelon Says:

Color the squares in a checkerboard pattern. The solution has to use an equal number of black and white squares, and every square of one of the colors is clued and must be passed through.

• David Scherzinger Says:

I was thinking something along those lines, but I discounted that line of reasoning because the grid is toroidal, and that (generally) screws up parity.

I guess it would have helped to check that the size of the grid was even x even ðŸ˜›