Number Puzzles

[AdamKadmon43]

If:
2+3=10
7+2=63
6+5=66
8+4=96

Then 9+7= ????

(no fair answering if you read it in Marilyn Savant's column).

[just4mefc]

If:
2+3=10
7+2=63
6+5=66
8+4=96

Then 9+7= 144

and no I didn't cheat :-)

I won't say how I got there so others may play along

[Long Duck Dong]

yeah 144.....

lol I failed maths at school,.... badly..... but logistical shit is something that I excel at

[DuckiesDarling]

I had to ask Duck but then I hate math, give me a spreadsheet and accounting I rock. Easy to see once you realize you have to figure out WHY the first pair equals something and then apply it to the rest to prove the truth of your logic.

Not too proud to admit I got it but only after a bit of help on how to get it :)

[just4mefc]

takes 3 men 3 days to dig 3 holes... how long will it take 1 man to dig 1/2 a hole?

[Long Duck Dong]

looks at just4....... ROFLMAO........no comment

[Canticle]

takes 3 men 3 days to dig 3 holes... how long will it take 1 man to dig 1/2 a hole?

Depends upon the size of the hole he is being paid to dig?

[Canticle]

If:
2+3=10
7+2=63
6+5=66
8+4=96

Then 9+7= ????

(no fair answering if you read it in Marilyn Savant's column).



Yeah 144....that's a good one.

[AdamKadmon43]

If:
2+3=10
7+2=63
6+5=66
8+4=96

Then 9+7= 144

and no I didn't cheat :-)

I won't say how I got there so others may play along

VERY GOOD.

[AdamKadmon43]

yeah 144.....

lol I failed maths at school,.... badly..... but logistical shit is something that I excel at

VERY GOOD LDD.

[just4mefc]

Depends upon the size of the hole he is being paid to dig?

Well that WOULD be true, but in reality there is no such thing as 1/2 a hole

:bigrin:

[darkeyes]

Well that WOULD be true, but in reality there is no such thing as 1/2 a hole

:bigrin:

yea ther is..haff a hole is a haff.. tee hee..me jus a lil smart arse..:tong:

[Wrenn]

There may not be such a thing as half a hole but there is such a thing as half a whole. Isn't there?

[Canticle]

Well that WOULD be true, but in reality there is no such thing as 1/2 a hole

:bigrin:


HeHe I know :bigrin: because any hole that was dug, would be entire unto itself............unless the worker had been contracted to dig a hole, that was very specifically a certain depth and width. If, by the end of one day, he'd only dug half way across the measured width and dug down, to only half of the required depth....then.....going by his contract....he would have dug....half a hole. ;)

Or...as Wrenn puts it.....half a whole! :)

[just4mefc]

Well all very true, there is 1/2 a whole and as Canticle said a hole is a hole in and of itself. On a different note. If I had given actual measurements the answer would still be wrong. Let me explain a bit. Whenever you have more then one person working you wind up with and exponential result. So 3 men would actually accomplish more then the sum of 3 workers. Therefore if you hire only one worker you would get less then 1/2 day of work :tongue:

See I can be a smart arse too ;)

[Canticle]

Well all very true, there is 1/2 a whole and as Canticle said a hole is a hole in and of itself. On a different note. If I had given actual measurements the answer would still be wrong. Let me explain a bit. Whenever you have more then one person working you wind up with and exponential result. So 3 men would actually accomplish more then the sum of 3 workers. Therefore if you hire only one worker you would get less then 1/2 day of work :tongue:

See I can be a smart arse too ;)

LOL.........and I guess the different interpretations could go on....ad infinitum....:bigrin: :tong::bigrin:

I have a puzzle, which everyone gets wrong, but I'll keep it for another time. One my dad used to tease us with when we were children.

[just4mefc]

LOL.........and I guess the different interpretations could go on....ad infinitum....:bigrin: :tong::bigrin:

I have a puzzle, which everyone gets wrong, but I'll keep it for another time. One my dad used to tease us with when we were children.

Just another female tease ;)

[Canticle]

Just another female tease ;)

Nah, not my style, never has been, so I'd better post this puzzle, which is so very simple, it's not really a puzzle at all, but numbers are involved.


If there are two ducks, in front of a duck, two ducks, behind a duck and a duck in the middle. How many ducks are there?


Blame my Dad...LOL!!!

[BareHunter45]

The minimum would be 5 (Assuming each statement can use the same ducks).

Bill

[Canticle]

The minimum would be 5 (Assuming each statement can use the same ducks).

Bill

LOL....We'll have to wait and see Bill....:bigrin:;):tong:

[Long Duck Dong]

The minimum would be 5 (Assuming each statement can use the same ducks).

Bill

the minimun would be 3 not 5....

do not add the numbers together..... its a logistic location puzzle

If there are two ducks, in front of a duck, two ducks, behind a duck and a duck in the middle. How many ducks are there?

1d 2d 3D = If there are two ducks, in front of a duck

1D 2d 3d = two ducks, behind a duck

1d 2D 3d = and a duck in the middle.

[Canticle]

the minimun would be 3 not 5....

do not add the numbers together..... its a logistic location puzzle

If there are two ducks, in front of a duck, two ducks, behind a duck and a duck in the middle. How many ducks are there?

1d 2d 3D = If there are two ducks, in front of a duck

1D 2d 3d = two ducks, behind a duck

1d 2D 3d = and a duck in the middle.


You got it. It's a simple puzzle. Amazing how many people argue that there must be 7......or 5

[DuckiesDarling]

Not to jack Adam's thread but here is one...


There are two kinds of people on a mysterious island. There are so-called Honestants who speak always the truth, and the others are Swindlecants who always lie.
Three fellows (A, B and C) are having a quarrel at the market. A gringo goes by and asks the A fellow: "Are you an Honestant or a Swindlecant?" The answer is incomprehensible so the gringo asks B: "What did A say?" B answers: "A said that he is a Swindlecant." And to that says the fellow C: "Do not believe B, he is lying!" Who is B and C?

[Long Duck Dong]

since I know the answer and we discussed it...... I will not reveal that a is b's boyfriend and c's secret lover, .... and the reason why A mumbled, is he had a mouth full of cum and could not speak :tong::tong::tong:

[Canticle]

Not to jack Adam's thread but here is one...


There are two kinds of people on a mysterious island. There are so-called Honestants who speak always the truth, and the others are Swindlecants who always lie.
Three fellows (A, B and C) are having a quarrel at the market. A gringo goes by and asks the A fellow: "Are you an Honestant or a Swindlecant?" The answer is incomprehensible so the gringo asks B: "What did A say?" B answers: "A said that he is a Swindlecant." And to that says the fellow C: "Do not believe B, he is lying!" Who is B and C?

I guess someone will work out this one, sometime. it's got me foxed.

[Canticle]

since I know the answer and we discussed it...... I will not reveal that a is b's boyfriend and c's secret lover, .... and the reason why A mumbled, is he had a mouth full of cum and could not speak :tong::tong::tong:


Ah, now I get it. Well, it's a puzzle which is way off beam, on all three answers. Way off beam.

[DuckiesDarling]

What LDD posted was a joke, and nothing to do with the puzzle :)

[Canticle]

What LDD posted was a joke, and nothing to do with the puzzle :)

Still way off beam.

[DuckiesDarling]

Logic is never way off beam. It's a logic puzzle and easy to figure out if you have a logical brain.

[Canticle]

Logic is never way off beam. It's a logic puzzle and easy to figure out if you have a logical brain.

I do have a logical brain. Way off beam, second time around referred to something else. Plus, there are many different aspects to logic....sections and sub-sections, compartments and areas which go off at a tangent, to what is normally deduced, to be logic. Sometimes logic itself, is totally illogical and defies explanation.



WHAT IS

2 + 2 =
4 + 4 =
8 + 8 =
16 + 16 =

Pick a number between 12 and 5

Which number did you choose

[Long Duck Dong]

I do have a logical brain. Way off beam, second time around referred to something else. Plus, there are many different aspects to logic....sections and sub-sections, compartments and areas which go off at a tangent, to what is normally deduced, to be logic. Sometimes logic itself, is totally illogical and defies explanation.



WHAT IS

2 + 2 =
4 + 4 =
8 + 8 =
16 + 16 =

Pick a number between 12 and 5

Which number did you choose

DD asked a simple logistic puzzle..... you stated that you were outfoxed......

the answer to DD's puzzle is simple, a person can either answer it or not.....
so using the same logistics....

you state you have a logistical mind, yet you can not solve the puzzle....
a) you are telling the truth about a logistical mind
b) you are telling the truth about being outfoxed
c) only one of the statements can be true......

logically if only one of the statements can be true... the other can not be.... and that would mean........ think about it...:tong::tong::tong:

[Canticle]

DD asked a simple logistic puzzle..... you stated that you were outfoxed......

the answer to DD's puzzle is simple, a person can either answer it or not.....
so using the same logistics....

you state you have a logistical mind, yet you can not solve the puzzle....
a) you are telling the truth about a logistical mind
b) you are telling the truth about being outfoxed
c) only one of the statements can be true......

logically if only one of the statements can be true... the other can not be.... and that would mean........ think about it...:tong::tong::tong:

You didn't read my words. The hunt is not on and the game is not afoot. Riddlle-me-ree or not.....there is more to the puzzle than the simple deduction. Those who tell the truth and tell no lie, sleep soundly, as shall I.

Goodnight.

Canticle

[Canticle]

Not to jack Adam's thread but here is one...


There are two kinds of people on a mysterious island. There are so-called Honestants who speak always the truth, and the others are Swindlecants who always lie.
Three fellows (A, B and C) are having a quarrel at the market. A gringo goes by and asks the A fellow: "Are you an Honestant or a Swindlecant?" The answer is incomprehensible so the gringo asks B: "What did A say?" B answers: "A said that he is a Swindlecant." And to that says the fellow C: "Do not believe B, he is lying!" Who is B and C?

''Who is B and C?''

You said three fellows were arguing. Therefore, logically, should this not read ''Who are B and C?''......????

[just4mefc]

Not to jack Adam's thread but here is one...


There are two kinds of people on a mysterious island. There are so-called Honestants who speak always the truth, and the others are Swindlecants who always lie.
Three fellows (A, B and C) are having a quarrel at the market. A gringo goes by and asks the A fellow: "Are you an Honestant or a Swindlecant?" The answer is incomprehensible so the gringo asks B: "What did A say?" B answers: "A said that he is a Swindlecant." And to that says the fellow C: "Do not believe B, he is lying!" Who is B and C?

A is an honestant (with mouth full of cum)
B is a swindlecant
C is an honestsant

I like that one, it is a real mouthful :tongue:

[DuckiesDarling]

''Who is B and C?''

You said three fellows were arguing. Therefore, logically, should this not read ''Who are B and C?''......????

Wouldn't matter how it was worded the answer remains the same and obviously eludes you. Have a nice day.

[just4mefc]

I do have a logical brain. Way off beam, second time around referred to something else. Plus, there are many different aspects to logic....sections and sub-sections, compartments and areas which go off at a tangent, to what is normally deduced, to be logic. Sometimes logic itself, is totally illogical and defies explanation.



WHAT IS

2 + 2 =
4 + 4 =
8 + 8 =
16 + 16 =

Pick a number between 12 and 5

Which number did you choose

I choose 2, that is when I usually have lunch ;)

[DuckiesDarling]

A is an honestant (with mouth full of cum)
B is a swindlecant
C is an honestsant

I like that one, it is a real mouthful :tongue:

Actually since we don't know what A said, he could have said he was an honestant or a swindlecant, the responses from the other two prove that B is a swindlecant and C is an honestant since A Swindlecant would never say they were a Swindlecant and an Honestant would never say they were a Swindlecant. But good job, Just, thanks for proving there are logical minds :)

[DuckiesDarling]

New one :)

There are three switches downstairs. Each corresponds to one of the three light bulbs in the attic. You can turn the switches on and off and leave them in any position.
How would you identify which switch corresponds to which light bulb, if you are only allowed one trip upstairs?

*Giggles* Yes there are a lot of different answers but try to think outside the box and don't cheat on recruiting help :)

[just4mefc]

You are in a room with 2 doors marked A and B respectively and no windows. Behind one door is instant death and behind the other is freedom. There are two computers in the room also marked A and B, one is programed to always tell the truth and the other is programed to always lie. You do not know which computer is which nor do you know which door leads to life or death. You may only ask one question to one computer. How do you safely get out of the room? :rotate:

[DuckiesDarling]

You are in a room with 2 doors marked A and B respectively and no windows. Behind one door is instant death and behind the other is freedom. There are two computers in the room also marked A and B, one is programed to always tell the truth and the other is programed to always lie. You do not know which computer is which nor do you know which door leads to life or death. You may only ask one question to one computer. How do you safely get out of the room? :rotate:

Hmmm, I'd ask "What would the other computer say about which door is safe?" Then take the opposite answer.

[just4mefc]

Hmmm, I'd ask "What would the other computer say about which door is safe?" Then take the opposite answer.

Awesome! I Knew you would get that one quickly :bigrin:

[DuckiesDarling]

Thanks, I pride myself on being logical on days that end in y. Did you get the last one I posted about the light bulbs?

[just4mefc]

New one :)

There are three switches downstairs. Each corresponds to one of the three light bulbs in the attic. You can turn the switches on and off and leave them in any position.
How would you identify which switch corresponds to which light bulb, if you are only allowed one trip upstairs?

*Giggles* Yes there are a lot of different answers but try to think outside the box and don't cheat on recruiting help :)

Well my outside the box answer is "be logical go upstairs and use the phone to call an electrician" :rolleyes:

[DuckiesDarling]

ROFLMAO

The one I was thinking of was a wee bit different but I'll let other people have a chance to warm up the answer *hint included*

[Long Duck Dong]

I said, make the missus do it..... and DD threatened to hurt me

[just4mefc]

or "its the attic who the hell cares" :tongue:

[DuckiesDarling]

I said, make the missus do it..... and DD threatened to hurt me

But I'd make sure you liked it :tong:

[just4mefc]

my first answer was going to be "take LDD and DD upstairs remove 2 light bulbs put one finger from each in the empty sockets go down stairs and turn on switches one at a time" roflmao

[DuckiesDarling]

my first answer was going to be "take LDD and DD upstairs remove 2 light bulbs put one finger from each in the empty sockets go down stairs and turn on switches one at a time" roflmao

But, Just honey... you wouldn't know which scream was more feminine. Because I'd likely grab his balls and say if it lights me up you're a woman instantly.

[just4mefc]

what I actually do is replace one bulb with an outlet adapter and plug in a radio. Leave 2 switch on and one off. Now I can hear the radio switch and the other two will show themselves :)

[just4mefc]

But, Just honey... you wouldn't know which scream was more feminine. Because I'd likely grab his balls and say if it lights me up you're a woman instantly.

ok make that DD's nipple :tongue:

[DuckiesDarling]

LOL, Okay I will post the solution I was aiming for.

Assuming this was done with old style lightbulbs, they get warm when they've been on for a bit.

So you would turn the first switch on and leave it on for a few minutes. Turn it off and flip the second switch on. Go up to the attack. The first bulb would be warm, the light would be on for the second switch so the cool unlit bulb would be the third switch.

[DuckiesDarling]

ok make that DD's nipple :tongue:

:eek: or hey wait that might be a bit of fun depending on the voltage......Do not give Duck ideas, dangit :tong:

[just4mefc]

my first answer was going to be "take LDD and DD upstairs remove 2 light bulbs put one finger from each in the empty sockets go down stairs and turn on switches one at a time" roflmao

Of course if I had LDD and DD up in the attic, the lights would be the least of my attention :tongue:

[DuckiesDarling]

hehe on that note it must be time for bed, my babe has just headed there and I'm on the way to join him in my dreams. Gnite y'all.

[RockGardener]

If, by the end of one day, he'd only dug half way across the measured width and dug down, to only half of the required depth....then.....going by his contract....he would have dug....half a hole. ;)

Or...as Wrenn puts it.....half a whole! :)

Actually he would have dug a fourth of a hole! Half the width and half the depth would be 1/4. Just sayin'..

and just sayin' also... I would go to the attic with DD and LDD. :female::female::male:

[Canticle]

I choose 2, that is when I usually have lunch ;)

Maybe it is, or maybe it isn't.....have to wait and see :bigrin:

[Canticle]

Actually he would have dug a fourth of a hole! Half the width and half the depth would be 1/4. Just sayin'..

and just sayin' also... I would go to the attic with DD and LDD. :female::female::male:

LOL LOL. I shouldn't type things when I am about to fall asleep. I knew that there was something incorrect with that sentence. Oh, well......

Personally, I like visual puzzles. There are some really good ones to be found on the net.

I'd keep my feet firmly on terra firma and pay for the attic to be decorated and turned into a small apartment and then rent it out. The money would be useful and in my part of the world.....to rent is quite expensive.

[Canticle]

You are in a room with 2 doors marked A and B respectively and no windows. Behind one door is instant death and behind the other is freedom. There are two computers in the room also marked A and B, one is programed to always tell the truth and the other is programed to always lie. You do not know which computer is which nor do you know which door leads to life or death. You may only ask one question to one computer. How do you safely get out of the room? :rotate:

Yep, that was an easy one........although.........if you got it wrong and went through the door to instant death......you'd be none the wiser......cos if there was no afterlife.......you wouldn't be able to ponder upon and curse your bad judgement.

[Canticle]

Well my outside the box answer is "be logical go upstairs and use the phone to call an electrician" :rolleyes:

It was a good one, but fairly obvious. I've actually experienced the need for that kind of experimentation with the switches and the bulbs. Makes for a lot of laughter.

[Canticle]

Actually since we don't know what A said, he could have said he was an honestant or a swindlecant, the responses from the other two prove that B is a swindlecant and C is an honestant since A Swindlecant would never say they were a Swindlecant and an Honestant would never say they were a Swindlecant. But good job, Just, thanks for proving there are logical minds :)


Actually ..... logically......the below is not necessarily correct. If a Swindlecant is a teller of untruths......then there are many tellers of untruths, who can be quite proud of what they do and they announce it to the world. I've known a few and even when they know, that you know, that they are lying....they will continue to smile and carry on with their story.....no matter how far from the truth, it may be.

For example and this is using a simplified version of what a Swindlecant (cant?....I'd have thought tant), may do.

Two children, of an age when they understand what is a truth and what is an untruth, who are told that, if they tell the truth, they will be in less trouble, than if they speak untruths.

When questioned about what has happened ......to whatever....one will stay silent, so as not to incriminate him/herself, whilst the other child will tell an untruth, incriminating the other child, because they believe that if they tell an untruth, they will not get in as much trouble.

For one child, it seemed logical to stay silent and for the other, it seemed logical to tell an untruth.....and later admit to this and without feeling any shame.

So the dishonest or untruthful, will often declare that they are such and with no head hung low. To them. to lie, is logical, even though the rest of society may think otherwise.

''A Swindlecant would never say they were a Swindlecant''

Logic is used in and applies to, far more areas, than solving puzzles.

[just4mefc]

Actually ..... logically......the below is not necessarily correct. If a Swindlecant is a teller of untruths......then there are many tellers of untruths, who can be quite proud of what they do and they announce it to the world. I've known a few and even when they know, that you know, that they are lying....they will continue to smile and carry on with their story.....no matter how far from the truth, it may be.

For example and this is using a simplified version of what a Swindlecant (cant?....I'd have thought tant), may do.

Two children, of an age when they understand what is a truth and what is an untruth, who are told that, if they tell the truth, they will be in less trouble, than if they speak untruths.

When questioned about what has happened ......to whatever....one will stay silent, so as not to incriminate him/herself, whilst the other child will tell an untruth, incriminating the other child, because they believe that if they tell an untruth, they will not get in as much trouble.

For one child, it seemed logical to stay silent and for the other, it seemed logical to tell an untruth.....and later admit to this and without feeling any shame.

So the dishonest or untruthful, will often declare that they are such and with no head hung low. To them. to lie, is logical, even though the rest of society may think otherwise.

''A Swindlecant would never say they were a Swindlecant''

Logic is used in and applies to, far more areas, than solving puzzles.


Nah the parameters were all ready set that one group can only lie and the other only tell the truth. But I see where you are going...

A man who can only lie says "I am lying too you". Is this truth or Lie

or

Can God make a rock that God can not lift?

:bigrin:

[just4mefc]

Which is heavier a pound of feathers or a pound of gold?
:)

[Canticle]

Which is heavier a pound of feathers or a pound of gold?
:)

Neither. They both weigh the same.

[Canticle]

Nah the parameters were all ready set that one group can only lie and the other only tell the truth. But I see where you are going...

A man who can only lie says "I am lying too you". Is this truth or Lie

or

Can God make a rock that God can not lift?

:bigrin:

No, there are no set parameters. Outside forces can influence a person's behaviour, as do any personality defects, from which a person may suffer. Others are in a constant state of flux and change as the wind changes direction.

I was going to quote the piece about if a liar says he/she is lying, is it truth or lie........but decided this was not required.

If there is no God........ no supernatural force, it leads to there being no necessity for rocks to be lifted......unless it is by the human hand, large excavators and cranes......or the force of nature itself.

[just4mefc]

Neither. They both weigh the same.

Incorrect the feathers ARE heavier :rolleyes:

[just4mefc]

No, there are no set parameters. Outside forces can influence a person's behaviour, as do any personality defects, from which a person may suffer. Others are in a constant state of flux and change as the wind changes direction.

I was going to quote the piece about if a liar says he/she is lying, is it truth or lie........but decided this was not required.

If there is no God........ no supernatural force, it leads to there being no necessity for rocks to be lifted......unless it is by the human hand, large excavators and cranes......or the force of nature itself.

I see where you like to go in terms of a more philosophical answer but to constantly change the parameters takes away from the fun.

[Canticle]

I see where you like to go in terms of a more philosophical answer but to constantly change the parameters takes away from the fun.

I guess it depends what one calls fun

[just4mefc]

I guess it depends what one calls fun

Well I am on this thread for the light hearted brain tease of it all. I also love philosophy and I like some of your points of view. But on the puzzle thread I want to do puzzles :bigrin:

[Canticle]

Incorrect the feathers ARE heavier :rolleyes:

This always used to be a pound of feathers and a pound of lead and the aswer was always, that they weighed the same. Upping it to gold, is a nice idea, lead being such a dirty colour.

A pound of something...whatever it is...will always weigh the same as a pound of another matter. At least, in solid or liquid form.

Of course, there would be a considerable amount of feathers and the packaged, bagged item would be quite large....maybe, even difficult to carry, for some and after carrying them, it could be said, by an individual, that holding a pound of gold felt lighter, having just had to deal with a pound of feathers.

Or, the pound of feathers might still be attached to the bird and therefore it could be said, that a pound of feathers weighed more than a pound of gold.

Barring those scenarios, a pound in weight, is a pound in weight, no matter what the item may be......if it is a solid, or a liquid.

[just4mefc]

This always used to be a pound of feathers and a pound of lead and the aswer was always, that they weighed the same. Upping it to gold, is a nice idea, lead being such a dirty colour.

A pound of something...whatever it is...will always weigh the same as a pound of another matter. At least, in solid or liquid form.

Of course, there would be a considerable amount of feathers and the packaged, bagged item would be quite large....maybe, even difficult to carry, for some and after carrying them, it could be said, by an individual, that holding a pound of gold felt lighter, having just had to deal with a pound of feathers.

Or, the pound of feathers might still be attached to the bird and therefore it could be said, that a pound of feathers weighed more than a pound of gold.

Barring those scenarios, a pound in weight, is a pound in weight, no matter what the item may be......if it is a solid, or a liquid.

All great explanations... but wrong. I will pm why ;)

[DuckiesDarling]

No, there are no set parameters. Outside forces can influence a person's behaviour, as do any personality defects, from which a person may suffer. Others are in a constant state of flux and change as the wind changes direction.

I was going to quote the piece about if a liar says he/she is lying, is it truth or lie........but decided this was not required.

If there is no God........ no supernatural force, it leads to there being no necessity for rocks to be lifted......unless it is by the human hand, large excavators and cranes......or the force of nature itself.


You are freaking demented you know that? As Just4 said the paremeters were already set. One group cannot tell a lie, one cannot tell a truth. So therefore a Swindlecant can never say he's a Swindlecant as that would be a truth.

[DuckiesDarling]

Incorrect the feathers ARE heavier :rolleyes:

Yes, the feathers are heavier because a pound of feathers is weighed different than a pound of gold. Gold is measured in troy ounces as a universal standard.

[just4mefc]

Yes, the feathers are heavier because a pound of feathers is weighed different than a pound of gold. Gold is measured in troy ounces as a universal standard.

Yes and I think I am in LOVE ;)

[DuckiesDarling]

Yes and I think I am in LOVE ;)

:tong:

[Canticle]

Incorrect the feathers ARE heavier :rolleyes:

Darn it! I had just finished drafting a post, when I received a pm and deleted it....by accident! No matter.

This always used to be a pound of feathers and a pound of lead and the answer was always, that the two items weighed the same. I like the idea of using gold, in preference to lead. Lead is such a dirty colour.

A pound of feathers would weigh the same as a pound of gold, unless this a trick question, to do with the meaning of the word pound, or some other reason.

A pound of feathers would make for a bulky package and there might be some, who would say, that after carrying around, such an awkward item, a pound of gold did feel lighter.

Or, the pound of feathers might still be attached to a bird. If so, the pound of feathers, would indeed, weigh far more than the pound of gold. Of course, killed, plucked and eaten, the bird would no longer exist and only it's bones would be available for weighing and I don't think the bones, stripped of their flesh.....would be wearing a feather boa. :tong:

Then again, is the pound of gold, one solid lump, or has it been used, by a craftsperson, to decorate some work of art, such as a statue.....or scupture. If that were the case, the gold, like the feathers, upon the bird, would weigh far more than a pound.

Barring all such scenarios, I still see the feathers weighing the same as the gold. Gold is a very heavy metal, but a pound is still a pound.

[Canticle]

You are freaking demented you know that? As Just4 said the paremeters were already set. One group cannot tell a lie, one cannot tell a truth. So therefore a Swindlecant can never say he's a Swindlecant as that would be a truth.

I will remain polite. I am far from demented. I am an intelligent human being. I am just looking at what you posted in a different manner. Also, I have no intention of flaming anyone.

[Canticle]

I see that I did not delete the post. However, I shall leave the second, in place, for it does mention using pound, in a different sense.

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

lol Then I must be the strongest Cat in the world: I can pick a single flower with the whole wide world holding on to the other end...lol
Cheesy Cat :bigrin:

[Long Duck Dong]

Darn it! I had just finished drafting a post, when I received a pm and deleted it....by accident! No matter.

This always used to be a pound of feathers and a pound of lead and the answer was always, that the two items weighed the same. I like the idea of using gold, in preference to lead. Lead is such a dirty colour.

A pound of feathers would weigh the same as a pound of gold, unless this a trick question, to do with the meaning of the word pound, or some other reason.

A pound of feathers would make for a bulky package and there might be some, who would say, that after carrying around, such an awkward item, a pound of gold did feel lighter.

Or, the pound of feathers might still be attached to a bird. If so, the pound of feathers, would indeed, weigh far more than the pound of gold. Of course, killed, plucked and eaten, the bird would no longer exist and only it's bones would be available for weighing and I don't think the bones, stripped of their flesh.....would be wearing a feather boa. :tong:

Then again, is the pound of gold, one solid lump, or has it been used, by a craftsperson, to decorate some work of art, such as a statue.....or scupture. If that were the case, the gold, like the feathers, upon the bird, would weigh far more than a pound.

Barring all such scenarios, I still see the feathers weighing the same as the gold. Gold is a very heavy metal, but a pound is still a pound.

sighs put a pound of gold and a pound of feathers in water.....and see what sinks faster.....

hence gold is heavier by density..... christ I failed school and left at 14 and even I know that.....

*pounds* head against wall and rattles my troy ounce of brains

[DuckiesDarling]

Darn it! I had just finished drafting a post, when I received a pm and deleted it....by accident! No matter.

This always used to be a pound of feathers and a pound of lead and the answer was always, that the two items weighed the same. I like the idea of using gold, in preference to lead. Lead is such a dirty colour.

A pound of feathers would weigh the same as a pound of gold, unless this a trick question, to do with the meaning of the word pound, or some other reason.

A pound of feathers would make for a bulky package and there might be some, who would say, that after carrying around, such an awkward item, a pound of gold did feel lighter.

Or, the pound of feathers might still be attached to a bird. If so, the pound of feathers, would indeed, weigh far more than the pound of gold. Of course, killed, plucked and eaten, the bird would no longer exist and only it's bones would be available for weighing and I don't think the bones, stripped of their flesh.....would be wearing a feather boa. :tong:

Then again, is the pound of gold, one solid lump, or has it been used, by a craftsperson, to decorate some work of art, such as a statue.....or scupture. If that were the case, the gold, like the feathers, upon the bird, would weigh far more than a pound.

Barring all such scenarios, I still see the feathers weighing the same as the gold. Gold is a very heavy metal, but a pound is still a pound.

A troy pound is like 12 ounces, gold is measured in troy ounces universally so a pound of gold is 12 ounces. A pound of feathers would be 16 ounces as
feathers are measured in normal ounces. That's why he didn't say lead, if it had been lead than yes they would have been equal.

[Canticle]

sighs put a pound of gold and a pound of feathers in water.....and see what sinks faster.....

hence gold is heavier by density..... christ I failed school and left at 14 and even I know that.....

Well.....yeah....LDD that would happen in water.......that's pretty obvious.....but that's not the same as weighing things....and yeah...I admit.....I had forgotten about weighing gold differently. I only have a few gold items....and two of those, I was given.....so I'm not really into remembering exactly how gold is weighed. I prefer silver...or white gold...cos it looks like silver.

All those floating feathers...if they lots of different colours, like the ones I used in my commissioned craftwork....gee...they'd look pretty. The gold, I would retrieve and sell for scrap. The money would be useful.

[Long Duck Dong]

Well.....yeah....LDD that would happen in water.......that's pretty obvious.....but that's not the same as weighing things....and yeah...I admit.....I had forgotten about weighing gold differently. I only have a few gold items....and two of those, I was given.....so I'm not really into remembering exactly how gold is weighed. I prefer silver...or white gold...cos it looks like silver.

All those floating feathers...if they lots of different colours, like the ones I used in my commissioned craftwork....gee...they'd look pretty. The gold, I would retrieve and sell for scrap. The money would be useful.

Archimedes exclaimed eureka.... why ?????

[Canticle]

A troy pound is like 12 ounces, gold is measured in troy ounces universally so a pound of gold is 12 ounces. A pound of feathers would be 16 ounces as
feathers are measured in normal ounces. That's why he didn't say lead, if it had been lead than yes they would have been equal.

Yep.....I was informed and then I remembered. I forgot...maybe because it is not something I need to remember. We all have more important things to remember......and what is important to one, will seem trivia to another.

[Canticle]

lol Then I must be the strongest Cat in the world: I can pick a single flower with the whole wide world holding on to the other end...lol
Cheesy Cat :bigrin:

Actually, Cat.....what you said is quite true and no puzzle, either :)

[Long Duck Dong]

12151920 what word is it

[DuckiesDarling]

I got it :) But I won't post answer and let others try.

[DuckiesDarling]

Another one from me...


Alice came across a lion and a unicorn in a forest of forgetfulness. Those two are strange beings. The lion lies every Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday and the other days he speaks the truth. The unicorn lies on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays, however the other days of the week he speaks the truth.
Lion: Yesterday I was lying.
Unicorn: So was I.
Which day did they say that?

[Canticle]

12151920 what word is it

If the numbers can be separated and are 12, 15, 19, 20 and these numbers refer to positions of letters, in the alphabet, then the word is LOST.

However, the numbers may not necessarily be meant to be separated.

[Long Duck Dong]

I contain flesh and blood and bone, I have a top and bottom, yet my top and bottom can be my sides, I am made of metal and I am symbolic of a ending....
what am I?

[DuckiesDarling]

hehehe I just got told to shut up cause I got it :)

[Canticle]

Archimedes exclaimed eureka.... why ?????

Supposedly and I have read that there are some, who not believe he existed, he cried out ''Eureka'' (I have found it!), whilst bathing.......displacement of water. Whether or not the Greeks had bath tubs.....is another matter.

I went to school with a girl called Eureka.

[Long Duck Dong]

Supposedly and I have read that there are some, who not believe he existed, he cried out ''Eureka'' (I have found it!), whilst bathing.......displacement of water. Whether or not the Greeks had bath tubs.....is another matter.

I went to school with a girl called Eureka.

I was referring to the story, about how he worked out how to measure a weight by density using water..... when you have two inter molded densities...
silver using in a gold crown has a lower density than gold and therefore displaces more water than a crown made fully of gold

weighting the crown would not prove silver was used cos the weights were the same.... but the mass and density was not..... hence you can measure weight in water to determine density

it was not a bath tub, it was a public bath house, which have been found in ancient remains..... so the story matches the facts....

[Canticle]

I was referring to the story, about how he worked out how to measure a weight by density using water..... when you have two inter molded densities...
silver using in a gold crown has a lower density than gold and therefore displaces more water than a crown made fully of gold

weighting the crown would not prove silver was used cos the weights were the same.... but the mass and density was not..... hence you can measure weight in water to determine density

it was not a bath tub, it was a public bath house, which have been found in ancient remains..... so the story matches the facts....

Well, sorry you didn't get the about the bath tub. I know it would have been a puclic bath house. I guess I should have mentioned a cartoon I remember, from years ago, with a wet Greek leaping out of a bath tub......with was the header to an article.

Poor Archimaedes

[Canticle]

Oops too fond of my ''ae'' s........Archimedes

[allbimyself]

Another one from me...


Alice came across a lion and a unicorn in a forest of forgetfulness. Those two are strange beings. The lion lies every Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday and the other days he speaks the truth. The unicorn lies on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays, however the other days of the week he speaks the truth.
Lion: Yesterday I was lying.
Unicorn: So was I.
Which day did they say that?

Thursday

[allbimyself]

I was referring to the story, about how he worked out how to measure a weight by density using water..... when you have two inter molded densities...
silver using in a gold crown has a lower density than gold and therefore displaces more water than a crown made fully of gold

weighting the crown would not prove silver was used cos the weights were the same.... but the mass and density was not..... hence you can measure weight in water to determine density

it was not a bath tub, it was a public bath house, which have been found in ancient remains..... so the story matches the facts....

Actually, using water is not "weighing" but measuring mass. Gold is denser than silver, therefore a pound of silver will displace more water than a pound of gold.

[allbimyself]

Here's one:

Remember Let's Make A Deal? They'd show you 3 curtains. Behind one was a car, behind the other two would be goats or some other things of little value. You choose one curtain. Monty shows you that behind one of the other curtains was a goat. Then he asks if you would like to keep the curtain you picked or trade it for the remaining curtain. Now, assuming you want the car and not the goat, what should you do?

Switch?
Keep the one you have?
or does it not matter?

[Canticle]

Thursday


Agrees, the answer is Thursday

[Canticle]

If the numbers can be separated and are 12, 15, 19, 20 and these numbers refer to positions of letters, in the alphabet, then the word is LOST.

However, the numbers may not necessarily be meant to be separated.


Carrying on from this, puzzles often have trick questions, too. The words ''what is the word,'' may be the puzzle.....not the numbers and if so, the answer could be ''WHAT''

[DuckiesDarling]

Thursday

Correct, Allbi *gives you a cookie*

[DuckiesDarling]

Here's one:

Remember Let's Make A Deal? They'd show you 3 curtains. Behind one was a car, behind the other two would be goats or some other things of little value. You choose one curtain. Monty shows you that behind one of the other curtains was a goat. Then he asks if you would like to keep the curtain you picked or trade it for the remaining curtain. Now, assuming you want the car and not the goat, what should you do?

Switch?
Keep the one you have?
or does it not matter?

It matters, technically you have a better chance of getting the car if you switch. The key is the host actually knows where the goats are, he's not randomly picking a curtain to show you.

[Canticle]

Here's one:

Remember Let's Make A Deal? They'd show you 3 curtains. Behind one was a car, behind the other two would be goats or some other things of little value. You choose one curtain. Monty shows you that behind one of the other curtains was a goat. Then he asks if you would like to keep the curtain you picked or trade it for the remaining curtain. Now, assuming you want the car and not the goat, what should you do?

Switch?
Keep the one you have?
or does it not matter?

I'd say switch, only because human beings are curious, want to try their luck, are greedy and the car would be something for nothing.

Keeping the goat would be OK. It's antics more amusing, than that of a car.

I'd also say it doesn't matter, because what you haven't had in the first place, is not going to be missed.....it's not as if you had would have, to swap your own car for the goat, or whatever was behind the second curtain.

Logically, one would take the chance and hope for the car, then keep it....or sell it, for the dosh.

[Long Duck Dong]

Here's one:

Remember Let's Make A Deal? They'd show you 3 curtains. Behind one was a car, behind the other two would be goats or some other things of little value. You choose one curtain. Monty shows you that behind one of the other curtains was a goat. Then he asks if you would like to keep the curtain you picked or trade it for the remaining curtain. Now, assuming you want the car and not the goat, what should you do?

Switch?
Keep the one you have?
or does it not matter?

ok 3 curtains, gives me a 33.33% option .....

if monty shows me a curtain with a goat behind it,... then that changes the odds of finding the car to 68%

I have already chosen a curtain that may hide the goat or the car.... so the odds are in my favour that I will choose the car by switching ... from 1/3 to 2/3

that or I will wait for 12 hours and the smell of goat shit :tong:

[allbimyself]

You are all correct. Your odds of winning double (from 1/3 to 2/3) by switching.

[just4mefc]

The odds versus the original scenario do improve with the switch, but in reality the odds are reset. Once you eliminate the the first curtain, you are down to 2 and the odds now reset to a 50/50 shot. This is the problem with statistics. You can manipulate them to fit your needs.

[DuckiesDarling]

A square medieval castle on a square island was under siege. All around the island, there was a 10 metre wide water moat. But the conquerors could make foot-bridges only 9.5 metres long. Nevertheless a wise man was able to figure out how to get over the water. What do you think was his advice?
(There's a place on the other side to put the bridge against, not just a sheer wall. the water moat has square corners - that section of the moat is about 14.1 metres wide.)?

[Canticle]

Swim (across the moat)......but that was just a whimsical thought.

[Canticle]

The odds versus the original scenario do improve with the switch, but in reality the odds are reset. Once you eliminate the the first curtain, you are down to 2 and the odds now reset to a 50/50 shot. This is the problem with statistics. You can manipulate them to fit your needs.

Oh the answer to my puzzle (thank you for answering), was 7, because...apparently......that is the number most people pick.

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

lol I'm not good at math at all..:( All I know is 1+1 Can equal 3(if protection isnt used) and that its really fun with point A slips into slot B. Or sometime when point A has a friend over and have a point sliped into A's slot. Or 2 slots gang up on A's pointy thing, then the fun Really gets started...uhmm, what was the questiion again....?
Snicker
Silly Cat, who knows that 2 or more can a right nice combination.....;):bigrin::cool: :three:

[just4mefc]

lol I'm not good at math at all..:( All I know is 1+1 Can equal 3(if protection isnt used) and that its really fun with point A slips into slot B. Or sometime when point A has a friend over and have a point sliped into A's slot. Or 2 slots gang up on A's pointy thing, then the fun Really gets started...uhmm, what was the questiion again....?
Snicker
Silly Cat, who knows that 2 or more can a right nice combination.....;):bigrin::cool: :three:

My kind of math :tong:

[Long Duck Dong]

ok whats 69 and 69 ???

[Canticle]

Archie, a brave lad, decided to become a hero, so he entered the local labyrinth. He faced many perils and had to duck and dive, many times, jumping out of the way of swinging blades, use his flaming torch, to worry demons and send them upon their way and make sure that he did not fall into the bottomless pits, which littered the route. However, he reached the centre of the complex, underground structure and there he had to face the monster. He battled the creature for hours and when the monster was stood over him, plunged his sword, deep inside it's body, to pierce it's heart. He slew the creature. He cut off the demonic animal's head and so had his trophy, to prove he was a hero.

He had no map, or plan of the caverns and he had not left any chalked marks, upon the walls, to guide his path, so how did Archie find his way out of the labyrinth.

[just4mefc]

ok whats 69 and 69 ???

Dinner for 4 :tong:

[just4mefc]

square root of 69?

[Canticle]

ok whats 69 and 69 ???

You mean apart from being an interstate highway in the United States, which consists of two halves?

[just4mefc]

You mean apart from being an interstate highway in the United States, which consists of two halves?

square root of 69 = ate something :tong:

[Canticle]

square root of 69 = ate something :tong:

I wouldn't know...lol

[allbimyself]

The odds versus the original scenario do improve with the switch, but in reality the odds are reset. Once you eliminate the the first curtain, you are down to 2 and the odds now reset to a 50/50 shot. This is the problem with statistics. You can manipulate them to fit your needs.

Sorry, but you are mistaken. First, by your logic, the first pick is also 50% after one curtain was eliminated so switching does not improve anything. Second, and more importantly you believe the choice of which curtain to show was random. It wasn't. The contestant's pick is random, the decision by the show's producers of which curtain to expose was NOT. When the original pick was made, there was a 67% chance that the car was not chosen. The show's producers KNOW where the car is! By displaying one curtain to be wrong, that 67% chance now falls entirely on the unpicked, unexposed curtain.

A more glaring example. I have a deck of cards. Your goal is to pick the ace of spades. You randomly pick one card from the deck without looking at it. I then look at all the remaining cards and show you the cards one by one, none of which are the ace of spades, until I have one card left. Who do you think has the ace of spades, you or me? Chances are I do, 51/52.

If I had turned 50 cards blindly until one was left, then yes, you would have a 50% chance of holding the ace of spades but in that scenario the ace of spades would have most likely been turned and neither of us had it.

[R. Kestrel]

The odds versus the original scenario do improve with the switch, but in reality the odds are reset. Once you eliminate the the first curtain, you are down to 2 and the odds now reset to a 50/50 shot. This is the problem with statistics. You can manipulate them to fit your needs.Nope. The odds aren't "reset." You're essentially trading the curtain you originally picked for the two curtains you didn't pick. You're twice as likely to win if you switch your choice.

The statistics aren't being manipulated. The exercise simply demonstrates the counter-intuitive nature of statistics, and the cognitive blind spots of even intelligent people.

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

ok whats 69 and 69 ???

Thats the Chinese eqation: 2 can chew......And you're hungry an hour later. :bigrin:
Cat

[just4mefc]

Nope. The odds aren't "reset." You're essentially trading the curtain you originally picked for the two curtains you didn't pick. You're twice as likely to win if you switch your choice.

The statistics aren't being manipulated. The exercise simply demonstrates the counter-intuitive nature of statistics, and the cognitive blind spots of even intelligent people.

I really want to take you all to Vegas. You are being manipulated by the probabilities. This is exactly how Vegas wins. Their knowledge of the curtain is not relevant. Odds always reset in the real world. Example, in baseball world series much is made of the odds of winning a series when down 3-0. But once the teams draw even at 3-3, they have effectively reset. Comes down to one game. If life were really based on statistics and odds, then everyone would bet the house on the team that once held the 3-0 lead. This is where the real world Vegas smart guys hope you go. Another example the general accepted odds of flipping a coin are 50/50... now flip it once you get heads. Odds are the next throw is tails. but comes up heads again. third toss, still heads... well now you can bet it all right?... no. The odds of any 1 toss do not change. Want proof, get a coin and toss 100 times write down all the results and look for patterns. You will see clusters of tails and heads. You will never see a perfect 50/50. In the example given, AT THE MOMENT of my original decision I have 3 curtains A,B,C I pick A. They remove C from the equation and ask do I want to keep A or switch to B. In reality I have a new moment of odds. Do you want A or B? The past does not matter from this point forward. This my friends is where we get the difference between book smart and street smart.

Oh and Kestrel, Considering the history of basketball what were the odds of Boston beating LA this year? :tongue:

[just4mefc]

Sorry, but you are mistaken. First, by your logic, the first pick is also 50% after one curtain was eliminated so switching does not improve anything. Second, and more importantly you believe the choice of which curtain to show was random. It wasn't. The contestant's pick is random, the decision by the show's producers of which curtain to expose was NOT. When the original pick was made, there was a 67% chance that the car was not chosen. The show's producers KNOW where the car is! By displaying one curtain to be wrong, that 67% chance now falls entirely on the unpicked, unexposed curtain.

A more glaring example. I have a deck of cards. Your goal is to pick the ace of spades. You randomly pick one card from the deck without looking at it. I then look at all the remaining cards and show you the cards one by one, none of which are the ace of spades, until I have one card left. Who do you think has the ace of spades, you or me? Chances are I do, 51/52.

If I had turned 50 cards blindly until one was left, then yes, you would have a 50% chance of holding the ace of spades but in that scenario the ace of spades would have most likely been turned and neither of us had it.

Thanks for proving my point, the odds reset. If you pick from a deck of 50 you have the 1/50 chance of picking the ACE of spades, cut the deck in half with the ACE of spades still in the draw deck and you have 1/25, then cut again 1/12.5, so on and so forth til down to 2 cards. What are the odds now? 50/50. Your knowledge and the fact we started with 1/50 has nothing to do with the last moment 2 cards odds. I agree with you, had it been blind then the odds are neither of us have the ACE of spades.

Most importantly know this, the game show WANTS you to win. This is how they make money. The sponsor wants them to give you the car. So all of you who say that the their knowledge of where the car is hurts you, you have no idea how advertising works. In addition did any of you actually watch the show? Time and again people would change and lose or keep and lose

[R. Kestrel]

I really want to take you all to Vegas. You are being manipulated by the probabilities.
If your grasp of statistics is this weak, forget Vegas. I want you to come over for poker night. Bring a lot of money.


This is exactly how Vegas wins. Their knowledge of the curtain is not relevant... In the example given, AT THE MOMENT of my original decision I have 3 curtains A,B,C I pick A. They remove C from the equation and ask do I want to keep A or switch to B. In reality I have a new moment of odds. Do you want A or B?
The only possibilities were, and remain, thus:

1) You pick A. Car is behind curtain A, Monty opens either B or C, you'd lose if you switch

2) You pick A. Car is behind curtain B, Monty opens C, you'd win if you switch

3) You pick A. Car is behind curtain C, Monty opens B, you'd win if you switch

Therefore, as I said before, you're twice as likely to win if you switch.


This my friends is where we get the difference between book smart and street smart. :rolleyes: Look both ways before crossing that street, amigo.

[just4mefc]

If your grasp of statistics is this weak, forget Vegas. I want you to come over for poker night. Bring a lot of money.


The only possibilities were, and remain, thus:

1) You pick A. Car is behind curtain A, Monty opens either B or C, you'd lose if you switch

2) You pick A. Car is behind curtain B, Monty opens C, you'd win if you switch

3) You pick A. Car is behind curtain C, Monty opens B, you'd win if you switch

Therefore, as I said before, you're twice as likely to win if you switch.

:rolleyes: Look both ways before crossing that street, amigo.

"If your grasp of statistics is this weak" ah the weak mind always goes to the insult. I might or might not have a grasp of statistics but apparently you can not read and follow along.
"3) You pick A. Car is behind curtain C, Monty opens B, you'd win if you switch"

ah Dude at the point of the decision rather to switch we have only A and B left. This is a new decision point. Why do you keep bringing up car behind C. At the original point you are correct BUT once we remove curtain C you are left with only A and B. Behind one of these is a car the other a goat. AT this point you are really being asked pick A or B. PERIOD no longer does C have anything to do with it.

I don't have to worry about crossing the street because you running me over with your goat does not worry me :tong:

Your pompous reply would suggest I already got your goat with my LA beating Boston statement :bigrin:

[R. Kestrel]

ah Dude at the point of the decision rather to switch we have only A and B left. This is a new decision point. Why do you keep bringing up car behind C. At the original point you are correct BUT once we remove curtain C you are left with only A and B. Behind one of these is a car the other a goat. AT this point you are really being asked pick A or B. PERIOD no longer does C have anything to do with it.
Look at it this way. There are three curtains, and you're choosing at random. Since you picked A, you have a 33.3% chance of winning. There's a 66.6% probability that the car is behind either B or C. So after Monty opens curtain C and shows you a goat, that means that the probability that the car is behind B becomes 66.6%. Right?

So do you keep your 33.3% chance of winning by sticking with A? No, you play the odds, which are better by making the switch to B.


Your pompous reply would suggest I already got your goat with my LA beating Boston statement I'm not a hoops fan, I'm just pompous.

But at least I'm pompous and right. ;)

[allbimyself]

Thanks for proving my point, the odds reset. If you pick from a deck of 50 you have the 1/50 chance of picking the ACE of spades, cut the deck in half with the ACE of spades still in the draw deck and you have 1/25, then cut again 1/12.5, so on and so forth til down to 2 cards. All true and totally irrelevant since that's NOT what I described.
What are the odds now? 50/50. Your knowledge and the fact we started with 1/50 has nothing to do with the last moment 2 cards odds. It has everything to do with it. When you pick the first card you have 1/52 chance of having the ace of spades. I, having the remaining 51 cards have a 51/52 chance of having the ace of spades. Turning over cards that I CAN SEE (so I know I'm not showing you the ace of spades) guarantees that, unless you picked the ace of spades, the last card I have that isn't showing IS the ace of spades. Just because I've shown you 50 cards that are NOT the ace of spades does NOT mean I still don't have a 51 in 52 chance of having it. This is basic, you are trying to sound like you have some knowledge of statistics and probability but you are exposing that you do not.


Most importantly know this, the game show WANTS you to win. This is how they make money. The sponsor wants them to give you the car.Exactly, which is why they give you better odds by allowing you to switch.
So all of you who say that the their knowledge of where the car is hurts you, you have no idea how advertising works.Who said this? I don't see where anyone said that. Their knowledge of where it is HELPS you, because they are going to improve your odds by showing you where it isn't!
In addition did any of you actually watch the show? Time and again people would change and lose or keep and loseWell duh! No one said that by switching you would automatically win, only that your odds improved. There was no guarantees. So, yes, people lose by switching and lose by keeping. But, (and I'm 100% sure you didn't do this or you would know the truth) if you bothered to keep records of the numbers that switched or didn't and the numbers that won, you'd find that of those that switched, 2/3's won and of those that didn't only 1/3 won.

Here's a nice example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem

[just4mefc]

Look at it this way. There are three curtains, and you're choosing at random. Since you picked A, you have a 33.3% chance of winning. There's a 66.6% probability that the car is behind either B or C. So after Monty opens curtain C and shows you a goat, that means that the probability that the car is behind B becomes 66.6%. Right?

So do you keep your 33.3% chance of winning by sticking with A? No, you play the odds, which are better by making the switch to B.

I'm not a hoops fan, I'm just pompous.

But at least I'm pompous and right. ;)

Nope pompous and still wrong.
"There's a 66.6% probability that the car is behind either B or C. So after Monty opens curtain C and shows you a goat, that means that the probability that the car is behind B becomes 66.6%. Right?"

RIGHT and WRONG! I agree if you carry the original odds forward you have a 66.6% chance. For the record this was never part of my disagreement. The original odds are painfully obvious. My point continues to be "this is a mis-application of odds" Again from the new decision point you have only 2 options left. See my reply to Allbimyself. Just as with the cards the odds continue to reset. This is more proof of the fallacy that stat's are absolute. It is not the science we disagree on, it is in the art of application that we diverge.

:banghead:

[R. Kestrel]

I agree if you carry the original odds forward you have a 66.6% chance. For the record this was never part of my disagreement. The original odds are painfully obvious. My point continues to be "this is a mis-application of odds" Again from the new decision point you have only 2 options left. See my reply to Allbimyself. Just as with the cards the odds continue to reset. This is more proof of the fallacy that stat's are absolute. It is not the science we disagree on, it is in the art of application that we diverge.
The original odds don't change. They're the same as when you picked curtain A.

What if there were 10 curtains? If you picked curtain 1, you have a 10% chance of winning.

Now how about if Monty shows you that the car's not behind number 2, and it's not behind curtain 3, and so on until he has opened all the curtains except curtain 1 (which you picked) and curtain 10. You still have only a 10% chance that the car is behind the one you picked.

Essentially, you're trading the curtain you originally picked for the nine you didn't. You'd be crazy not to switch.

Get it now?

[allbimyself]

Nope pompous and still wrong.
"There's a 66.6% probability that the car is behind either B or C. So after Monty opens curtain C and shows you a goat, that means that the probability that the car is behind B becomes 66.6%. Right?"

RIGHT and WRONG! I agree if you carry the original odds forward you have a 66.6% chance. For the record this was never part of my disagreement. The original odds are painfully obvious. My point continues to be "this is a mis-application of odds" Again from the new decision point you have only 2 options left. See my reply to Allbimyself. Just as with the cards the odds continue to reset. This is more proof of the fallacy that stat's are absolute. It is not the science we disagree on, it is in the art of application that we diverge.

:banghead:

I think you should stop banging your head, it has obviously done damage. This whole odds resetting thing is tiresome. Odds do not reset. You are trying to apply the principle that "dice have no memory" to something that are not dice and not random. If we were physically close I would meet you and show you a demonstration that would prove it to you. Take 3 cards from a deck, two red, one black. Have a friend place them face down (he knows where the black one is). You pick one. He'll show you one of the remaining ones that's red. Now, according to you, half the time you'll have the black one. So, turn both remaining ones over and record whether you had the black one or not. Do this as many times as you need to be convinced but do it at least 20 times. You'll find that you have the black card 1/3 of the time not 1/2 the time.

[R. Kestrel]

I think you should stop banging your head, it has obviously done damage.
:cutelaugh

[Annika L]

Are we really debating the Monty Hall paradox here?? Cool, let me play!

There seems to have been a ton of dispute here, and I apologize up front for not taking the time to read it all...been there, done that with this one. But I do know the right answer.

Monty offers A, B, or C. You choose A. He shows you a goat behind C. Yes, your odds of winning go up if you switch and choose B.

It's easier to see with more doors:

Suppose Monty offers you a choice of 1000 doors. There are goats behind 999 of them and a car behind one of them. You choose door 1. Your chance of being right is .001. The chance of the prize being behind a different door is .999. Ok, now Monty opens 998 of the other doors...all except door 593, and there are goats behind all of those. When you made your initial choice, your chance of being right was .001...that hasn't changed...so you almost certainly picked the wrong door. Now Monty has shown you the *right* door...well, *probably* (probability .999) the right door. So unless you have incredible luck on a regular basis (or unless you fancy a goat), switch your guess to door 593.

Now if at this point, your friend wanders up and says "hey, what's goin' on?" And Monty explains the game, but doesn't tell your friend which door you chose, your friend would have 50/50 odds with either guess (1 or 593) he/she makes. But you have (much) more information than your friend. That's where the notion of "resetting probabilities" comes in.

BTW, if you don't buy my 1000-door setup, write a quick computer program to simulate it...or find a room with 1000 doors and a friend to play the role of Monty...and try it yourself...try it 100 times, always keeping your money on your initial guess, and I'll put *my* money on you losing all 100 times.

Reducing from 1000 doors to 3...with 3 doors, your odds of being right initially aren't nearly as bad, but the same principle applies, and your odds of winning go up by switching.

Ok...so whose side am I on? :tong:

(Oh, by the way, if an apple a day keep the doctor away, does 1 apple every 8 hours keep 3 doctors away??)

[just4mefc]

"All true and totally irrelevant since that's NOT what I described. .."

But it IS what is happening in the curtain example at that one moment.

"Just because I've shown you 50 cards that are NOT the ace of spades does NOT mean I still don't have a 51 in 52 chance of having it."

True I did modify your example. It fits more to the curtain example in my view. However at that moment when we are down to two cards and you or I must have the Ace, I can re-bet so to speak and at that moment forward the odds do change. This is why Vegas pay more for betting on a team at the beginning of the season then if you wait for the odds to improve and bet at the last game.

"This is basic, you are trying to sound like you have some knowledge of statistics and probability but you are exposing that you do not."

No actually I am not so take a breathe. I am simply arguing that the odds at a given point of a decision tree. The application of the odds and statistics. At any one given moment in time. No doubt over the course of trials the numbers you state would hold up. I am challenging you to do more then read a wiki page. To come up with arguments and debate without flipping out. Don't be so invested in being right. I am not trying be superior or knock you so please chill out.

"Who said this? I don't see where anyone said that."

it was implied by others that they want you to lose.

"those that switched, 2/3's won and of those that didn't only 1/3 won"

Reference for this? I ask because according to the FTC the show must make it random. This is highly regulated so it would be very interesting to see the proof. This would fall under contestant interference.

So really we are debating the knowledge of the host and wether it is random or not.

From your ref page "Asked whether the contestant should switch, vos Savant correctly replied, "If the host is clueless, it makes no difference whether you stay or switch. If he knows, switch"

Oh and by the way I am not the first nor the last person to debate and ponder this. Just because the math is correct does not mean one should take statistics as fact. I had this debate with a college math instructor and although he always said it was the right answer on paper to switch he wouldn't put his life on it.

So mellow out, I am not trying to prove you wrong in your math. I am not trying to act superior in any way what so ever. This whole thread was just for fun after all.

[just4mefc]

Wow nice to see you all can read a wiki page good for you. I read it and had heard the problem presented many many years ago and I already knew the standard answer. My answer is the "right" answer to THIS WRONG question...

Now try to READ this... here is the original problem...
Remember Let's Make A Deal? They'd show you 3 curtains. Behind one was a car, behind the other two would be goats or some other things of little value. You choose one curtain. Monty shows you that behind one of the other curtains was a goat. Then he asks if you would like to keep the curtain you picked or trade it for the remaining curtain. Now, assuming you want the car and not the goat, what should you do?

Switch?
Keep the one you have?
or does it not matter?

notice anything? He forgot to mention that Monty KNEW the answer in the original question and therefore with him not knowing... THE ODDS DO RESET...

From your ref page "Asked whether the contestant should switch, vos Savant correctly replied, "If the host is clueless, it makes no difference whether you stay or switch. If he knows, switch"

Then Allbimyself and Kestrel go all postal with the insult etc. You presented a question with implied random and as such, "random dice rule" does apply. Kestrel, didn't even get the point that if you make it random it resets. He just kept coming back with "door c" silliness. Guess he forgot to read the entire wiki page?

The key variable in the whole thing is knowledge. In Annika'a 1000 doors If the producer's lower the number to two but do not tell Monty the right answer, Monty is also picking at random AT THAT POINT the odds reset. Now do you get that?

Banging my head is the only way I can get down to the level of allbimyself and Kestrel, if anything I have to hit it harder.

:tongue:

[Annika L]

Wow nice to see you all can read a wiki page good for you. I read it and had heard the problem presented many many years ago and I already knew the standard answer. My answer is the "right" answer to THIS WRONG question...

Now try to READ this... here is the original problem...
Remember Let's Make A Deal? They'd show you 3 curtains. Behind one was a car, behind the other two would be goats or some other things of little value. You choose one curtain. Monty shows you that behind one of the other curtains was a goat. Then he asks if you would like to keep the curtain you picked or trade it for the remaining curtain. Now, assuming you want the car and not the goat, what should you do?

Switch?
Keep the one you have?
or does it not matter?

notice anything? He forgot to mention that Monty KNEW the answer in the original question and therefore with him not knowing... THE ODDS DO RESET...

From your ref page "Asked whether the contestant should switch, vos Savant correctly replied, "If the host is clueless, it makes no difference whether you stay or switch. If he knows, switch"

Then Allbimyself and Kestrel go all postal with the insult etc. You presented a question with implied random and as such, "random dice rule" does apply. Kestrel, didn't even get the point that if you make it random it resets. He just kept coming back with "door c" silliness. Guess he forgot to read the entire wiki page?

The key variable in the whole thing is knowledge. In Annika'a 1000 doors If the producer's lower the number to two but do not tell Monty the right answer, Monty is also picking at random AT THAT POINT the odds reset. Now do you get that?

Banging my head is the only way I can get down to the level of allbimyself and Kestrel, if anything I have to hit it harder.

:tongue:

I didn't get my answer from any wiki page, just4me. Years before wiki pages were invented, I actually worked out the probabilities...then to check myself, I wrote the program I suggested...my partner needed to play it 20 times to convince herself, LOL.

Now, if Monty doesn't know the right answer, then there is a serious complication: with 1000 doors, it's almost certain that (since he's guessing at random himself) he'll choose wrong too, and that the car will be behind one of the 998 doors he opens...at that point, you'll be choosing between two goats!!

But ok, suppose the car *doesn't* turn up when Monty opens those 998 doors...so it's behind either your door or his remaining door. Then what? Well, effectively at that point, you and Monty have collectively (and presumably randomly) chosen 2 doors from a set of 1000 doors, and miraculously, one of them has a car behind it. Yes, your initial choice had probability .001 (1 in 1000) of being right. But assuming that you were wrong, then Monty's choice had probability .001001 (1 in 999) of being right...and of course if your choice was *right*, then his probability of making the right choice was 0. But regardless, the fact is that between the two of you, you chose 2 doors from 1000, and 1 has the car behind it...the order in which you chose is unimportant...Monty could just as well have claimed host-privilege and chosen first, made you pick second, and then opened the other 998 goats. All you have now is a set of two doors, and you know there's a car behind one. Hence regardless of what you do, there is a .5 probability of winning.

So yes, in this scenario, just4me has it. If I felt up to it, I'd write another program to test it, but I can already smell the outcome...in the very few cases where we've managed to trap a car between us, half the time it'll have been my choice, and half the time, it'll have been his.

Whether we move on to a new puzzle or continue to debate this one, can we use intellect, rather than assertions of (our) intellect or (our opponents') stupidity, to make our points?

Just my small request.

[darkeyes]

Number puzzles... *shivers*

Wen me wos at school..from day 1 wen they 1st started teachin us sums (me mum an dad started teachin me wen me wos bout 3 but that fell on ver dead ears).. it did me head in.. slowly..ver slowly began 2 grasp simple addin an subtraction.. pikked up multiplyin not 2 bad.. an then it came 2 division... arrrrrrrrrrrggggg.. then vulgar fractions... eeeeeeeeeeeeeeekkkk.. then decimal fractions.. nooooooooooooooooo...... High school came 'long an we got inta problem solvin an algebra....aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarghhh.. trig........ *faints* an ne thin else 2 do wiv Maths.. geometry... *shoots 'ersel*. Nethin 2 do wiv numbas me had difficulty.. in end struggled through me Standard Grades at 16 an got 'C' (on appeal).. an believe me that wos summat that shocked the devil outa me.. wot wos surprisin wos that me got ne thin betta than a 'E' wich wos wot me wos told 2 expect at best..

..at age 16 chucked way me maths books an swore me wud nev ev gain hav owt 2 do wiv numbas.. an so for me Highers, Maths an numbas jus didn enter inta the equation.. nearest me got 2 numbas wos chapter nos or book pages.. an course the numba on me front door.. an shoppin price tags

..so don ask me 2 get involved wiv numba nethin (cept mayb shoes an clothes sizes an owt 2 do wiv dosh..nev make a mistake ova dosh... funny that).. so 'eres a puzzle for ya.. dus me lack of ability wiv numbas mean me shudn b 'llowed out 'lone wiv me placcie cos ther me gets inta a rite tizzie wen the statements roll in.. every month ther summat me hasn budgeted for an hav forgotted.. much 2 the chagrin of a certain person who is a mathematical smart arse...:(

[allbimyself]

Actually, it doesn't matter if Monty knows where the car is or not (he did but that's beside the point).

If he did NOT know, when he shows what's behind one curtain he runs the risk of it being the car. If it IS the car, game over. If it is NOT the car, it's still 2/3 likely that the car is behind the remaining curtain.

Work it out.

FTC has nothing to do with it. Quit trying to make shit up.

Again, "odds reset" is a phrase without meaning. The odds are the same until a random even recurs. The ONLY random event is the initial pick. NOTHING that occurs after that is random. The car doesn't move.

Game shows employ actuaries so they KNOW the odds and what it's going to cost them exactly over time. They can tell the car manufacturer we are going to give away X number of cars in a given time frame because they KNOW the odds. Obviously, they wanted to give away a car 2/3 of the time.

But keep on spouting that you know something that professionals don't. Keep bringing up irrelevancies like the FTC. I've told you how you can prove it either way, but you won't. Until then you have nothing more to offer.

[Annika L]

Actually, it doesn't matter if Monty knows where the car is or not (he did but that's beside the point).

If he did NOT know, when he shows what's behind one curtain he runs the risk of it being the car. If it IS the car, game over. If it is NOT the car, it's still 2/3 likely that the car is behind the remaining curtain.

Work it out.

FTC has nothing to do with it. Quit trying to make shit up.

Again, "odds reset" is a phrase without meaning. The odds are the same until a random even recurs. The ONLY random event is the initial pick. NOTHING that occurs after that is random. The car doesn't move.

Game shows employ actuaries so they KNOW the odds and what it's going to cost them exactly over time. They can tell the car manufacturer we are going to give away X number of cars in a given time frame because they KNOW the odds. Obviously, they wanted to give away a car 2/3 of the time.

But keep on spouting that you know something that professionals don't. Keep bringing up irrelevancies like the FTC. I've told you how you can prove it either way, but you won't. Until then you have nothing more to offer.

Allbi dear, you forget that I *am* a professional, and I *did* work it out.

It certainly does matter whether Monty knows the true location of the car.

If he does, I agree with your logic 100% that you benefit from switching.

If he doesn't know where the car is, then I already pointed out that he runs the risk of exposing the car...but that if he doesn't expose the car, your odds are the same whether you switch or not, since you've both effectively made random choices. My arguments are above...if my logic is flawed somewhere, please explain where and how, rather than implying that I must not have thought things through, since I didn't arrive at your conclusion.

I agree, however, that the expression "the odds reset" lacks meaning...or at least definition. I get what people mean *intuitively* by that, but it is not a technical expression in probability.

[just4mefc]

Actually, it doesn't matter if Monty knows where the car is or not (he did but that's beside the point).

If he did NOT know, when he shows what's behind one curtain he runs the risk of it being the car. If it IS the car, game over. If it is NOT the car, it's still 2/3 likely that the car is behind the remaining curtain.

Work it out.

FTC has nothing to do with it. Quit trying to make shit up.

Again, "odds reset" is a phrase without meaning. The odds are the same until a random even recurs. The ONLY random event is the initial pick. NOTHING that occurs after that is random. The car doesn't move.

Game shows employ actuaries so they KNOW the odds and what it's going to cost them exactly over time. They can tell the car manufacturer we are going to give away X number of cars in a given time frame because they KNOW the odds. Obviously, they wanted to give away a car 2/3 of the time.

But keep on spouting that you know something that professionals don't. Keep bringing up irrelevancies like the FTC. I've told you how you can prove it either way, but you won't. Until then you have nothing more to offer.


Allbi dear, you forget that I *am* a professional, and I *did* work it out.

It certainly does matter whether Monty knows the true location of the car.

If he does, I agree with your logic 100% that you benefit from switching.

If he doesn't know where the car is, then I already pointed out that he runs the risk of exposing the car...but that if he doesn't expose the car, your odds are the same whether you switch or not, since you've both effectively made random choices. My arguments are above...if my logic is flawed somewhere, please explain where and how, rather than implying that I must not have thought things through, since I didn't arrive at your conclusion.

I agree, however, that the expression "the odds reset" lacks meaning...or at least definition. I get what people mean *intuitively* by that, but it is not a technical expression in probability.

ALLbimyself gave a reference for his information that he quoted verbatim time and time again.

From his reference page once again...
"Asked whether the contestant should switch, vos Savant correctly replied, "If the host is clueless, it makes no difference whether you stay or switch. If he knows, switch"

The "odds reset" is not meant to be an academic term of probability but I thought he might have the intelligence to figure it out. That from the new decision point you have different odds. Once again I will state I am not acting as though I know more then the "professionals" as you put it. But perhaps you are afraid I might know more then you and you keep getting pissed about it? JK :tongue: Turning into a pissing contest for you. I keep saying I am not trying to show YOU up. I was never intending to say I am better then you nor anyone else for that matter. You made that up yourself. But you keep taking shots at me so what the hell I gotta poke back now and then.

I was not trying to make shit up btw. It was a real question. Is there a reference to any data that shows people changing were in fact measured to be right 2/3 of the time. Perhaps you remember the movie quiz show? It was based on a true story of game show fixing and led to very dramatic enforcement of randomness by the FTC.

If by proving it you meant ignore wether the host has knowledge or not?... then you have no proof.... here read this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem

now it is a bit long and your lips might get tired :tongue: but you will find that the host knowledge has everything to do with the proof. This is from the "professionals" btw. :tongue: If you want me to prove it based on the original correct question that included "monty knows the location" in the question. There is no need, I all ready get that. I got it before I ever posted a reply. We are now and always have been in agreement on the answer for the correct question. You didn't post the correct question though. So there ya go.

So once again I apologize for having come off as an ass and for apparently slighting anyone.

[allbimyself]

Annika, you are correct. What I had read as proof... well, after going over the logic again I see how it was flawed.

[just4mefc]

I didn't get my answer from any wiki page, just4me. ...

So yes, in this scenario, just4me has it. ....in the very few cases where we've managed to trap a car between us, half the time it'll have been my choice, and half the time, it'll have been his.

Whether we move on to a new puzzle or continue to debate this one, can we use intellect, rather than assertions of (our) intellect or (our opponents') stupidity, to make our points?

Just my small request.

Request granted :-).

ALLBIMYSELF had repeatedly posted verbatim from his link so my statement was directed more at him and Kestrel. I could see from your writing you were speaking from your mind and not cut'n and a paste'n

I should have just let the insults go but I am a bit of an ass myself and couldn't resist a few pokes back. Sorry to have included you in my poke back.

In terms of your knowledge of probability, I worship the water you walk on!
:bowdown:

Of course with this crowd bending over might have unforeseen consequences
:eek:

[DuckiesDarling]

Okay new one...

I am Fire
I am Water
In pairs on Earth
In threes in the Heavens
I always take
And give I never bother
Retrieving from me is hard
And from only one other it is harder

What am I?

[R. Kestrel]

It certainly does matter whether Monty knows the true location of the car.

If he does, I agree with your logic 100% that you benefit from switching.

If he doesn't know where the car is, then I already pointed out that he runs the risk of exposing the car...but that if he doesn't expose the car, your odds are the same whether you switch or not, since you've both effectively made random choices. My arguments are above...if my logic is flawed somewhere, please explain where and how, rather than implying that I must not have thought things through, since I didn't arrive at your conclusion.
Why would Monty's knowledge change the probability? As long as you chose at random the first time, and Monty opens a losing curtain, you still only have a 33.3% chance of having chosen the right curtain the first time out.

In Allbi's example of the deck of cards, the relevant question is whether you're allowed to choose a card at random, not whether the dealer knows where the ace of spades is. It's unlikely that without knowledge of where the ace is, the dealer would flip over fifty of the remaining fifty-one cards and not reveal the ace of spades. But as long as you were allowed to choose any card in your initial pick, you're still much more likely to get the ace of spades by switching than by sticking with your initial choice.

[just4mefc]

Why would Monty's knowledge change the probability? As long as you chose at random the first time, and Monty opens a losing curtain, you still only have a 33.3% chance of having chosen the right curtain the first time out.

In Allbi's example of the deck of cards, the relevant question is whether you're allowed to choose a card at random, not whether the dealer knows where the ace of spades is. It's unlikely that without knowledge of where the ace is, the dealer would flip over fifty of the remaining fifty-one cards and not reveal the ace of spades. But as long as you were allowed to choose any card in your initial pick, you're still much more likely to get the ace of spades by switching than by sticking with your initial choice.

I will let Annika give the reason as she is truly the Probabilities god. but in the meantime AllBi's link does do a decent job of explaining it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem

[Annika L]

Why would Monty's knowledge change the probability? As long as you chose at random the first time, and Monty opens a losing curtain, you still only have a 33.3% chance of having chosen the right curtain the first time out.

In Allbi's example of the deck of cards, the relevant question is whether you're allowed to choose a card at random, not whether the dealer knows where the ace of spades is. It's unlikely that without knowledge of where the ace is, the dealer would flip over fifty of the remaining fifty-one cards and not reveal the ace of spades. But as long as you were allowed to choose any card in your initial pick, you're still much more likely to get the ace of spades by switching than by sticking with your initial choice.

Just4me...it's Goddess...and not just of probabilities *smile*.

My full reasoning was given several posts up, Kestrel, but I'll see if I can address your concern without getting into any heavy math. And again, we're in agreement about if Monty *knows* the location of the car, so I'm only addressing why the situation is different if he *doesn't* know.

Can we go back to 1000 doors? It just makes it easier to see what's going on. I agree with you that you have a .001 chance initially of choosing correctly. I also agree (in fact I think I was the first to point it out) that if Monty doesn't know where the car is, he is *very* likely to expose the car when he opens the 998 doors. But suppose he has picked at random and doesn't expose the car.

Yes, your probability of having picked correctly initially *remains* .001, so the probability of the car being elsewhere *remain* .999. But when Monty chose at random, his probability of having gotten it right was .001001 or 0 (depending on whether your choice was wrong or right)...basically his total probability (when you consider the two possible worlds of being initially right and being initially wrong) of having made the right choice was the same as yours...meaning Monty *also* has a .999 probability that the car is not behind his door, but somewhere else *including behind your door*. So before the 998 doors are opened, the odds are equal on both sides...you both have a tiny probability of being right...but the *same* tiny probability. But once the 998 doors open and there's no car, it collapses to the case where one of you *must* be right. Since you both had the same probability of being right, your odds have become 50/50.

I hope that helps.

[just4mefc]

Just4me...it's Goddess...and not just of probabilities *smile*.


A curse be upon me for being a sexist pig - oink

Mia Culpa
:rotate:

[Annika L]

A curse be upon me for being a sexist pig - oink

Mia Culpa
:rotate:

Actually, I'm not sure whether it's more sexist to use feminine pronouns and noun modifiers, or to just use the male forms of all nouns and pronouns (thus treating everyone as if they are male). But I'm a benevolent goddess regardless, and would never curse you for such a (first-time) transgression.

*evil smile* But it's Mea Culpa. (*sigh* the perils of divinity)

[just4mefc]

Actually, I'm not sure whether it's more sexist to use feminine pronouns and noun modifiers, or to just use the male forms of all nouns and pronouns (thus treating everyone as if they are male). But I'm a benevolent goddess regardless, and would never curse you for such a (first-time) transgression.

*evil smile* But it's Mea Culpa. (*sigh* the perils of divinity)

Damn it, I did it again. Not long ago I saw the spelling "mia culpa" but it was a play on words from a TV show (Californication about a character named Mia making an apology) and ever since I keep mixing them up argggghhhh. I do the same damn thing with "there" and "their" Have to some how remember "MEa"
of course I know the difference from "there" and "their" but still screw that up when I am lazy, so I doubt I will remember...

so now I say, Mea Maxima Culpa :)

[DuckiesDarling]

Anyone got an answer to the one I posted.

I am Fire
I am Water
In pairs on Earth
In threes in the Heavens
I always take
And give I never bother
Retrieving from me is hard
And from only one other it is harder

What am I?

[Annika L]

Anyone got an answer to the one I posted.

I am Fire
I am Water
In pairs on Earth
In threes in the Heavens
I always take
And give I never bother
Retrieving from me is hard
And from only one other it is harder

What am I?

Y'know, it took me the longest damned time to figure out how this was a number puzzle...but then the answer hit me like a flash:

SEVEN!!

[DuckiesDarling]

No, hon but good try and it's not a number puzzle per se, it's a logic riddle which fits with others in this thread.

[R. Kestrel]

I hope that helps.
Thanks a lot, Annika.

It's funny that the concept of Monty opening 998 losing curtains "at random" is supposed to increase our confidence that we did, after all, choose the correct curtain and we wouldn't be any better off switching.

In reality, of course, it would just increase our confidence that Monty does in fact know which curtain is the winner and is just trying to get us to stick with our original choice.

[NotLostJustWandering]

A is an honestant (with mouth full of cum)


The puzzle givers no clue as to whether A is Honestant or Swindlecant. That's why the question is only about B and C.

[Jessicaknight]

If:
2+3=10
7+2=63
6+5=66
8+4=96

Then 9+7= ????

(no fair answering if you read it in Marilyn Savant's column).

I could say 144 like everyone else but NO!

Never mind
2+3=10
7+2=63
6+5=66
8+4=96

9+7=16

[just4mefc]

I could say 144 like everyone else but NO!

Never mind
2+3=10
7+2=63
6+5=66
8+4=96

9+7=16

well true and a clever way to solve the puzzle ;)

[Annika L]

Thanks a lot, Annika.

It's funny that the concept of Monty opening 998 losing curtains "at random" is supposed to increase our confidence that we did, after all, choose the correct curtain and we wouldn't be any better off switching.

In reality, of course, it would just increase our confidence that Monty does in fact know which curtain is the winner and is just trying to get us to stick with our original choice.

LOL, true. Of course, if you feel that way, then by all means switch your answer...your chance of winning will be no worse if you go with Monty's "guess" than if you stick with yours...and if Monty is faking his lack of knowledge, you're *much* better off switching!

[just4mefc]

The puzzle givers no clue as to whether A is Honestant or Swindlecant. That's why the question is only about B and C.

Here read it again...
There are two kinds of people on a mysterious island. There are so-called Honestants who speak always the truth, and the others are Swindlecants who always lie.
Three fellows (A, B and C) are having a quarrel at the market. A gringo goes by and asks the A fellow: "Are you an Honestant or a Swindlecant?" The answer is incomprehensible so the gringo asks B: "What did A say?" B answers: "A said that he is a Swindlecant." And to that says the fellow C: "Do not believe B, he is lying!" Who is B and C?

although not said directly B and C do know wether A is a swindlecant or an honestant.
this is the key to the puzzle. Pretty much the same as my post about the room with 2 doors etc...
B is a swindlecant
C is an honestsant

therefore Swindlecant B claims A said he is swindlecant and since that is a lie, A is an honestant. now you can try and get all silly and say that A might have said "non yer bizness" or some other answer. But this is a reasonable deduction that

A is an Honestant

[Annika L]

No, hon but good try and it's not a number puzzle per se, it's a logic riddle which fits with others in this thread.

Not 7, eh? Hmmm...I guess I could try recalculating...or I could try a different approach altogether.

I've had a guess rattling around in my mind for a day or so, and since nobody else has hazarded an attempt, I suppose I'll toss it out there and risk looking stupid.

Might we be talking about an oxygen atom? It fits most if not all of the clues...but I could also be taking things too literally.

[just4mefc]

LOL, true. Of course, if you feel that way, then by all means switch your answer...your chance of winning will be no worse if you go with Monty's "guess" than if you stick with yours...and if Monty is faking his lack of knowledge, you're *much* better off switching!

Of course the real answer is... do your best to lose the car. If you win the car, you have to pay windfall income and sales tax on a new car suggested retail value. For a $36,000 car here in California, my "free" car will cost me $21,500 plus registration etc... Who the hell ever pays retail value on a car anyway? Better off waiting for some cash. At some point Monty might offer to buy your curtain, at least I only have to pay the income and not the sales tax on cash. :bigrin:

[DuckiesDarling]

Not 7, eh? Hmmm...I guess I could try recalculating...or I could try a different approach altogether.

I've had a guess rattling around in my mind for a day or so, and since nobody else has hazarded an attempt, I suppose I'll toss it out there and risk looking stupid.

Might we be talking about an oxygen atom? It fits most if not all of the clues...but I could also be taking things too literally.

Ding ding :) We have a winner sorta. Oxygen.

[just4mefc]

Ding ding :) We have a winner sorta. Oxygen.

I have been waiting with baited breathe for this answer :bigrin:

[Annika L]

Ok, here's one that used to amuse me when I was younger. If you find it too easy, or are upset that it's not enough of a number puzzle for this thread, I have a much more sinister one with which to torture you all!

The Wayward Inn

Ten weary footsore travelers
All in a woeful plight,
Sought shelter in a wayside Inn
One dark and stormy night.

"Nine beds - no more," the landlord said,
"Have I to offer you;
To each of eight a single room,
But the ninth must serve for two."

A din arose. The troubled host
Could only scratch his head,
For of those tired men no two
Could occupy one bed.

The puzzled host was soon at ease -
He was a clever man -
And so to please his guests devised
This most ingenious plan.

A B C D E F G H I

In room marked A two men were placed;
The third he lodged in B:
The fourth to C was then assigned -
The fifth retired to D.

In E the sixth he tucked away
And in F the seventh man;
The eighth and ninth in G and H
And then to A he ran.

Wherein the host, as I have said,
Had laid two travelers by,
Then taking one - the tenth and last -
He lodged him safe in I.

Nine single rooms - a room for each -
Were made to serve for ten,
And this it is that puzzles me,
And many wiser men.

[DuckiesDarling]

I've seen this before somewhere so I'll refrain from answering. Nice one, Annika :tong:

[allbimyself]

He only lodged 9 men. The tenth is unaccounted for. You simply called the 2nd man the 10th man :)

[Annika L]

*sigh* Yes, I lied through my teeth, didn't I? Shameful of me!

Ok all...sink yer teeth into this one:

A mouse wants to eat a 3x3x3-inch piece of cheese. He will start at a corner and eat the 27 1x1x1-inch subcubes (picture a Rubik's cube) one at a time. As he eats the cheese, he can only move forward, left, right, up, or down to an adjacent subcube...he cannot backtrack or move diagonally to a next cube.

The question is, if he starts at a corner, can he finish with the center subcube? If so, explain his path. If not, explain why not.

[darkeyes]

*Screams*..

*Puzzles*

*thinks* Now how do I explain to Kate the obscenely large number at the bottom of my mobbie bill for this last month? :rolleyes: Paying it isn't a problem, but am not sure I wish to pay for it in blood..:eek:

..not too sure this next month will be any better since there will be a fortnight's roaming charges from foreign climes.. :( *Puzzles* Since I cant leave me phone at home how do I avoid another huge bill and some right old earache next month? *Puzzles some more* And how is it that added together Kate an Siobhan's mobbie bills are always less than half of mine? This month.. more like a third. :cool:

God I hate numbers... u lot answer those puzzles for me and you are a better man than I, Bungdi Tin..... *sighs*

[Annika L]

*Screams*..

*Puzzles*

*thinks* Now how do I explain to Kate the obscenely large number at the bottom of my mobbie bill for this last month? :rolleyes: Paying it isn't a problem, but am not sure I wish to pay for it in blood..:eek:

..not too sure this next month will be any better since there will be a fortnight's roaming charges from foreign climes.. :( *Puzzles* Since I cant leave me phone at home how do I avoid another huge bill and some right old earache next month? *Puzzles some more* And how is it that added together Kate an Siobhan's mobbie bills are always less than half of mine? This month.. more like a third. :cool:

God I hate numbers... u lot answer those puzzles for me and you are a better man than I, Bungdi Tin..... *sighs*

*puzzles* My cheesy mouse is impacting Fran's phone bill...how??

[just4mefc]

*Screams*..

*Puzzles*

*thinks* Now how do I explain to Kate the obscenely large number at the bottom of my mobbie bill for this last month? :rolleyes: Paying it isn't a problem, but am not sure I wish to pay for it in blood..:eek:

..not too sure this next month will be any better since there will be a fortnight's roaming charges from foreign climes.. :( *Puzzles* Since I cant leave me phone at home how do I avoid another huge bill and some right old earache next month? *Puzzles some more* And how is it that added together Kate an Siobhan's mobbie bills are always less than half of mine? This month.. more like a third. :cool:

God I hate numbers... u lot answer those puzzles for me and you are a better man than I, Bungdi Tin..... *sighs*

The answer to your puzzle is SKYPE :tong:

[darkeyes]

*puzzles* My cheesy mouse is impacting Fran's phone bill...how??

Dunno..u smart wiv numbas.. work it out, yummie person.. an wile yas at it..work out resta the bloody bill...

Got the irresponsible wiv money lecture tonite.. nev work that out..irresponsible indeed:eek:.. me spends so lil... me clothes bill wos less than 250 quid las month.. an so far this month havn spent ne at all..... darent.. its hols next week.. an we goin 2 Paris shoppin on middle Sat.. need all me Euros for that!!!:bigrin:

[darkeyes]

The answer to your puzzle is SKYPE :tong:

Skype, me luffly, is of limited use.. can an dus save dosh.. so dus alla me free minutes on me mobbie... even hav free calls on the landline.. but they jus don save enuff.. isn always practical or convenient.. is it??;)

[just4mefc]

Skype, me luffly, is of limited use.. can an dus save dosh.. so dus alla me free minutes on me mobbie... even hav free calls on the landline.. but they jus don save enuff.. isn always practical or convenient.. is it??;)

smartphone (iphone etc...) skype with you everywhere ya go :tongue:

[darkeyes]

smartphone (iphone etc...) skype with you everywhere ya go :tongue:

Fone due for upgrade in 5 months.. is an option.. :) an do like 2 b smart.. tee hee:bigrin:

[DuckiesDarling]

hmmmm Annika for the cheese puzzle, no he can't end at the center but I'll be damned if I can remember why not.


Fran, solution... TALK LESS including Texts. It will be hard but you can do it, I have faith in you :)

[darkeyes]

hmmmm Annika for the cheese puzzle, no he can't end at the center but I'll be damned if I can remember why not.


Fran, solution... TALK LESS including Texts. It will be hard but you can do it, I have faith in you :)

Talk LESS?? But me quiet like lil mouse... talk ne less an me gob will heal up!!!!:eek: Txt less? God.. only jus went ova me free quota.. me wud b bereft....:( No talkin an no txtin.. :eek::(

[Annika L]

hmmmm Annika for the cheese puzzle, no he can't end at the center but I'll be damned if I can remember why not.


Translation for the others: she can't figure it out.

I'll give you a hint: memory has nothing to do with it ;):tong:

[DuckiesDarling]

Translation for the others: she can't figure it out.

I'll give you a hint: memory has nothing to do with it ;):tong:

ROFL I know that it's in the restricted movements the thing I remember was they did it with two color blocks. Since his path would alternate between colors he couldn't end in the center with the same color he started on. Same principle here only no colors involved. And with that I admit I give up and I'm woman enough to admit it and won't be googling to find out, I'll just wait with the others :)

[Annika L]

ROFL I know that it's in the restricted movements the thing I remember was they did it with two color blocks. Since his path would alternate between colors he couldn't end in the center with the same color he started on. Same principle here only no colors involved. And with that I admit I give up and I'm woman enough to admit it and won't be googling to find out, I'll just wait with the others :)

Ok...Twyla has given a *major* hint...anyone want to take a shot at putting it all together?

[just4mefc]

Ok...Twyla has given a *major* hint...anyone want to take a shot at putting it all together?

Well I have not had enough time to work it through. But here is my current thought. In order to have the center be the last block the mouse must be either above, below, or to any side of the center block, upon finishing the blocks. By starting in a corner, and having 3 levels to consume, s/he will always end on a corner and since diagonal movement is restricted... NO the moue can not finish with the center block of cheese. Have not worked out the actual proof on paper to confirm but that is my best theory so far.


???