| Difficulty: |  |
| Rating: | 42 % |
| Solved: | 33 times |
| Observed: | 0 times |
| ID: | 000THQ |
The normal Sudoku rules apply: in each row, each column, and each bold-outlined 3x3 box, the digits 1–9 must each appear exactly once.
Additionally:
Green spectral lines: Adjacent digits along any green spectral line differ by at least 5.
Yellow atoms: Around an atom, all surrounding digits are either all even or all odd. All atoms are given.
Red atomic nuclei: Around a red atomic nucleus there are always two pairs of identical digits in a cross formation (e.g., 4 4 and 9 9).
Electrons: Cells connected by a white electron contain consecutive digits. Cells connected by a black electron have a 1:2 ratio. Not all white and black electrons are given.
Tip in white:
Find out which digit is in the field at column 1, row 7.
F-Puzzles-Link: F-Puzzles link
SudokuPad-Link: SudokuPad link
Solution code: The first row
on 7. July 2026, 04:39 by RedBarchetta
I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest that Zinker was playing on 69. Look at the pairings of 6 and 9. The solution code of row 1 is independent of the two the possible solutions. 69 takes two. So while the puzzle has two solutions, there is only one correct solution code.
Now then; there is not a negative constraint IMO. Someone could post that not all black and or white dots are given and have zero dots in the puzzle and that would be logical. Indeed in this puzzle there are multiple other cells that could have a dot but do not.
Maybe Zinker logic was the use of AND. White AND Black dots instead of white or black. Who knows. I’ll go with the 69 logic which is still lazy. Take turns. Do it right.
on 6. July 2026, 14:03 by Jayem
This is my first ever comment but I feel I have to say something. I actually quite enjoyed this puzzle and up until the last four digits, it was great. I think a 35% rating is unfair, even with the deadly pattern. Now, onto the deadly pattern - I don’t think your argument works. I think you’re implying that because not all dots are given, there could be a black dot between R6C4 and R6C5 which resolves the deadly pattern. However, you could also argue that ther are white dots between R5C5/R5C6 and R5C7/R5C8 which would resolve it the opposite way. As others have said, the fairest way to have resolved it, would’ve been to just add an extra dot. Still enjoyed it though!
on 5. July 2026, 09:01 by Nagesh
It's not a Sudoku.
on 5. July 2026, 08:40 by Playmaker6174
Welp, we can all collectively agree that the puzzle is just straight up broken, regardless of how it’s resolved (with or without the negative ‘tricks’).
I honestly think it would be better to revise the whole thing again and consider how to use the constraints better instead of just placing only one-off constraints that don’t really play some role on the rest of the solve.
on 5. July 2026, 04:48 by sfield
I also had the same issue with the deadly pattern. There are already both black and white dots not present regardless of the resolution. You need to add one of the black or white dots that would resolve it. Or add the other missing black and white dots so that is the only source of missing ones.
on 5. July 2026, 02:39 by cg24
die letzte Regel ergibt keinen Sinn. wie schon erwähnt wurde, ist sie bedient ohne die letzten 4 Ziffern zu lösen
vlt wäre eine andere Formulierung sinmvoller oder Erklärung, wie die negative Regel zu verstehen ist
on 5. July 2026, 01:37 by fuxia
Thanks for the hint, Redmuunk. I really don't like this kind of "trick".
on 4. July 2026, 22:23 by Redmuunk
The deadly pattern is resolved by the final rule, "Not all white and black electrons are given
on 4. July 2026, 17:32 by mbumbee
Lovely puzzle! However, there is that unresolved bit at the end, I agree.
on 4. July 2026, 16:40 by Starlight
I also can't see how to solve the deadly pattern at the end.
Edit:
If it's the last rule resolves it then it isn't clear since that is already apparently satisfied without resolving it
on 4. July 2026, 16:24 by Chelo
Me too.
on 4. July 2026, 15:26 by fuxia
I have a deadly pattern in the end that even the negative constraint doesn't resolve.
| Difficulty: | |
| Rating: | 42 % |
| Solved: | 33 times |
| Observed: | 0 times |
| ID: | 000THQ |
