It’s probably not right, but if you take nine from six the only letter you can take away that they both have is “i”, so you get “sx.” Take ten from nine you get “ni”, and fifty from forty you get “or.” So you’re left with sx, ni, and or, which is six letters.

I can’t seem to get this one. The 0 being placed where it is throws the whole thing off. Therefore, my conclusion is that the 0 must be there for a reason. (I’m looking at patterns… or things like taking a block of 6 numbers and removing the number 9 from that block… that doesn’t work, and neither do any of the other pattern-manipulation things I’ve tried).
Can we get a hint??
Prairie

I made an adaptation to spanish language. It´s hard for me to translate it because my ENglish it´s not very goof, but it woul be something like:

“I took six from the grapevine (“vid” in spanish), a hundred and fifty from the cabbage (“col” and one was beside oneself (“Fuera de sí”. At last I had two (“dos””

789-456-123=210 then the sum of the digits is divisible by 3, so the numbers given in the problem is up to nine , so 9-3= 6!!! but what about the zero?!?! i’ll solve again maybe…

Heres another solution. Start at 6 and count 9 numbers backwards so you will cross out 7. Then start at 9 and count back 10 you will cross out 9. The 50 from 40 is -10 so cross out 1 and 0 you are left with 6 numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8

Joe| Guest May 14th, 2007 - 1:23 pmIt’s probably not right, but if you take nine from six the only letter you can take away that they both have is “i”, so you get “sx.” Take ten from nine you get “ni”, and fifty from forty you get “or.” So you’re left with sx, ni, and or, which is six letters.

Prairie Kittin| Guest May 14th, 2007 - 2:39 pmI can’t seem to get this one. The 0 being placed where it is throws the whole thing off. Therefore, my conclusion is that the 0 must be there for a reason. (I’m looking at patterns… or things like taking a block of 6 numbers and removing the number 9 from that block… that doesn’t work, and neither do any of the other pattern-manipulation things I’ve tried).

Can we get a hint??

Prairie

Prairie Kittin| Guest May 14th, 2007 - 7:35 pmHa!! I got it!!!

Roman numerals!

SIX – 9 (IX)= S

9 (IX) – 10 (X) = I

40 (XL) – 50 (L)= X

SIX

Prairie

RLP| Profile May 14th, 2007 - 9:05 pmgood going, Prarie- didn’t think anyone would get this for a couple days…

Prairie Kittin| Guest May 14th, 2007 - 10:40 pmThat was fun. It stumped me for a while! I wasn’t sure I was going to be able to get this one! LOL!!

Prairie

jason| Guest May 15th, 2007 - 6:45 amits a good think I didn’t post what I was going to say!!

Juan Luis Roldán| Guest May 15th, 2007 - 8:46 amI made an adaptation to spanish language. It´s hard for me to translate it because my ENglish it´s not very goof, but it woul be something like:

“I took six from the grapevine (“vid” in spanish), a hundred and fifty from the cabbage (“col” and one was beside oneself (“Fuera de sí”. At last I had two (“dos””

http://espejo-ludico.blogspot......-de-s.html

Colleen| Guest May 20th, 2007 - 11:45 pmI had a pretty different approach…

((6-9) + (9- 10)) – (40-50)=

-3 + -1 – (-10)=

-4 + 10=

6

This way is kind of stretching it, though.

kiki| Guest July 2nd, 2007 - 12:08 am9-6=3

10-9=1

50-40=10

3+1=4

10-4

6

theres ur solution!!!!!!!!!!

Hreljin| Guest August 28th, 2007 - 12:12 pm789-456-123=210 then the sum of the digits is divisible by 3, so the numbers given in the problem is up to nine , so 9-3= 6!!! but what about the zero?!?! i’ll solve again maybe…

Ray| Guest September 15th, 2007 - 10:25 am9 from 6 = -3

10 from 9 = -1

50 from 40 = -10

-3 – -10 + -1 = 6

swsint| Guest September 19th, 2007 - 8:43 pmHeres another solution. Start at 6 and count 9 numbers backwards so you will cross out 7. Then start at 9 and count back 10 you will cross out 9. The 50 from 40 is -10 so cross out 1 and 0 you are left with 6 numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8

Jry Herbal| Profile March 4th, 2011 - 10:26 pmSIMPLE IF YOU KNOW ROMAN NUMERALS:

SIX – IX = S

IX – X = I

XL – L = X

suineg| PUZZLE MASTER | Profile April 4th, 2016 - 5:47 pmI think it would make more sense like this:

IIIIX – IX = III

IX- X I

XL-L = X

IIIIX you got SIX, because in the other explanation you do not use ROMAN NUMERALS to describe 6.

Cool man.