>>12752221>The only guys that know the formula seem to be the kind that are obsessed with math olympiads like IMO and learn a bunch of very specialized theoremsThe sad thing is, that's not even true. It potentially has some use in daily life. For example if you have two type of things, one worth 84$ and one worth 85$, then you can predict that you cannot trade them for something worth 6971$ because the amounts won't match. Or if you have two pieces of lumber, one that is 84 inches and one that is 85 inches, you can predict that you can't stack them smoothly all the way to a roof at 6971 inches.
This problem was famously established by mathematician Ferdinand Georg Frobenius 150 years ago. It's called the Frobenius coin problem. In his version he simply used coins. If you have coins with a value of X and coins with a value of Y, what's the most expensive thing that you can't buy with exact change? It's a simple and intuitive approach, people read this and understand the problem immediately and they can start learning some math.
Meanwhile the person who wrote the OP picture took this 150 years old problem, which was already fine, and completely fucked it up. They fucked it up for the purpose of making it "harder than it is", to intentionally make knowledge less accessible with bad english syntax, and they managed to make this utterly banal problem look like it's highly specific nerd trivia.
