NationStates Jolt Archive

ok, it's been a while since we had a great Riddle/Puzzle thread to break the monotony of all the serious debating that's going on.

so here's mine... enjoy.

oh and feel free to contribute your own.

+++

There is a breed of mouse developed. Every month, the mouse is capable of producing a litter of babies that number 12, no more, no less. After two months, the babies are then old enough to be able to produce their own litter of 12 per month

So one day, you walk into a pet store and find a newly birthed litter of mice. Taken by their cuteness, you decide to buy one of the babies and take her home.

After 10 months, how many mice would you have?

One.

One
Why must you be so quick? You beat me to it. :(

ok, it's been a while since we had a great Riddle/Puzzle thread to break the monotony of all the serious debating that's going on.

so here's mine... enjoy.

oh and feel free to contribute your own.

+++

There is a breed of mouse developed. Every month, the mouse is capable of producing a litter of babies that number 12, no more, no less. After two months, the babies are then old enough to be able to produce their own litter of 12 per month

So one day, you walk into a pet store and find a newly birthed litter of mice. Taken by their cuteness, you decide to buy one of the babies and take her home.

After 10 months, how many mice would you have?

Ok, one question before I do horribly with my math, is this new breed of mice capable of reproducing asexually or do they need the union of male and female?:confused:

Why must you be so quick? You beat me to it. :(

Sorry - I work in a library, so anything to entertain me I leap upon.

..and now I seem to be able to timewarp myself!

ok, it's been a while since we had a great Riddle/Puzzle thread to break the monotony of all the serious debating that's going on.

so here's mine... enjoy.

oh and feel free to contribute your own.

+++

There is a breed of mouse developed. Every month, the mouse is capable of producing a litter of babies that number 12, no more, no less. After two months, the babies are then old enough to be able to produce their own litter of 12 per month

So one day, you walk into a pet store and find a newly birthed litter of mice. Taken by their cuteness, you decide to buy one of the babies and take her home.

After 10 months, how many mice would you have?

One

So one day, you walk into a pet store and find a newly birthed litter of mice. Taken by their cuteness, you decide to buy one of the babies and take her home.

After 10 months, how many mice would you have?

Depends on the life expectancy of the mouse... But, it's still a binary problem. One or none.

yeppers.

on a digital clock (standard 12 hours, not military 24) how many times would it display three or more of the same number in a row in a 24 hour period?

Edit: whoops, sorry, left out some very important qualifiers

Umm 10?

yeppers.

on a digital clock (standard 12 hours, not military 24) how many times would it display three or more of the same number in a row in a 24 hour period?

Edit: whoops, sorry, left out some very important qualifiers

14 times, if it is 12:00 and not 0:00 ?
(and we exclude seconds)

One.

yeppers.

on a digital clock (standard 12 hours, not military 24) how many times would it display three or more of the same number in a row in a 24 hour period?

Edit: whoops, sorry, left out some very important qualifiers

yeppers.

on a digital clock (standard 12 hours, not military 24) how many times would it display three or more of the same number in a row in a 24 hour period?

Edit: whoops, sorry, left out some very important qualifiers
20?
1:11
2:22
3:33
4:44
5:55
11:10
10:11
12:22
10:00
11:11

20?
1:11
2:22
3:33
4:44
5:55
11:10
10:11
12:22
10:00
11:11

Ik think 10:11 is not allowed.
But 11:11, 11:12, 11:13, 11:14, 11:15, 11:16, 11:17, 11:18 and 11:19 would be - and those are the ones I missed.
*leaves it to someone else to add them all* :p

Good grief, I hate this kind of stupid trick riddle. It's not a riddle, it's a game of "spot the deliberately hidden fact you're going to gloss over and feel like an idiot about later".

20?
1:11
2:22
3:33
4:44
5:55
11:10
10:11
12:22
10:00
11:11



Ahhh yeah, clever.

closer...

Bah, 12:11. 22. I knew I'd forget one.

Umm 10?
sorry.

14 times, if it is 12:00 and not 0:00 ?
(and we exclude seconds)

sorry 14 is wrong. And yes, it's 12:00 and not 0:00

Ik think 10:11 is not allowed.
But 11:11, 11:12, 11:13, 11:14, 11:15, 11:16, 11:17, 11:18 and 11:19 would be - and those are the ones I missed.
*leaves it to someone else to add them all* :p

Oh...right...I hate this game...so what, is that 19 now, x2. That, whatever it is.

20?
closer...

38.

I have my own...

If two completely brand new cars are sent by truck directly after leaving the factory and they start at opposite ends of a one way street (one driver doesn't see the sign) and they both get to each end of the street at 1:00 and if they have gas they go 40 km/h down the street which is 0.5 km long, at what time do they crash?

.375 minutes past 1:00 ? (unless I missed something terribly somewhere)

One because it doesn't have a partner!

yeppers.

on a digital clock (standard 12 hours, not military 24) how many times would it display three or more of the same number in a row in a 24 hour period?

Edit: whoops, sorry, left out some very important qualifiers
34 times.

300 ftw

One because it doesn't have a partner!

.375 minutes past 1:00 ? (unless I missed something terribly somewhere)

Both wrong, hehehe. Keep in mind they were sent straight to the road from the factory at opposite ends of the road. Forgot something which makes it less of a sneaky trick. They are sent by truck to the road. Straight from the factory.

Both wrong, hehehe. Keep in mind they were sent straight to the road from the factory at opposite ends of the road. Forgot something which makes it less of a sneaky trick. They are sent by truck to the road. Straight from the factory.

GRRRR...don't pull something like "they were still in the trucks which did not move..so they did not crash" or something sneaky like that.:mad:


:p

I pulled a 'they don't have gas'. I said '...and if they have gas they go 40 km/h...'

Neither of these is a trick question, but they are counter-intuitive:

1.) You're on a gameshow where your prize will be either a new car or a goat. The way the prize is determined is as follows:

There are three doors, one of which has the car behind it and the other two have goats behind them. You must pick one door without knowing anything about what's behind it.

After you've made your choice, your host will open one of the remaining doors to reveal a goat, leaving you with your door and one other door still closed. At this point you're offered the chance to switch to the other closed door if you want to, and whichever door you're left with will be opened to reveal your prize.

Question: Does it matter whether you switch or not? Explain your answer.

2.) You have a bag of infinite size. You put two balls marked '1' and '2' into the bag, and then take '1' out.

One minute later you put '3' and '4' into the bag and take '2' out.

One minute after that you put '5' and '6' into the bag and take '3' out.

etc.

Question: After an infinite time has passed, how many balls will be in the bag?

1) It is better to switch, here are the three situations:

Door 1 has a goat
Door 2 has a car
Door 3 has a goat

You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you switch, you win.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 1 or 3, you switch you loose.
You pick Door 3 the host opens Door 1 you switch you win.

You win 2/3 of the time if you switch while you win only 1/3 of the time if you don't.

Correct! :)

2) Infinte balls because you take out one ball every time and put in two.

Nope. You think there are an infinite number of balls in the bag, but can you give me the number of even one ball which is still in there? ;)

Here's a real riddle.

A father died and left his three sons 26 cows. His will was that the first 2/3 goes to the eldest, the remaining 2/3 goes to the second son and the third 2/3 will go to the third and remaining to the King.

They could not split the cows per the will and brought the dispute to the King.

You are the King. How do you solve this? :D

1) It is better to switch, here are the three situations:

Door 1 has a goat
Door 2 has a car
Door 3 has a goat

You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you switch, you win.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 1 or 3, you switch you loose.
You pick Door 3 the host opens Door 1 you switch you win.

You win 2/3 of the time if you switch while you win only 1/3 of the time if you don't.

2) Infinte balls because you take out one ball every time and put in two.

None because ze mice are zhat yu wuld cell inbred.

Edit: My page now.

Correct! :)



Nope. You think there are an infinite number of balls in the bag, but can you give me the number of even one ball which is still in there? ;)

The number of balls in the bag is equivalent to the number on the ball you take out. So...0 then?

Here's a real riddle.

A father died and left his three sons 26 cows. His will was that the first 2/3 goes to the eldest, the remaining 2/3 goes to the second son and the third 2/3 will go to the third and remaining to the King.

They could not split the cows per the will and brought the dispute to the King.

You are the King. How do you solve this? :D

Spoiler:
"Add one of my own cows to the herd to make 27 cows:

the eldest takes 18, leaving 9

the second son takes 6, leaving 3

the third son takes 2, leaving 1

and as king I get my cow back"

Or alternatively I could just execute them all and keep their cows. :)

None because ze mice are zhat yu wuld cell inbred.

Edit: My page now.

good for you. *pats head*:p
I've never seen that before, "my page now".
oh and for all these number thingys 300! you're all wrong, wrong i say, maths is a lie!

*eats cookie*

JuNii, didn't you read my explanation. If you pick the door with the car you loose if you switch but if you pick either goat you win if you switch. Ergo assuming you have an equal probablility to pick each door you win 2/3 of the time if you switch.

Correct.

actually, that's wrong.

3 door, chances of picking 1 correct door is 1/3.

if one wrong door is eliminated. the chances your door contains the car goes up to 1/2. 50/50.

No, it won't. It stays at 1/3 since you already knew there was at least one other door with a goat behind it.

That is assuming the dooropener knows the prizes behind all doors and picked accordingly.

The number of balls in the bag is equivalent to the number on the ball you take out. So...0 then?

Bingo! There are none left because, after an infinity, every ball must have been taken out. It leads back to the 'one infinity can be bigger than another infinity' paradox. Have a cookie. :)

34 times.Correct.

Correct! :)actually, that's wrong.

3 door, chances of picking 1 correct door is 1/3.

if one wrong door is eliminated. the chances your door contains the car goes up to 1/2. 50/50.

it won't matter if you change your choice. it's still 50/50 wether or not you switch.

Good grief, I hate this kind of stupid trick riddle. It's not a riddle, it's a game of "spot the deliberately hidden fact you're going to gloss over and feel like an idiot about later".
http://xkcd.com/169/

Bingo! There are none left because, after an infinity, every ball must have been taken out. It leads back to the 'one infinity can be bigger than another infinity' paradox. Have a cookie. :)It's not (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal_number) really much of a paradox.

Correct.

actually, that's wrong.

3 door, chances of picking 1 correct door is 1/3.

if one wrong door is eliminated. the chances your door contains the car goes up to 1/2. 50/50.

it won't matter if you change your choice. it's still 50/50 wether or not you switch.No. If you switch, your chances of having the correct door after the switch are 2/3.

This thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=507106) explains why.

Nope. You think there are an infinite number of balls in the bag, but can you give me the number of even one ball which is still in there? ;)

Infinity is not a number, it's a construct that humans can only understand as progress. If you DO look at any specific moment, however far in the future, there will be t/2 balls in the bag.

I
No. If you switch, your chances of having the correct door after the switch are 2/3.

This thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=507106) explains why.

Then this thread fails, because


Door 1 has a goat
Door 2 has a car
Door 3 has a goat

You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you switch, you win.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 1 or 3, you switch you loose.
You pick Door 3 the host opens Door 1 you switch you win.


Does NOT show all possibilities. It's rather:

Door 1 has a goat
Door 2 has a car
Door 3 has a goat

You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you switch, you win.
You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you don't switch, you lose.

You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 1, you switch you loose.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 1, you don't switch you win.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 3, you switch you loose.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 3, you don't switch you win.

You pick Door 3 the host opens Door 1 you switch you win.
You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you don't switch, you lose.

It's still fifty-fifty. (edit: Fifty-fifty for choosing your policy, of course)

Bingo! There are none left because, after an infinity, every ball must have been taken out. It leads back to the 'one infinity can be bigger than another infinity' paradox. Have a cookie. :)

Considering you already are aware that an infinity can be bigger than the other, it should be clear that infinity - infinity is not, in general, 0. In fact, infinity - infinity could be 0, infinity, -infinity, 42 or a huge range of other numbers. Since in this case, the infinity that is subtracted from the other one is exactly half as great as the first one, an infinity remains that is exactly as great as the infinity that was subtracted.

Everything unclear?

Does NOT show all possibilities. It's rather:

Door 1 has a goat
Door 2 has a car
Door 3 has a goat

You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you switch, you win.

You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you don't switch, you lose.

You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 1, you switch you loose.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 1, you don't switch you win.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 3, you switch you loose.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 3, you don't switch you win.

You pick Door 3 the host opens Door 1 you switch you win.
You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you don't switch, you lose.

It's still fifty-fifty. (edit: Fifty-fifty for choosing your policy, of course)


And so the switch is better ;) Using your doors:

Staying:
You pick door 1 - you lose
You pick door 2 - you win
You pick door 3 - you lose

Chance: 1 in 3.

Switching:
You pick Door 1 - you switch, you win.
You pick Door 2 - you switch, you lose.
You pick Door 3 - you switch you win.

Chance of winning: 2 out of 3.

Then this thread fails, because



Does NOT show all possibilities. It's rather:

Door 1 has a goat
Door 2 has a car
Door 3 has a goat

You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you switch, you win.
You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you don't switch, you lose.

You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 1, you switch you loose.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 1, you don't switch you win.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 3, you switch you loose.
You pick Door 2, the host opens Door 3, you don't switch you win.

You pick Door 3 the host opens Door 1 you switch you win.
You pick Door 1, the host opens Door 3 you don't switch, you lose.

It's still fifty-fifty. (edit: Fifty-fifty for choosing your policy, of course)

Not true I'm afraid. The extra option included under door two is redundant because all you need to know is "if door 2 and switch, then win".

A lot of people find it easier to see the logic if we suppose there to be a million doors instead of three: only one of the million has the real prize behind it, and once you've chosen a door 999,998 doors will be opened to show goats behind them. In this situation you know that one of the two remaining doors has the car behind it, but which one?

What's more likely: that by a million to one chance you picked the right door, or that you picked one of the 999,999 wrong doors and the remaining door is the correct one? You should switch, because the odds of picking the right door first time are 1/1,000,000; while switching is equivalent to picking 999,999 doors at once (because if the prize was behind any of them then you'll win it by switching. In exactly the same way, if you switch then you get a 2/3 chance of winning, because if the prize was behind one of the two doors which you didn't pick (and it probably was) then you'll win it if you switch.

Considering you already are aware that an infinity can be bigger than the other, it should be clear that infinity - infinity is not, in general, 0. In fact, infinity - infinity could be 0, infinity, -infinity, 42 or a huge range of other numbers. Since in this case, the infinity that is subtracted from the other one is exactly half as great as the first one, an infinity remains that is exactly as great as the infinity that was subtracted.

Everything unclear?

Yes, which balls are left in the bag? If there really are any balls left in the bag then give an example of one which is left. It's can't be done, and if you can't name a single ball which will still be in the bag then it must be empty.

You're getting confused by the fact that the inequality of infinity in this case is applying to the length of time rather than the number of balls.

It's not (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal_number) really much of a paradox.

No. If you switch, your chances of having the correct door after the switch are 2/3.

This thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=507106) explains why.
nope. becauase if the host reveals that door #1 is a goat, then door number one ceases to be a valid choice.

thus the choice is narrowed down to 2 doors, doors 2 and 3. thus the odds are NOT 2/3 but 1/2. Door 1 is NO LONGER a choice.

there are only TWO doors left to choose from, doors 2 and 3 your choice of door 2 (when there were three doors) has a 50% chance of hiding the car, not 2/3.

the wiki explination is flawed because it figures that the revealed door is still a viable choice (thus the 3 in the 2/3)

yet if the revealed door is an undesireable, then it ceases to be a choice leaving only TWO doors, not three, to choose from.

Door 1 Goat A
Door 2 Car
Door 3 Goat B

at this time, you have a 1 in 3 chance to choose the car.

you select either door 2 or 3 and the host reveals door 1 to be a goat then asks if you want to switch.

No one would select door 1, not if they want the car. so the number of viable choices is reduced from 3 to 2. Weither or not you switch from 2 to 3 or 3 to 2 won't matter because there are still TWO choices. door 2 and door 3. The odds of you having the car on your first choice improves from 1/3 to 1/2. the Odds of you having the goat on your first choice decreases from 2/3 to 1/2. the act of chosing to switch is now baised on the new odds of one out of two, not two out of three.

A lot of people find it easier to see the logic if we suppose there to be a million doors instead of three: only one of the million has the real prize behind it, and once you've chosen a door 999,998 doors will be opened to show goats behind them. In this situation you know that one of the two remaining doors has the car behind it, but which one? but with each opening of the door, revealing a goat (lotsa goats there) the odds shift from 1/1,000,000 to 1/999,999 to 1/999,998 to 1/999,997... all the way down to 1/2

the other 999,998 doors stop being viable choices thus can't figure into the odds of your original door holding a car.

What's more likely: that by a million to one chance you picked the right door, or that you picked one of the 999,999 wrong doors and the remaining door is the correct one? You should switch, because the odds of picking the right door first time are 1/1,000,000; while switching is equivalent to picking 999,999 doors at once (because if the prize was behind any of them then you'll win it by switching. In exactly the same way, if you switch then you get a 2/3 chance of winning, because if the prize was behind one of the two doors which you didn't pick (and it probably was) then you'll win it if you switch..and when you get down to the last two doors from that million doors, the odds of you getting the car by switching doors is 50%. and what are the odds that the door you picked has a car? 50%.

OK, let's assume there are four doors instead of three:

Door 1 - Goat A
Door 2 - Car
Door 3 - Goat B
Door 4 - Goat C

Pick Door 1, host opens Door 3 and reveals a Goat, opens Door 4 and reveals a goat. Switch to win? Yes

Pick Door 2, host opens Door 1 and Door 3, Door 3 and Door 4 or Door 1 and Door 4 it doesn't matter because anyway: Switch to win? No

Pick Door 3, host opens Door 1 and Door 4. Switch to win? Yes

Pick Door 4, host opens Door 1 and Door 4. Switch to win? Yes

See how you have a 1/4 chance of picking the car and 3/4 chance of picking a goat? By Switching you have a 3/4 chance of picking the car and a 1/4 chance of picking a goat because you went from car to goat or goat to car.

and what are the odds that the door you picked has a car? 50%.

Which does not matter. You picked it when there was a 1 in a million chance. You already knew that there would at least be 999.998 doors with goats behind them. That actually being shown to be the case changes nothing.

In the 3 door problem it is 2/3 vs 1/3. As I and others already explained.

um what's all this palava about doors might i ask without trying to sound to ignorant?
Something to do with infinity?

um what's all this palava about doors might i ask without trying to sound to ignorant?
Something to do with infinity?

Agenda gave us two problems:

Neither of these is a trick question, but they are counter-intuitive:

1.) You're on a gameshow where your prize will be either a new car or a goat. The way the prize is determined is as follows:

There are three doors, one of which has the car behind it and the other two have goats behind them. You must pick one door without knowing anything about what's behind it.

After you've made your choice, your host will open one of the remaining doors to reveal a goat, leaving you with your door and one other door still closed. At this point you're offered the chance to switch to the other closed door if you want to, and whichever door you're left with will be opened to reveal your prize.

Question: Does it matter whether you switch or not? Explain your answer.

2.) You have a bag of infinite size. You put two balls marked '1' and '2' into the bag, and then take '1' out.

One minute later you put '3' and '4' into the bag and take '2' out.

One minute after that you put '5' and '6' into the bag and take '3' out.

etc.

Question: After an infinite time has passed, how many balls will be in the bag?

but with each opening of the door, revealing a goat (lotsa goats there) the odds shift from 1/1,000,000 to 1/999,999 to 1/999,998 to 1/999,997... all the way down to 1/2

the other 999,998 doors stop being viable choices thus can't figure into the odds of your original door holding a car.

and when you get down to the last two doors from that million doors, the odds of you getting the car by switching doors is 50%. and what are the odds that the door you picked has a car? 50%.

No. The odds of picking the right door first time are 1/1,000,000. Period. This doesn't change no matter how many doors are opened to reveal goats.

Switching is equivalent to getting to choose all 999,999 of the other doors, and as such is much more likely to get the right one.

If you don't believe the proof then look at the statistics of a site which runs an online simulation of the problem:


Switched:
No of players: 185
No. of winners: 126
Percent winners: 68.1%

Didn't Switch:
No. of players:186
No. of winners: 66
Percentage winners: 35.5%

Here (you have to play through the problem before you get to see the stats) (http://math.ucsd.edu/~crypto/Monty/monty.html)

This lines up nicely with the 2/3 probability, the numbers don't lie.

AAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

doors/cars/goats: odds are better if you switch. end of story!

How many "clean" and "unclean" animals did Moses take on the Ark?

you are driving a bus. at the first stop, 6 people get on. at the second stop, 3 get off and 5 get on. at the 3rd stop, 7 get off and 4 get on. at the 4th stop, 1 gets off and 3 get on. what is the name of the bus driver?

Here's another one: suppose a superior life form (let's call him "John Cleese") places two boxes on the table and asks you take the contents of either both boixes or only box B. Box A is transparent and has $10 in it, while box B is opaque and may have $100 in it, but ONLY if he thinks that you'll pick that box instead of both boxes. Keep in mind that he has an excellent track record of predicting people well.

Do you take only box B or both boxes?

So Box B contains $ 100 if he thinks you will pick only box B, and his guesses are extremely accurate ?

Just box B then.

AAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

doors/cars/goats: odds are better if you switch. end of story!

How many "clean" and "unclean" animals did Moses take on the Ark?

you are driving a bus. at the first stop, 6 people get on. at the second stop, 3 get off and 5 get on. at the 3rd stop, 7 get off and 4 get on. at the 4th stop, 1 gets off and 3 get on. what is the name of the bus driver?


Moses didn't take any animals on the ark - it was Noah, Ham, Shep and Japheth.

'What is the name of the bus driver?' Huh?

AAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

doors/cars/goats: odds are better if you switch. end of story!

Btw it's kind of rude to say "end of story" because it clearly isn't as people are still discussing it and besides I don't see you justifying the position you ascertain there.

Because there are two goats, the host is ALWAYS able to pick a door with one behind it. Therefore, no new information is given by his "kind" offer. Unfortunately, this is one of the problems that people always argue on.

Here's another one: suppose a superior life form (let's call him "John Cleese") places two boxes on the table and asks you take the contents of either both boixes or only box B. Box A is transparent and has $10 in it, while box B is opaque and may have $100 in it, but ONLY if he thinks that you'll pick that box instead of both boxes. Keep in mind that he has an excellent track record of predicting people well.

Do you take only box B or both boxes?

AAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

doors/cars/goats: odds are better if you switch. end of story!

How many "clean" and "unclean" animals did Moses take on the Ark?

you are driving a bus. at the first stop, 6 people get on. at the second stop, 3 get off and 5 get on. at the 3rd stop, 7 get off and 4 get on. at the 4th stop, 1 gets off and 3 get on. what is the name of the bus driver?

oh illogical stuff is easy.
Moses took on all he could carry.
The bus drivers name is Geoff

Because there are two goats, the host is ALWAYS able to pick a door with one behind it. Therefore, no new information is given by his "kind" offer. Unfortunately, this is one of the problems that people always argue on.

Here's another one: suppose a superior life form (let's call him "John Cleese") places two boxes on the table and asks you take the contents of either both boixes or only box B. Box A is transparent and has $10 in it, while box B is opaque and may have $100 in it, but ONLY if he thinks that you'll pick that box instead of both boxes. Keep in mind that he has an excellent track record of predicting people well.

Do you take only box B or both boxes?


Aahh! This thought experiment is such a bastard! lol!

oh illogical stuff is easy.
Moses took on all he could carry.
The bus drivers name is Geoff

I don't agree on the Ark one, but I can't believe I didn't get that bus driver one!

Obviously it is Geoff! It was staring me right in the face, well done!

That's what I'd do, but a surprising amount of people insist that since he already decided you're guaranteed extra money by taking both boxes no matter what he predicted...

Of course, if the sums were higher my answer might change. Say that Cleese is correct 99 out of 100 times. With $10 vs $ 100 I would take that 1% chance at him being wrong (and getting nothing).

But with 10 million vs 100 million ? A 1% chance at throwing away 10 million is starting to make me doubt.

That's what I'd do, but a surprising amount of people insist that since he already decided you're guaranteed extra money by taking both boxes no matter what he predicted...

Well let's assume he has a correct prediction rate 95% of the time.

You walk away with $100 instead of $10 95% of the time if you take only Box B.

You walk away with nothing instead of $10 5% of the time if you take only Box B

You walk away with $10 95% of the time if you take both boxes.

You walk away with $110 5% of the time if you take both boxes.

Logically you take only Box B.

So Box B contains $ 100 if he thinks you will pick only box B, and his guesses are extremely accurate ?

Just box B then.

That's what I'd do, but a surprising amount of people insist that since he already decided you're guaranteed extra money by taking both boxes no matter what he predicted...

doors/cars/goats: odds are better if you switch. end of story!

Oh, it can get worse :p How about this golden oldie:

Say we put a normal aircraft (no vertical takeoff and all that) on a threadmill or endless conveyor belt. The belt is moving backwards relative to the planes nose direction. Say at twice the max speed the plane could get on a normal runway.

Can the plane take off ? Assume it cannot take off tail first.

The answer: absolutely. Yet people still argue ;)

(how fast )is the treadmill going?

^ doesn't matter.

Only the wheels are moving. Not the Plane. The Plane needs to move to get lift.

(how fast )is the treadmill going?

That is actually irrelevant, as long as we do not take silly speeds.
But let us say... twice as fast as the plane can move forward on a normal runway.

And no, the plane cannot take off if it is backwards ;)

For those who like those river crossing puzzles.

http://www.smallcampus.net/upload/html/maths_games/2001-05-03/riverIQGame.swf

^ doesn't matter.
Correct.

Only the wheels are moving. Not the Plane. The Plane needs to move to get lift.

Clarify. Can the plane take off :) ?

(how fast )is the treadmill going?

wur did you get this treadmill from?

Clarify. Can the plane take off :) ?

Of course not. The wheels can rotate at any speed. The Plane itself has not moved from where it is. The plane needs to move (point A to point B for ex) to get the airlift required.

Of course not. The wheels can rotate at any speed. The Plane itself has not moved from where it is. The plane needs to move (point A to point B for ex) to get the airlift required.
:p

Yes, which balls are left in the bag? If there really are any balls left in the bag then give an example of one which is left. It's can't be done, and if you can't name a single ball which will still be in the bag then it must be empty.

Please read this post .

I can give you the whole list, it's

L = {t/2 <= x <= t}, with t -> infinity.

Or for a single example, the last ball you put in.


You're getting confused by the fact that the inequality of infinity in this case is applying to the length of time rather than the number of balls.

*blink* what?

Which does not matter. You picked it when there was a 1 in a million chance. You already knew that there would at least be 999.998 doors with goats behind them. That actually being shown to be the case changes nothing.

In the 3 door problem it is 2/3 vs 1/3. As I and others already explained. except when ask to switch, your choices is not out of 1,000,000 doors but 2.

so if the third door is revealed to be a goat, would you pick that door? is that third door still a viable option to choose from? how many doors are there to choose from? 3 or 2? if the number of choices is 2, how can you say 2/3rds?

I tried that site, I played 10 times and didn't switch for all ten times. I got the car 5 times. closer to half than 1/3rd.

I played it again for another 10 times and this time I always switched. I got the car 6 times. just as close to half as to 2/3rds.

No. The odds of picking the right door first time are 1/1,000,000. Period. This doesn't change no matter how many doors are opened to reveal goats.

Switching is equivalent to getting to choose all 999,999 of the other doors, and as such is much more likely to get the right one. yes, the odds of picking the right door (at the start) is 1/1,000,000 but I said that the chances of the door you picked holding the car increases with each door opened untill you have a 1/2 chance.

by asking to if you want to switch, the host is asking you to choose again. by choosing again, your odds are now 50%

Here's a riddle of my own devising. It's an easy one, but eh:

A line divides me from myself; the blacker I am, the better my health. I go through, around, and underneath, but wherever you are I'm always beneath.

Please read this post

I can give you the whole list, it's

L = {t/2 <= x <= t}, with t -> infinity.

Or for a single example, the last ball you put in.



*blink* what?

How can there be a last ball when we're talking about infinity? Just give me one number, one ball which is in the bag. It simply can't be done.

Do you understand the door problem now by the way?

For those who like those river crossing puzzles.

http://www.smallcampus.net/upload/html/maths_games/2001-05-03/riverIQGame.swf

Did anybody try this?

Here's a riddle of my own devising. It's an easy one, but eh:

A line divides me from myself; the blacker I am, the better my health. I go through, around, and underneath, but wherever you are I'm always beneath.
What if you're walking on a glass floor with a lamp underneath?;)

Al and Roy have been hired by a farm to sow flower seeds. They've been assigned a 10-acre plot of land and they split it in half so they can work independantly. Roy starts from the East and Al from the West.

Al can plow the land at a rate of 20 minutes per Acre. Roy takes about 40 minute to plow, but he can sow seeds at three times the speed Al does.

If sowing seeds on the 10-acre plot pays $100 and each were given 5 pounds of seeds to sow, how much of that money should go to Roy?

What if you're walking on a glass floor with a lamp underneath?;)

Shadow/darkness is not the answer. Good try, though. :P

For those who like those river crossing puzzles.

http://www.smallcampus.net/upload/html/maths_games/2001-05-03/riverIQGame.swf

need it translated to understand the qualifying rules.

Here's a riddle of my own devising. It's an easy one, but eh:

A line divides me from myself; the blacker I am, the better my health. I go through, around, and underneath, but wherever you are I'm always beneath.

Blood?


Ok here's my riddle...

What have I got in my pocket?

Not really, but i do have a real one thats pretty simple.

An anatomy professor is giving a lecture about the femur to doctors. The professor begins by saying that the femur can be found in the leg and is the largest bone in the body, he passes around a femur from a cadaver as an instructional aid. Towards the end of the lecture he asks one of the Physicians "How many femurs do you have?" The Physician responds "5". There are no inaccuracies in the Physicians answer, how can that be true?

Look, ignore the mathematical justification for a minute and look at the statistics:



Your sample size of twenty is practically meaningless, a larger sample size of 371 shows a strong correlation with the predicted 2/3 chance of winning by switching.

I just did a quick chi-square test estimate and the probability of this correlation being chance is much less that 0.5% (I don't know quite how much less because my statistical tables stop there). It simply isn't credible to claim that the two options have an equal chance of resulting in a win.

gee, I got alot of these also.
**Due to circumstances beyond our control, your last trial was not recorded**

except when ask to switch, your choices is not out of 1,000,000 doors but 2.

so if the third door is revealed to be a goat, would you pick that door? is that third door still a viable option to choose from? how many doors are there to choose from? 3 or 2? if the number of choices is 2, how can you say 2/3rds?

I tried that site, I played 10 times and didn't switch for all ten times. I got the car 5 times. closer to half than 1/3rd.

I played it again for another 10 times and this time I always switched. I got the car 6 times. just as close to half as to 2/3rds.

yes, the odds of picking the right door (at the start) is 1/1,000,000 but I said that the chances of the door you picked holding the car increases with each door opened untill you have a 1/2 chance.

by asking to if you want to switch, the host is asking you to choose again. by choosing again, your odds are now 50%

Look, ignore the mathematical justification for a minute and look at the statistics:

If you don't believe the proof then look at the statistics of a site which runs an online simulation of the problem:


Switched:
No of players: 185
No. of winners: 126
Percent winners: 68.1%

Didn't Switch:
No. of players:186
No. of winners: 66
Percentage winners: 35.5%

Here (you have to play through the problem before you get to see the stats) (http://math.ucsd.edu/~crypto/Monty/monty.html)

This lines up nicely with the 2/3 probability, the numbers don't lie.

Your sample size of twenty is practically meaningless, a larger sample size of 371 shows a strong correlation with the predicted 2/3 chance of winning by switching.

I just did a quick chi-square test estimate and the probability of this correlation being chance is much less that 0.5% (I don't know quite how much less because my statistical tables stop there). It simply isn't credible to claim that the two options have an equal chance of resulting in a win.

What if you're walking on a glass floor with a lamp underneath?;)

Also, let me revise it so it's a little clearer:

A line divides me from myself; the blacker I am, the better my health. I go through, around, and underneath, but wherever I am I'm always beneath.

need it translated to understand the qualifying rules.
IIRC, the prisoner must never be with the others without the presence of the policeman, the male adult cannot be left with the female kids without the female adult being present (and vice versa), and there must always be an adult on the raft. The raft can hold two people at a time.

IIRC, the prisoner must never be with the others without the presence of the policeman, the male adult cannot be left with the female kids without the female adult being present (and vice versa), and there must always be an adult on the raft. The raft can hold two people at a time.

ah, easily done.

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8766/84700569tm6.png

How can there be a last ball when we're talking about infinity? Just give me one number, one ball which is in the bag. It simply can't be done.


Have you read the post I linked? THERE IS NO POINT IN TIME THAT IS INFINITY. You cannot get to the minute 'infinity', you can only approach it. You can either read this riddle as 'a point so far in the future which can be said to approach infinity', then the answer is that in the t-th minute, t is one example of a ball in the bag; or you can say that the question is not valid. If you don't understand why, then try to tell me what was written on the last ball you put in the bag...


Do you understand the door problem now by the way?

Frankly, it seems I'm too tired right now. Right now, my answer do this switches for every ten seconds or so I'm thinking about it, so instead of just going "you're still wrong", I chose to not post on this topic. Maybe tomorrow, if I remember/have time.

Look, ignore the mathematical justification for a minute and look at the statistics:


Monty Hall Paradox II (http://math.ucsd.edu/%7Eanistat/chi-an/MonteHallParadox.html)

now try this site. and click on Host doesn't know.

then select either always switch or Never switch and see what you get.

so why does it make a difference if the host knows or not?

Here's a riddle of my own devising. It's an easy one, but eh:

A line divides me from myself; the blacker I am, the better my health. I go through, around, and underneath, but wherever you are I'm always beneath.

Nose of a puppy dog?

ah, easily done.

It's fairly easy after the first few stumbles. But the best part is the little animations when two inappropriate characters get together and one does a karate kick on the other. :D

Alright boys here's a couple of ones to keep your brain ticking over

1) A horse is tied to a five metre rope in front of an old saloon. Six metres behind the horse is a bale of hay. With out breaking his rope, the horse is able to eat the hay whenever he chooses. How is this possible?


2)A ship is at anchor. Over the side hangs a rope ladder with rungs every half metre. The tide rises a half metre every hour. At the end of five hours how much of the ladder will remain above water assuming that nine rungs were above the water before the tide began to rise?

And finally

3) A man leaves the pub and walks towards the carpark. Without the benefit of moonlight or any artifical light he was able to spot his car 120 metres away. How is this possible?

Neither of these is a trick question, but they are counter-intuitive:

1.) You're on a gameshow where your prize will be either a new car or a goat. The way the prize is determined is as follows:

There are three doors, one of which has the car behind it and the other two have goats behind them. You must pick one door without knowing anything about what's behind it.

After you've made your choice, your host will open one of the remaining doors to reveal a goat, leaving you with your door and one other door still closed. At this point you're offered the chance to switch to the other closed door if you want to, and whichever door you're left with will be opened to reveal your prize.

Question: Does it matter whether you switch or not? Explain your answer.



What if I want the goat?

Alright boys here's a couple of ones to keep your brain ticking over

1) A horse is tied to a five metre rope in front of an old saloon. Six metres behind the horse is a bale of hay. With out breaking his rope, the horse is able to eat the hay whenever he chooses. How is this possible?


2)A ship is at anchor. Over the side hangs a rope ladder with rungs every half metre. The tide rises a half metre every hour. At the end of five hours how much of the ladder will remain above water assuming that nine rungs were above the water before the tide began to rise?

And finally

3) A man leaves the pub and walks towards the carpark. Without the benefit of moonlight or any artifical light he was able to spot his car 120 metres away. How is this possible?

1. The horse itself is longer than a meter, therefore can reach the hay.

2. The ship rises with the tide

3. He was at the pub during the day.

Alright boys here's a couple of ones to keep your brain ticking over

1) A horse is tied to a five metre rope in front of an old saloon. Six metres behind the horse is a bale of hay. With out breaking his rope, the horse is able to eat the hay whenever he chooses. How is this possible?


2)A ship is at anchor. Over the side hangs a rope ladder with rungs every half metre. The tide rises a half metre every hour. At the end of five hours how much of the ladder will remain above water assuming that nine rungs were above the water before the tide began to rise?

And finally

3) A man leaves the pub and walks towards the carpark. Without the benefit of moonlight or any artifical light he was able to spot his car 120 metres away. How is this possible?

1. the rope is tied to the horse. nothing else.

2. 9... boats float.....as the tide rises, so do the rungs.

3. it was daylight.

Here's one, that is sort of obvious but I have had many people not get.

Scenario: You're in a locked room. There is absolutely no way out except for one door. The door would normally open, but on this door is a lock which you do not know the combination to. You have nothing in your possesion but a gun with one bullet. There are 10 zombies in the room, which can only be killed with a gunshot to the head. They are about to eat you alive. What is your best move?

1) A horse is tied to a five metre rope in front of an old saloon. Six metres behind the horse is a bale of hay. With out breaking his rope, the horse is able to eat the hay whenever he chooses. How is this possible?
Possibilities:
1) The rope is anchored 5 meters behind the horse, and/or
2) the rope isn't tied to anything on the other end or is tied to a cart, and/or
3) the horse whinnies anytime it wants hay and its caretake brings it to him, and/or
4) the horse sucks the hay through a specially-designed hay-straw, and/or
5) the hay is on a teeter-totter, and the horse stamps on the end of it to fling the hay into the air and land near the horse.

2)A ship is at anchor. Over the side hangs a rope ladder with rungs every half metre. The tide rises a half metre every hour. At the end of five hours how much of the ladder will remain above water assuming that nine rungs were above the water before the tide began to rise?
It depends on how poorly ths ship floats

3) A man leaves the pub and walks towards the carpark. Without the benefit of moonlight or any artifical light he was able to spot his car 120 metres away. How is this possible?
1) It's sunny out, but that's unrealistic because people generally don't leave pubs during daylight, so I'd guess
2) He uses the boop-boop thing on his keychain to hear where it is, or possibly night vision goggles.

edit - 3) He could also feel around the carpark for his car, which may have unique characteristics, or somebody could already be at the car, and simply shout to him, or the car could be equipped with a tracking device with which he could home in on it.

Here's one, that is sort of obvious but I have had many people not get.

Scenario: You're in a locked room. There is absolutely no way out except for one door. The door would normally open, but on this door is a lock which you do not know the combination to. You have nothing in your possesion but a gun with one bullet. There are 10 zombies in the room, which can only be killed with a gunshot to the head. They are about to eat you alive. What is your best move?
1) Shoot the lock, but I've read that tends not to work, so it might be best to
2) Kill yourself, because that would prevent the zombies from eating you alive, and maybe they could turn you into a zombie or something afterward.

Here's a riddle of my own devising. It's an easy one, but eh:

A line divides me from myself; the blacker I am, the better my health. I go through, around, and underneath, but wherever you are I'm always beneath.

Sounds like a basic 2-lane paved road.

The answer is to shoot the lock. It's actually an interesting psychological test, to see how easily someone would give up before finding a more meaningful way.

Here's another one:

Jane is at her mother's funeral. Her mother died from lung cancer. While she is at the funeral, she meets a man named John. John is a very strange person, and many others at the funeral viewed him suspiciously. But Jane likes John, and later the 2 go out for dinner. She finds out much about him, but never bothered to ask his relation to her mother, because she was so intrigued by his unique personality. After dinner, John kisses her goodbye and tells her he loves her, but then leaves because he has to take care of "last minute business". Jane is upset because she never got his phone number or any contact information. The next morning, Jane's sister is dead, and her death is ruled a homicide.

Who killed Jane's sister and what was their motive?

Of course not. The wheels can rotate at any speed. The Plane itself has not moved from where it is. The plane needs to move (point A to point B for ex) to get the airlift required.

Wrong :p
Since the thrust of the plane is not caused by the wheels but by the engines, the fact that the runway is moving backwards does not hinder the planes forward motion. Which means that it will take off normally on a conveyor belt.

It will however simply fall off a threadmill ;)

so if the third door is revealed to be a goat, would you pick that door? is that third door still a viable option to choose from? how many doors are there to choose from? 3 or 2? if the number of choices is 2, how can you say 2/3rds?

Let me quote myself:

And so the switch is better ;) Using your doors:

Staying:
You pick door 1 - you lose
You pick door 2 - you win
You pick door 3 - you lose

Chance: 1 in 3.

Switching:
You pick Door 1 - you switch, you win.
You pick Door 2 - you switch, you lose.
You pick Door 3 - you switch you win.

Chance of winning: 2 out of 3.

Do you see a flaw in this reasoning ?

The answer is to shoot the lock. It's actually an interesting psychological test, to see how easily someone would give up before finding a more meaningful way.

Here's another one:

Jane is at her mother's funeral. Her mother died from lung cancer. While she is at the funeral, she meets a man named John. John is a very strange person, and many others at the funeral viewed him suspiciously. But Jane likes John, and later the 2 go out for dinner. She finds out much about him, but never bothered to ask his relation to her mother, because she was so intrigued by his unique personality. After dinner, John kisses her goodbye and tells her he loves her, but then leaves because he has to take care of "last minute business". Jane is upset because she never got his phone number or any contact information. The next morning, Jane's sister is dead, and her death is ruled a homicide.

Who killed Jane's sister and what was their motive?

I did. She cheated on me. ;) sorry, couldn't resist the chance at an off-the-wall answer.

The answer is to shoot the lock. It's actually an interesting psychological test, to see how easily someone would give up before finding a more meaningful way.

Here's another one:

Jane is at her mother's funeral. Her mother died from lung cancer. While she is at the funeral, she meets a man named John. John is a very strange person, and many others at the funeral viewed him suspiciously. But Jane likes John, and later the 2 go out for dinner. She finds out much about him, but never bothered to ask his relation to her mother, because she was so intrigued by his unique personality. After dinner, John kisses her goodbye and tells her he loves her, but then leaves because he has to take care of "last minute business". Jane is upset because she never got his phone number or any contact information. The next morning, Jane's sister is dead, and her death is ruled a homicide.

Who killed Jane's sister and what was their motive?I killed Jane's sister, because the bitch daughter-of-a-coke-whore was cheating on me. On the way to do the job I saw John selling blow on the street. It looked like some junkie had just paged him. That explains his relationship with Jane's mom.

That was lulz-y but I want to know if people here can answer this since it's 1:15 AM and I'm about to pass out in front of the comp.

1. The horse itself is longer than a meter, therefore can reach the hay.

2. The ship rises with the tide

3. He was at the pub during the day.

2&3 is the correct answer 1 is wrong have a look at Philippa Island answer

1. the rope is tied to the horse. nothing else.

2. 9... boats float.....as the tide rises, so do the rungs.

3. it was daylight.

Correct 3/3

That was lulz-y but I want to know if people here can answer this since it's 1:15 AM and I'm about to pass out in front of the comp.
But there is no answer. The riddle doesn't contain enough evidence to suggest what the relationship is or why Jane's sister died.

There are only 2 possible murderers, and a riddle's answer is never obvious.

I just gave you the answer, now you must tell me WHY

Possibilities:
1) The rope is anchored 5 meters behind the horse, and/or
2) the rope isn't tied to anything on the other end or is tied to a cart, and/or
3) the horse whinnies anytime it wants hay and its caretake brings it to him, and/or
4) the horse sucks the hay through a specially-designed hay-straw, and/or
5) the hay is on a teeter-totter, and the horse stamps on the end of it to fling the hay into the air and land near the horse.


It depends on how poorly ths ship floats


1) It's sunny out, but that's unrealistic because people generally don't leave pubs during daylight, so I'd guess
2) He uses the boop-boop thing on his keychain to hear where it is, or possibly night vision goggles.

edit - 3) He could also feel around the carpark for his car, which may have unique characteristics, or somebody could already be at the car, and simply shout to him, or the car could be equipped with a tracking device with which he could home in on it.

You put too much thought into this but still you have got some good answers teeter-totter, hat straw, the first part of question two is correct

I have left the pub at daylight, because I had to get back to school, but wtf feel around for his car use his car alarm (boop-boop), home in on it, you were right the first time. Seriously mate you have got brain works interesting answers

There are only 2 possible murderers, and a riddle's answer is never obvious.

I just gave you the answer, now you must tell me WHYThere certainly are not only two possible murderers. What makes you think that?

Who killed Jane's sister and what was their motive?

Jane, in the hope that John would show up again for the funeral.

There certainly are not only two possible murderers. What makes you think that?

Because I know who the murderer is and I have chosen to narrow it down for you.

Here, let's save time. Jane killed her sister. Why?

Jane, in the hope that John would show up again for the funeral.

WINNER!

There are only 2 possible murderers, and a riddle's answer is never obvious.

I just gave you the answer, now you must tell me WHY

It was Jane

Edit: Damn you Alma Mater, you just pipped me to the post, but I have to give you credit for the answer I knew it was Jane I just didn't know why

To follow Sagittarya's lead here is another murder question

John whistled a tune as he turned he's taxi off the highway and headed into the city in the distance he saw a man flagging him down he stopped to pick him up and in got Sean carrying a bottle of champagne and some roses "And where do you want to go today Sir" said John "I'll be enjoying myself at 302 Oceanside Rd replied Sean. John said nothing as he continued driving towards the direction of the address. "I'll tell you what I won't be to long why don't you drive around in a couple of hours and pick me up" At that point John stopped the taxi pulled out a gun and shot Sean between the eyes. Since John and Sean had never met or even knew each others names what was the motive for John to kill Sean?

Another easy one I know but we will se how you go

Since John and Sean had never met or even knew each others names what was the motive for John to kill Sean?



John and his wife lived @ 302 Oceanside Rd

To follow Sagittarya's lead here is another murder question

John whistled a tune as he turned he's taxi off the highway and headed into the city in the distance he saw a man flagging him down he stopped to pick him up and in got Sean carrying a bottle of champagne and some roses "And where do you want to go today Sir" said John "I'll be enjoying myself at 302 Oceanside Rd replied Sean. John said nothing as he continued driving towards the direction of the address. "I'll tell you what I won't be to long why don't you drive around in a couple of hours and pick me up" At that point John stopped the taxi pulled out a gun and shot Sean between the eyes. Since John and Sean had never met or even knew each others names what was the motive for John to kill Sean?

Another easy one I know but we will se how you go
He hated run-on sentences?

To follow Sagittarya's lead here is another murder question

John whistled a tune as he turned he's taxi off the highway and headed into the city in the distance he saw a man flagging him down he stopped to pick him up and in got Sean carrying a bottle of champagne and some roses "And where do you want to go today Sir" said John "I'll be enjoying myself at 302 Oceanside Rd replied Sean. John said nothing as he continued driving towards the direction of the address. "I'll tell you what I won't be to long why don't you drive around in a couple of hours and pick me up" At that point John stopped the taxi pulled out a gun and shot Sean between the eyes. Since John and Sean had never met or even knew each others names what was the motive for John to kill Sean?

Another easy one I know but we will se how you go
Or maybe 302 Oceanside Rd is John's crib and is wifee was at home.

Or maybe 302 Oceanside Rd is John's crib and is wifee was at home.

Yes that is the correct answer alright one more for all those math heads out there

There was a ship wreck and Jack, Henry and Brian were washed ashore on a small island. Upon reaching the shore they fell asleep from exhaustion. A short time later Jack awoke and saw that a crate of bananas had also been washed on shore. Jack ate one third one third of the bananas and went back to sleep. Then Henry awoke and also ate one third of the remaining bananas and fell asleep. A short time later Brian awoke and not realising that the other two had eaten any ate one third of the bbananas that remained when Brian fininshed there were eight bananas left. How many were in the box originally?

I seem to be putting a lot of riddles on the thread I hope you don't mind JuNii?

Yes that is the correct answer alright one more for all those math heads out there

There was a ship wreck and Jack, Henry and Brian were washed ashore on a small island. Upon reaching the shore they fell asleep from exhaustion. A short time later Jack awoke and saw that a crate of bananas had also been washed on shore. Jack ate one third one third of the bananas and went back to sleep. Then Henry awoke and also ate one third of the remaining bananas and fell asleep. A short time later Brian awoke and not realising that the other two had eaten any ate one third of the bbananas that remained when Brian fininshed there were eight bananas left. How many were in the box originally?

I seem to be putting a lot of riddles on the thread I hope you don't mind JuNii?
27 I think.

There was a ship wreck and Jack, Henry and Brian were washed ashore on a small island. Upon reaching the shore they fell asleep from exhaustion. A short time later Jack awoke and saw that a crate of bananas had also been washed on shore. Jack ate one third one third of the bananas and went back to sleep. Then Henry awoke and also ate one third of the remaining bananas and fell asleep. A short time later Brian awoke and not realising that the other two had eaten any ate one third of the bbananas that remained when Brian fininshed there were eight bananas left. How many were in the box originally?

27. (8 * 3/2 * 3/2 * 3/2)

i got a riddle i dont think anyone here can solve,

What is greater than God more evil than the devil the poor have it the rich need it and if you eat it you will die?

it took me 5 days to solve...

i got a riddle i dont think anyone here can solve,

What is greater than God more evil than the devil the poor have it the rich need it and if you eat it you will die?

it took me 5 days to solve...

I dispute some of the conditions, but the answer is clearly meant to be: Nothing


Something easy to make up for that...eh...unsolvable riddle.

What herb cures all ailments?

nope. becauase if the host reveals that door #1 is a goat, then door number one ceases to be a valid choice.

thus the choice is narrowed down to 2 doors, doors 2 and 3. thus the odds are NOT 2/3 but 1/2. Door 1 is NO LONGER a choice.

there are only TWO doors left to choose from, doors 2 and 3 your choice of door 2 (when there were three doors) has a 50% chance of hiding the car, not 2/3.

the wiki explination is flawed because it figures that the revealed door is still a viable choice (thus the 3 in the 2/3)It doesn't need to be a viable choice.

Let's say the host didn't open the door, but instead offered you the chance to switch your door for both of the remaining doors. The odds of getting the prize would be 2/3 in that case.
Nonetheless, if you did choose to switch, at least one of the doors would be worthless. The 2/3 chance is still there, the host just opens the worthless door which would be there anyway.

you are driving a bus. at the first stop, 6 people get on. at the second stop, 3 get off and 5 get on. at the 3rd stop, 7 get off and 4 get on. at the 4th stop, 1 gets off and 3 get on. what is the name of the bus driver?Jim, as my name is Jim and I am driving the bus.

How can there be a last ball when we're talking about infinity? Just give me one number, one ball which is in the bag. Infinity + 1.

An anatomy professor is giving a lecture about the femur to doctors. The professor begins by saying that the femur can be found in the leg and is the largest bone in the body, he passes around a femur from a cadaver as an instructional aid. Towards the end of the lecture he asks one of the Physicians "How many femurs do you have?" The Physician responds "5". There are no inaccuracies in the Physicians answer, how can that be true?The physician is a siamese twin and they are holding the extra femur.

I dispute some of the conditions, but the answer is clearly meant to be: Nothing


Something easy to make up for that...eh...unsolvable riddle.

What herb cures all ailments?

Thyme/Time.

3 men stay in a hotel. The pay £30 to share a room. So each pays £10. After they've gone up the manager realises there is a special offer on and the room only costs £25. He sends the bellboy up to split the £5 refund between them. Bellboy can't work out how to, so pockets £2 and gives each man £1 each. So now they've each paid £9 which is £27 and the bellboy has £2 making £29. Who has the final £1?

Thyme/Time.

3 men stay in a hotel. The pay £30 to share a room. So each pays £10. After they've gone up the manager realises there is a special offer on and the room only costs £25. He sends the bellboy up to split the £5 refund between them. Bellboy can't work out how to, so pockets £2 and gives each man £1 each. So now they've each paid £9 which is £27 and the bellboy has £2 making £29. Who has the final £1?


I love this one. The trick is in how you present the sums.

Grandpa Bottle's Annoying Riddle:

Mary is 16. She is twice as old as Ann was when Mary was as old as Ann is now. How old is Ann?

These three little sentences reduced 7-year-old Bottle to fits of frustration during an otherwise-lovely vacation in the Caribbean. Leave it to Grandpa Bottle to taunt his grandchildren with math riddles while they're supposed to be on holiday.

yeppers.

on a digital clock (standard 12 hours, not military 24) how many times would it display three or more of the same number in a row in a 24 hour period?

Edit: whoops, sorry, left out some very important qualifiers

24 hour digital clock IS the standard. :confused:

Does it display seconds? :p

Grandpa Bottle's Annoying Riddle:

Mary is 16. She is twice as old as Ann was when Mary was as old as Ann is now. How old is Ann?

These three little sentences reduced 7-year-old Bottle to fits of frustration during an otherwise-lovely vacation in the Caribbean. Leave it to Grandpa Bottle to taunt his grandchildren with math riddles while they're supposed to be on holiday.

Is Ann 12? So that when Mary was 12 Ann would have been 8.

It took three fairly intelligent adults a while and a fair amount of disagreement to get this answer. Did you manage to solve it when you were 7?

Perhaps the most challenging riddle of recent years is this:

"Nickleback, why?"

Is Ann 12? So that when Mary was 12 Ann would have been 8.

Yeah, it's actually an algebra problem in a way.

You have four variables to consider. Mary Is, Mary Was, Ann Is, and Ann Was. You are ultimately asked to solve for Ann Is.

From the problem, we know:

Mary Is= 16
Mary Is= 2x(Ann Was)

Thus Ann Was = 8 years old. (16/2)

We also are given the information that Mary Was = Ann Is. So we know that if we can solve for Mary Was, we will also have solved for Ann Is.

The "hidden" bit of information in the problem is the fact that Mary and Ann aged at the same rate. Hence:

Mary Was + X years = Mary Is.
Ann Was + X years = Ann Is.

Plug in our known values:

Mary Was + X = 16
8 + X = Ann Is

Mary Was = Ann Is was provided in the riddle.

So 8 + X = 16 - X.

Solving for X, this means that the number of years which passed from Now until Then is 4. Four years ago, our currently-16-year-old Mary would have been twelve. Mary Was = Ann Is = 12.


It took three fairly intelligent adults a while and a fair amount of disagreement to get this answer. Did you manage to solve it when you were 7?
Funny story, I actually guessed 12 right off the bat. For some reason it just seemed like a good idea to pick the number in between 8 and 16.

But Grandpa recognized a gut-guess for what it was, and asked me to explain my answer.

Which I couldn't.

For the entire vacation.

He actually ended up having to explain my own answer to me. I really didn't have the least idea how to solve the problem.

There is a judge who is absolutely incapable of telling a lie. He is about to sentence a convicted murderer. He says to the murderer "I will give you the chance to make a statement. If your statement is true, you will be sentenced to life in prison, but if your statement is a lie, I will sentence you to death."

After the murderer makes his statement, the judge is forced to let him go free because he is incapable of sentencing him. What did the murderer say?

reposting this one since it seems everyone missed it.

Al and Roy have been hired by a farm to sow flower seeds. They've been assigned a 10-acre plot of land and they split it in half so they can work independantly. Roy starts from the East and Al from the West.

Al can plow the land at a rate of 20 minutes per Acre. Roy takes about 40 minute to plow, but he can sow seeds at three times the speed Al does.

If sowing seeds on the 10-acre plot pays $100 and each were given 5 pounds of seeds to sow, how much of that money should go to Roy?

Maybe I'm missing something, but from the wording it sounds like they have each decided they're responsible for sowing half of the assigned area. They were given equal numbers of seeds and each will sow those seeds over an equal area, so they each should get half the pay. The fact that they sow or plow at different rates doesn't really matter, as long as they are being paid for the complete job as opposed to being paid by the hour.

reposting this one since it seems everyone missed it.

Al and Roy have been hired by a farm to sow flower seeds. They've been assigned a 10-acre plot of land and they split it in half so they can work independantly. Roy starts from the East and Al from the West.

Al can plow the land at a rate of 20 minutes per Acre. Roy takes about 40 minute to plow, but he can sow seeds at three times the speed Al does.

If sowing seeds on the 10-acre plot pays $100 and each were given 5 pounds of seeds to sow, how much of that money should go to Roy?


and with all the shipwreak ones...

A ship is sinking in the middle of the ocean. on board are 15 people. the ship will be completely under the water in 20 minutes. their only hope is a 5-man lifeboat that can take them to a nearby Island.

To row to the island and back would take a total of 9 minutes. unfortunately, all 15 people don't know how to swim and the area they are in is filled with hungry sharks, so swiming for the island is out.

How many people would survive?


Roy should get $75. He sows 3 times faster than Al, and they are only being payed to sow, not plow.

Only 5 people will survive because no one on the island will row back to the boat.

reposting this one since it seems everyone missed it.

Al and Roy have been hired by a farm to sow flower seeds. They've been assigned a 10-acre plot of land and they split it in half so they can work independantly. Roy starts from the East and Al from the West.

Al can plow the land at a rate of 20 minutes per Acre. Roy takes about 40 minute to plow, but he can sow seeds at three times the speed Al does.

If sowing seeds on the 10-acre plot pays $100 and each were given 5 pounds of seeds to sow, how much of that money should go to Roy?


and with all the shipwreak ones...

A ship is sinking in the middle of the ocean. on board are 15 people. the ship will be completely under the water in 20 minutes. their only hope is a 5-man lifeboat that can take them to a nearby Island.

To row to the island and back would take a total of 9 minutes. unfortunately, all 15 people don't know how to swim and the area they are in is filled with hungry sharks, so swiming for the island is out.

How many people would survive?

There is a judge who is absolutely incapable of telling a lie. He is about to sentence a convicted murderer. He says to the murderer "I will give you the chance to make a statement. If your statement is true, you will be sentenced to life in prison, but if your statement is a lie, I will sentence you to death."

After the murderer makes his statement, the judge is forced to let him go free because he is incapable of sentencing him. What did the murderer say?
"You will sentence me to death."

If the statement was true, the Judge would then have to sentence him to life in prison, which would make the statement false. If false, the Judge would have to sentence him to death, which would make the statement true.

PARADOX!

There is a judge who is absolutely incapable of telling a lie. He is about to sentence a convicted murderer. He says to the murderer "I will give you the chance to make a statement. If your statement is true, you will be sentenced to life in prison, but if your statement is a lie, I will sentence you to death."

After the murderer makes his statement, the judge is forced to let him go free because he is incapable of sentencing him. What did the murderer say?Something like 'I will get the death sentence'.

A ship is sinking in the middle of the ocean. on board are 15 people. the ship will be completely under the water in 20 minutes. their only hope is a 5-man lifeboat that can take them to a nearby Island.

To row to the island and back would take a total of 9 minutes. unfortunately, all 15 people don't know how to swim and the area they are in is filled with hungry sharks, so swiming for the island is out.

How many people would survive?13, the first 5 peddle to the island. One goes back (otherwise the boat won't go back!), which leaves 11 minutes, to pick up 4 others. He goes back again to pick up another 4, leaving 2 minutes when he gets back, which is enough time to get another 4 people on the boat.

Only 5 people will survive because no one on the island will row back to the boat.Aha.:p

24 hour digital clock IS the standard. :confused: maybe where you are, but not here. so the clock goes from 1:00 - 12:59.

Does it display seconds? :p nope.

Aha.:p

I wouldn't. Unless it was my family or friends or something. Otherwise, if I'm safe, to hell with the rest.

maybe where you are, but not here. so the clock goes from 1:00 - 12:59.That's just... silly.

Here it goes from 0:01 to 23:59, with 12 o'clock midnight being 24:00 or 0:00 depending on the clock.

I wouldn't. Unless it was my family or friends or something. Otherwise, if I'm safe, to hell with the rest.You could be one of the two left.;)

Here's one I remembered from a long time ago, slightly improvised but with all the key elements.

There was a man working as a mall Santa, who is known among the mall staff to be a jerk, and is generally hated by all of his co-workers. One morning, "Santa" is found dead. The cause of death was ruled truama to the head by bludgeoning. After extensive searching, the cops found a revolver that they believed was the murder weapon. They brought in 3 workers to interrogate, the detective put the gun down on the table in front of each of them.

Worker #1 looked very nervous and couldn't stop staring at the gun. He finally broke down and said "I don't know who did it, but it wasn't me. Yeah the guy was an asshole but honestly I could never kill someone. Besides, I left the mall early to go see my life, I wouldn't have been there to kill him".

Worker #2 was very enraged that the cops were even asking him what happened. He said "I have good alibis and I can prove it to you. You think I'm enough of an idiot to risk my life killing the bastard. Why would I want to hit him when I could have sued him for harassment instead if he wasn't dead?"

Worker #3 was interrogated for hours, but the cops were not able to obtain much evidence that was the murderer, though they noticed he had severe arthritis in his hands and was incapable of shooting a gun.


Who did the police arrest? (assuming they got the actual murderer right)

Here's one I remembered from a long time ago, slightly improvised but with all the key elements.

There was a man working as a mall Santa, who is known among the mall staff to be a jerk, and is generally hated by all of his co-workers. One morning, "Santa" is found dead. The cause of death was ruled truama to the head by bludgeoning. After extensive searching, the cops found a revolver that they believed was the murder weapon. They brought in 3 workers to interrogate, the detective put the gun down on the table in front of each of them.

Worker #1 looked very nervous and couldn't stop staring at the gun. He finally broke down and said "I don't know who did it, but it wasn't me. Yeah the guy was an asshole but honestly I could never kill someone. Besides, I left the mall early to go see my life, I wouldn't have been there to kill him".

Worker #2 was very enraged that the cops were even asking him what happened. He said "I have good alibis and I can prove it to you. You think I'm enough of an idiot to risk my life killing the bastard. Why would I want to hit him when I could have sued him for harassment instead if he wasn't dead?"

Worker #3 was interrogated for hours, but the cops were not able to obtain much evidence that was the murderer, though they noticed he had severe arthritis in his hands and was incapable of shooting a gun.


Who did the police arrest? (assuming they got the actual murderer right)Er, number three did it?:confused:

Who did the police arrest? (assuming they got the actual murderer right)

Number 2. He knew the gun was used as a club.

Number 2. He knew the gun was used as a club.

This.

Just because #3 is incapable of shooting doesn't mean he found an alternative. #2 knew how the gun was used, and people don't look at a gun and assume it does something other than shoot.

worker 2

why would he state he hit Santa when they put a gun infront of him. wouldn't the logical and uninformed statement be 'I didn't shoot him'?

This.

Just because #3 is incapable of shooting doesn't mean he found an alternative. #2 knew how the gun was used, and people don't look at a gun and assume it does something other than shoot.

Number 2. He knew the gun was used as a club.I knew it was too obvious:(

A seafarer's ship is wrecked and he is stranded on an island. His boat is beyond repair and he does not have materials to make a new one. He eventually is able to leave, but only during the night. How does he leave, and why does it have to be nighttime when he leaves?

and they did get the full $100. but how much should Roy get? ;)

I believe my answer is right.

Here's one I remembered from a long time ago, slightly improvised but with all the key elements.

There was a man working as a mall Santa, who is known among the mall staff to be a jerk, and is generally hated by all of his co-workers. One morning, "Santa" is found dead. The cause of death was ruled truama to the head by bludgeoning. After extensive searching, the cops found a revolver that they believed was the murder weapon. They brought in 3 workers to interrogate, the detective put the gun down on the table in front of each of them.

Worker #1 looked very nervous and couldn't stop staring at the gun. He finally broke down and said "I don't know who did it, but it wasn't me. Yeah the guy was an asshole but honestly I could never kill someone. Besides, I left the mall early to go see my life, I wouldn't have been there to kill him".

Worker #2 was very enraged that the cops were even asking him what happened. He said "I have good alibis and I can prove it to you. You think I'm enough of an idiot to risk my life killing the bastard. Why would I want to hit him when I could have sued him for harassment instead if he wasn't dead?"

Worker #3 was interrogated for hours, but the cops were not able to obtain much evidence that was the murderer, though they noticed he had severe arthritis in his hands and was incapable of shooting a gun.


Who did the police arrest? (assuming they got the actual murderer right)

worker 2

why would he state he hit Santa when they put a gun infront of him. wouldn't the logical and uninformed statement be 'I didn't shoot him'?

Maybe I'm missing something, but from the wording it sounds like they have each decided they're responsible for sowing half of the assigned area. They were given equal numbers of seeds and each will sow those seeds over an equal area, so they each should get half the pay. The fact that they sow or plow at different rates doesn't really matter, as long as they are being paid for the complete job as opposed to being paid by the hour.

and they did get the full $100. but how much should Roy get? ;)

and they did get the full $100. but how much should Roy get? ;)
Like I said, if they each sow their half of the field, and if sowing the field pays $100, then they'd each get half of that. $50.

I believe my answer is right. sorry. they were paid to sow the feild, no condition as to how fast they have to sow it. as bottle said.
Like I said, if they each sow their half of the field, and if sowing the field pays $100, then they'd each get half of that. $50.
so Roy gets $50 because they split the field in half.

13, the first 5 peddle to the island. One goes back (otherwise the boat won't go back!), which leaves 11 minutes, to pick up 4 others. He goes back again to pick up another 4, leaving 2 minutes when he gets back, which is enough time to get another 4 people on the boat.

as we bow our heads to the remaining two who's names are Chum and Shark bait... :p

Professor Marks walked into his classroom and noticed a set of odd equations on his chalkboard.

8-6=2
8+6=2
9+6=3
7+6=_

As he pondered them, he wondered out loud why these strange equations were there.

A Janitor also noticed the equations and made one statement to the Professor, with the Janitor's statement, Professor Marks realized that the equations were in fact, accurate under certain conditions and he promptly completed the last equation.

What are the required conditions, and what is the answer to the third equation?

Professor Marks walked into his classroom and noticed a set of odd equations on his chalkboard.

8-6=2
8+6=2
9+6=3
7+6=_

As he pondered them, he wondered out loud why these strange equations were there.

A Janitor also noticed the equations and made one statement to the Professor, with the Janitor's statement, Professor Marks realized that the equations were in fact, accurate under certain conditions and he promptly completed the last equation.

What are the required conditions, and what is the answer to the third equation?
Is it when 6=sq.root(36)? and 1?

What are the required conditions, and what is the answer to the third equation?

Not understanding arithmetic/not caring?

3. Actually.. do you mean the real answer, or the given answer?

Either 15 if you mean accurate answer, and 3 if you mean the given answer.

8+6=2
9+6=3These are accurate in no base and under no conditions. 7+6 is eleven.

Is it when 6=sq.root(36)? and 1?
sorry, but nice try.

Not understanding arithmetic/not caring?

3. Actually.. do you mean the real answer, or the given answer?

Either 15 if you mean accurate answer, and 3 if you mean the given answer.the answer that will make the equations correct, as well as what the last equation's answer is under those 'conditions'.
close... but wrong.

These are accurate in no base and under no conditions. 7+6 is eleven. under one condition, they are accurate. and under those conditions, 7+6=|=11

Professor Marks walked into his classroom and noticed a set of odd equations on his chalkboard.

8-6=2
8+6=2
9+6=3
7+6=_

As he pondered them, he wondered out loud why these strange equations were there.

A Janitor also noticed the equations and made one statement to the Professor, with the Janitor's statement, Professor Marks realized that the equations were in fact, accurate under certain conditions and he promptly completed the last equation.

What are the required conditions, and what is the answer to the third equation?

OH some one told me...
The answer is what time it is when you add or subtract hours
8:00 minus 6 hours= 2:00
8:00 plus 6 hours= 2:00
9:00 plus 6 hours= 3:00
7:00 plus 6 hours= 1:00
Or The answer is the remainder when the real answer is divided by 12.
8-6=2, 2/12=0Remainder2
8+6=2, 14/12=1Remainder2
9+6=3, 15/12=1Remainder3
7+6=1, 13/12=1Remainder1

sorry, but nice try.

the answer that will make the equations correct, as well as what the last equation's answer is under those 'conditions'.
close... but wrong.

under one condition, they are accurate. and under those conditions, 7+6=|=11
That's just wrong though. 7+6=11 is true and the two others are false by definition. Math operates independent of "conditions".

Sounds like a basic 2-lane paved road.

I know this thread is old, but I wouldn't feel right if I didn't reply.

Yup, you got it. :D

you are driving a bus. at the first stop, 6 people get on. at the second stop, 3 get off and 5 get on. at the 3rd stop, 7 get off and 4 get on. at the 4th stop, 1 gets off and 3 get on. what is the name of the bus driver?

Like I would actually give out my name on some internet forum.. ha.

The answer is what time it is when you add or subtract hours
8:00 minus 6 hours= 2:00
8:00 plus 6 hours= 2:00
9:00 plus 6 hours= 3:00
7:00 plus 6 hours= 1:00
You can't do that though. If the units you are adding or subtracting are hours, seven hours plus nine hours still adds up to eleven hours of time. O'clock time isn't a mathematically valid unit of measurement.

That's just wrong though. 7+6=11 is true and the two others are false by definition. Math operates independent of "conditions".

quick, 10 + 8 in hex...

10 + 100 in binary...

math can operate with 'conditions' set to the numbers being used.

You can't do that though. If the units you are adding or subtracting are hours, seven hours plus nine hours still adds up to eleven hours of time. O'clock time isn't a mathematically valid unit of measurement.

but it's not 'hours', it's using the numbers and format of an analog clock face in which, there are only 12 numbers arrainged in a circular format.

and using that format, 7 plus 9 equals 4, not 11.

So Sparkelle's correct in both the conditions as well as the answer.

You can't do that though. If the units you are adding or subtracting are hours, seven hours plus nine hours still adds up to eleven hours of time. O'clock time isn't a mathematically valid unit of measurement.
Seven plus nine never equals eleven! Gack!
"O'clock time" is formally known as "modulo twelve arithmetic" and is indeed a mathematically valid system, no more invalid than the "imaginary" numbers or other alterations to the usual rule-set.

quick, 10 + 8 in hex...

10 + 100 in binary...

math can operate with 'conditions' set to the numbers being used.I mentioned base in a previous post. But that's not a condition, it's a numbering system.

Seven plus nine never equals eleven! Gack!Gack!

"O'clock time" is formally known as "modulo twelve arithmetic" and is indeed a mathematically valid system, no more invalid than the "imaginary" numbers or other alterations to the usual rule-set.But that's not a "condition" - it changes the communicated content of the question! There wasn't any "modulo" bidness written on the chalkboard.


Here are some better riddles:



1) What is the subjective experience of consciousness and whence does it come?


2) Related to 1 - What is the nature of the universe and existence, including: a) Is it a sub-process of a metaverse (simulation/hallucination/computation/etc.), and if so, how many meta-layers are there? What is its dimensionality in relation to our powers of observation? b) What was its impetus? If it ends, how will it? Answer either a or b, or both if you can.


3) Solve http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necktie_Paradox This is an easy one.

I mentioned base in a previous post. But that's not a condition, it's a numbering system. and is not setting the numbering system to be used in the equation a 'condition'?

1) What is the subjective experience of consciousness and whence does it come?the subjective experience of consciousness comes from actual experience.

2) Related to 1 - What is the nature of the universe and existence, including: a) Is it a sub-process of a metaverse (simulation/hallucination/computation/etc.), and if so, how many meta-layers are there? What is its dimensionality in relation to our powers of observation? b) What was its impetus? If it ends, how will it? Answer either a or b, or both if you can.
the nature of the univers and exisitance is that it is.
a) there are as many meta-layers as there is. and our powers of obersvation is only hampered by what we can see.
b) how it started is in it's beginning... how it will end is in it's ending.

3) Solve http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necktie_Paradox This is an easy one. what's to be solved?

They are wrong. it's not 50/50. for the one result they haven't counted on is that both ties cost the same. but even excluding that, would I make the wager? no. I would never wager a gift from my wife/GF. that one fact would make my tie more valuable to me.

1) What is the subjective experience of consciousness and whence does it come?
This is a question, not a riddle.


2) Related to 1 - What is the nature of the universe and existence, including: a) Is it a sub-process of a metaverse (simulation/hallucination/computation/etc.), and if so, how many meta-layers are there? What is its dimensionality in relation to our powers of observation? b) What was its impetus? If it ends, how will it? Answer either a or b, or both if you can.
These are questions, not riddles.


3) Solve http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necktie_Paradox This is an easy one.

It's called a win-win situation.

and is not setting the numbering system to be used in the equation a 'condition'?No. It is a fundamental alteration of the very statement of what is being conditioned. (Don't ask me how this is different!)

the subjective experience of consciousness comes from actual experience.That's a tautology!

the nature of the univers and exisitance is that it is.
a) there are as many meta-layers as there is. and our powers of obersvation is only hampered by what we can see.
b) how it started is in it's beginning... how it will end is in it's ending.Triple tautology!

These are questions, not riddles.They are riddles in question form.

It's called a win-win situation.Wrong!

They are wrong. it's not 50/50. for the one result they haven't counted on is that both ties cost the same.I don't think that would change anything.

but even excluding that, would I make the wager? no. I would never wager a gift from my wife/GF. that one fact would make my tie more valuable to me.That's not what I was going for, but I'll give it to you.