@@ -44,3 +44,26 @@ for the ideal configuration is therefore `99`. Had there been two configurations
4444group, the one with the smaller quantum entanglement would be chosen.
4545
4646What is the ** quantum entanglement** of the first group of packages in the ideal configuration?
47+
48+ # Part Two
49+ That's weird... the sleigh still isn't balancing.
50+
51+ "Ho ho ho", Santa muses to himself. "I forgot the trunk".
52+
53+ Balance the sleigh again, but this time, separate the packages into ** four groups** instead of three. The other
54+ constraints still apply.
55+
56+ Given the example packages above, this would be some of the new unique first groups, their quantum entanglements, and
57+ one way to divide the remaining packages:
58+ ```
59+ 11 4 (QE=44); 10 5; 9 3 2 1; 8 7
60+ 10 5 (QE=50); 11 4; 9 3 2 1; 8 7
61+ 9 5 1 (QE=45); 11 4; 10 3 2; 8 7
62+ 9 4 2 (QE=72); 11 3 1; 10 5; 8 7
63+ 9 3 2 1 (QE=54); 11 4; 10 5; 8 7
64+ 8 7 (QE=56); 11 4; 10 5; 9 3 2 1
65+ ```
66+ Of these, there are three arrangements that put the minimum (two) number of packages in the first group: ` 11 4 ` , ` 10 5 ` ,
67+ and ` 8 7 ` . Of these, ` 11 4 ` has the lowest quantum entanglement, and so it is selected.
68+
69+ Now, what is the ** quantum entanglement** of the first group of packages in the ideal configuration?
0 commit comments