[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Free Show | Home]

Riddle thread

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 103
Thread images: 7

File: image.jpg (58KB, 383x576px) Image search: [Google]
image.jpg
58KB, 383x576px
Post your best riddles.

To start: have 12 identical-looking balls. One of these balls has a different weight from all the others. You also have a two-pan balance for comparing weights. Using the balance in the smallest number of times possible, determine which ball has the unique weight, and also determine whether it is heavier or lighter than the others.
>>
>>8351132
7
>>
>>8351378
I think you can do it in 5?

6v6, select heaviest group
3v3, if both are the same weight do 3v3 the lighter group
Now do 1v1 with each of the 3 in the anomalous group against a known correct weight ball from the other 6.

Worst case: ball is lighter, ball is last or second last tested: 6v6, 3v3, 3v3, 1v1, 1v1

That's the best I could come up with.
>>
>>8351382
That's ideal; there are 2*12=24 possible scenarios, which is more than the 2^4=16 outcomes which could be determined in 4 weighings.
>>
>>8351382
Just take two balls from the last three and weigh them against each other.
If the scale is uneven replace one ball with the third.
If the scale is even replace one ball with the third.
Either way its 2 measurements instead of 3 and you will know which ball and if it's heavier or lighter
>>
You're given a lock with three rotating dials, each labeled 0 through 9, and wish to crack it in the fewest possible tries. Ordinarily, this would take up to 10*10*10=1000 attempts, but you know that one of the dials on this lock is broken. However, you aren't sure which, and there's no way to tell other than by analysis of which settings open the lock and which don't. How many different times do you have to try to crack the lock before you can be sure of opening it?
>>
>>8351388
Except each weighing can have 3 outcomes:
>Left side is heavier
>Right side is heavier
>Both have equal weight

This is why 3 weighings are enough.
>>
Split into three sets of 4: Weigh twice to isolate which set of 4 has the unique weight.

Split the set of 4 into two sets of 2: Weigh once with 2 balls from one of the other sets to isolate which set of 2 has the unique weight.

Split the set of 2 and weigh one of the balls individually with a ball from the other set. Since the weight needs to be determined as greater or less, both balls need to be weighed even though only one weigh is required to identify it.

Total weighs: 5
>>
>>8351409
Shit, my bad. 3-weighing solution:

Weigh two groups of 4.
If they're equal:
Look at the other 4. Weigh 2 of the 4 against one of the 4 and one of the normal.
If they're equal:
Weigh the remaining one against a regular coin.
If (WLOG) the 2 are heavier:
Weigh one of the potentially-heavy and one of the potentially-light coins against 2 normal-weight ones.

If coins A,B,C,D are heavier than a,b,c,d:
Weigh A,B,c and a,C,D.
If equal:
Weigh d against b.
If A,B,c heavier:
Weigh A,c against 2 normal coins.
If a,C,D heavier:
Weigh c,C against 2 normal coins.
>>
Given 32 stones of distinct weights and a pan balance, what is the least number of weighings needed to identify the heaviest and second-heaviest stones?
>>
File: weighs.png (7KB, 394x246px) Image search: [Google]
weighs.png
7KB, 394x246px
>>8351428
>>
>>8351394
That's true. So 6v6, 3v3, 3v3, 1v1 in worst cast.

>>8351428
I thought the strategy would be more effective, but it turns out worse than the normal solution.

4v4, 4v4, to find out which group of 4 has the anomalous ball, and whether it is heavier or lighter.
Then 2v2 against known good balls, then do 1v1 of 1 of the group of 2 anomalous balls against a known good ball.
That's 4, which is equal worse case to going 50/50 split from the start. What's more the best case is worse (splitting in half gives you worst case 4, best case 3).

I think you need to isolate a good set of balls fairly quickly, and realistically that takes 2 comparisons. Even if you have groups of 4 it takes 2 more comparisons to find which ball it is.


How about using 4 groups of 3.
First compare group 1 and 2, take note of whether they are equal, and which group is heavier.
Now compare group 1 and 3, again take note of if they are equal, and which group is heavier.
If 1,2,3 are equal, then the anomalous ball is in group 4. If 1 and 2 are unequal, but 1 and 3 are, then it's group 2. If 1 and 2 are equal but 1 and 3 are not, then it's 3, if 1 and 2 are unequal but so are 1 and 3, then it's 1.
Now we have a group of 3 balls, one of which is the ball. We also know if the ball is heavier or lighter.
Now compare any 2 balls in that group, if they are equal then it's the 3rd ball, if they are unequal then select the ball that is heavier/lighter based on our knowledge.

Best and worst case 3 comparisons. Can't think of a way to do it in less.
>>
>>8351132
oh this is one of my favourites!
3 iirc
>>
File: 4654651.png (212KB, 477x408px) Image search: [Google]
4654651.png
212KB, 477x408px
Here's mine:
you have 10 chests with golden coins, one of the chest has fake coins; the real coins weigh 10 grams, the fake ones weigh 9 grams; you have a balance that shows weight; can you find a way to determine which chest has the fake coins in one weighing?
>>
>>8352015
Take one coin from first, two from second and so on. Which ever multiple of nine you get is the order of the chest.
>>
Not really a riddle, but an interesting idea I got. My friend had been staying over at my place and he tends to wear mismatched socks because "He can't be bothered to match them and always picks two socks at random to make a pair". One day I noticed that his socks match and apparently it was not on purpose.

This got me thinking: Say he has N distinct pairs of socks and he matches them at random. What is the probability of getting at least one pair right? What is the average amount of correct pairs?

I vaguely remember solving a similar problem in my discrete mathematics class, it was something like 1/e as n tends to infinity, but I can't for the love of god remember how I got the answer.
>>
>>8351132
I'm not sure what is worse, the fact that the OP posted this because he thought it was new or the fact that so many newfags are posting answers because its the 1st time they've seen it on /sci/.
>>
>>8351407
This is a good one. Hope I can solve it.
>>
>>8352033
I'm OP. I know it's not new. I only wanted riddled. Here:


An acrobat thief enters an ancient temple, and finds the following scenario:
1. The roof of the temple is 100 meters high.
2. In the roof there are two holes, separated by 1 meter.
3. Through each hole passes a single gold rope, each going all the way to the floor.
4. There is nothing else in the room.
The thief would like to cut and steal as much of the ropes as he can. However, he knows that if he falls from height that is greater than 10 meters, he will die. The only thing in his possession is a knife.

How much length of rope can the acrobat thief get? And how?
>>
>>8352033
the worst is the fact that you're an enourmous cunt
>>
>>8352058
I think much more.
>>
>>8352049
All of it, tie the ropes at the top through holes, go down holding on both. Once on ground pull on one rope.
>>
>>8352049
Can the thief climb out through one of the holes? If so: all of both ropes.
If not: can the gold ropes be tied securely to each other without slipping?
>>
>>8352142
No and yes.
>>
>>8352136
Another way:
1)cuts one rope from top at say 1 meter
2)ties the cut ends with a shoelace knot with the end of the rope witch he is on
3) once tied, he jumps on the tied up rope and cuts the original one
4)goes down and puls on the first rope to release both ropes
So he gets 199 meters of rope
>>
Riddles coming from here
https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/riddles/medium.shtml
>>
>>8351132
3 measurements:
3 groups by 4 balls, a,b,c

1. a v b
If a>b select a
If b>a select b
If a=b select c

Split selected in half and measure
2. 2v2 - select heavier

3. 1v1 - select heavier

Now you have the heavier ball.
>>
>>8352258
How do you know that the anomalous ball is heavier, rather than lighter?
>>
>>8351132
4

How is this good?
>>
>>8352027
1/N

You pick one. Then the second is chosen at random fron set N
>>
>>8352049
>How much length of rope can the acrobat thief get? And how?
Almost all, assuming he knows his knots.
>>
>>8351407
300
>>
>>8351428
After the first try, if one of the sets of 4 is heavier than the other, which one do you pick for further testing?
>>
>>8351132
If you pick two random balls and weigh them, it is possible for them to have different weights. Then pick the heavier one and compare it to another ball. If they're different weights you know the heavier one is the unique one. So the least amount of weighings possible is 2 and the ball is heavier in this situation
>>
>>8352375
fuck, I thought it was written in OP's post, my bad...
>>
>>8352481
Explain yourself
>>
>>8351132
I have one.

The story takes place in a monastery. The rules are very strict in this place. No communication is allowed between the monks, of any kind. The monks meet once a day only, for dinner, where they can see each other.

One day at dinner time, the master monk makes a speech. He says that several monks will need to leave. He says he will mark in their sleep with a cross on the forehead those who need to leave. He says that as soon as the marked ones discover they are marked, they need to leave at once.

After the third dinner after that night, all the marked monks leave, together, at the same time.

How many were they? Explain.
>>
>>8352388
Actually, if N is the number of distinct Pairs it would actually be 1/(2N-1)
>>
>>8352592
Oh all the monks do not leave at the same time?
>>
>>8352644
Well, on the third dinner, all the marked ones leave the monastery. Implying they all understood, at the same time, that they were marked.
>>
>>8352656
Well I'm stumped anon. Can you give a clue?
>>
>>8352661
Sure.

Imagine there is 1 monk marked. Take then the first dinner. All monks can see each other. Take the marked monk. What does he see? What does he conclude?

Now imagine there are 2 monks marked...
>>
>>8352661
Yeah I'm stumped too. If the mark is on their forehead and they can't see it, and monks aren't allowed to communicate, then the only way they'd know is if they looked in a mirror. But that's something that shouldn't be in a monastery.
>>
>>8352592
Oh, the good old Black-Hat White-Hat Riddle. Its easy enough, but i always suck at explaining it.
There are three marked Monks.

If there were One marked Monk, he would see that there were no marked Ones and leave on Day One.
If there were Two mMs, they would see that the other mM didn't walk out on Day one. Therefore they can conclude that they are marked as well and both walk out on Day Two.
And the same goes for all number of days, the marked Monks will always walk after the same number as meals as there are marked Monks.

(The only problem would be if there were no marked Monks and the Prior was just trolling, as nobody would see a marked One and all would walk out)
>>
>>8352695
That's very well reasoned anon. There is no mirror indeed.

Thing is there is a way for them to deduce things by just looking at each other
>>
>>8352701
You got it anon, good job. didn't know that was a classic.

Explanation is basically what you stated.

* if there is 1 monk marked. Take this monk. 1st dinner. He sees no mark on other monks' foreheads. He concludes he is the marked one. He leaves after dinner 1.

* if there are 2 monks marked. Take one of them. 1st dinner. He sees 1 monk marked. He cannot conclude. He stays. So does his fellow marked monk. 2nd dinner. He sees the marked monk is still here. He concludes that he saw another mark, otherwise he would have left after dinner 1. He concludes then that he is marked. Same reasoning made by fellow monk. They both understand after dinner 2 and leave at the same time.

* if there are 3 monks marked. Take one of them. 1st dinner. He sees two marked monks. He cannot conclude, but he does the reasoning we made earlier. He knows that if they are only 2 marked monks, they will have to leave after dinner 2 (as explained above). If he sees them on dinner 3, he understands he is marked. Same reasoning for the two other monks. They all understand at the same time they are marked, and leave after dinner 3.

Answer is: there are 3 marked monks.
>>
Here is a funny riddle.
For fags that know maths, its a discrete version of the mean value theorem.

A guy is having a practice session of basketball. He spend his day trying shots. He miss the first shot, but at the end of his day, his success rate is over 80%. Can you be sure that, at some point in the day, his success rate is exactly 75%?
>>
Bump and hint : the answer is yes.
>>
>>8352775
well let's take this case.
guy misses first shot. rate=0%.
takes shot 2. rate=1/2=50%.
takes shot 3. rate=2/3=66...%
takes misses shot 4. rate=2/4=50%
takes shot 5. rate=3/5
takes shot 6. rate=4/6=2/3
takes shot 7. rate=5/7
takes shot 8. rate=6/8=3/4=75%

how to prove the thing generally then??
>>
>>8352724
>didn't know that was a classic.
It's usually "illustrated" with Prisoners and Hats.


Another similar one:
There are 4 Prisoners.
They are buried to their Necks in a single file, looking in the same direction. They can see the other Prisoners in front of them, but can't turn and look back. They also can't directly speak with each other, but hear what the others say to the Warden.
Then the Warden comes and puts Hats on each of them, chosen from a Pool of two Blue and three Red.
If three of them are able to correctly call out their own color all are free to go, but if even one of them is wrong all are killed.
After a moment of thinking all are set free. How?

Bonus question: In this scenario only those who can correctly call out their own hat color are able to escape. How does the jailer assure that at least one Prisoners remains?
>>
>>8351382
What about this:

Make 3 groups (let's call them A, B, C) of 4.
1. Weigh A against B. If even, pick C and go to 2, otherwise go to 1b.
1b: Weigh A against C. If even, pick B and go to 2, otherwise pick A and go to 2.
2: Split the picked group into 2 pairs (D, E). Weigh pair D.
3: If 2 resulted in even, pick a ball from E and compare it to a ball from D. If even, the other ball from E is the odd one. If uneven, the picked ball from E is the odd one. If 2 resulted in uneven, do the same thing with D and E switched.

3-4 steps. Any mistakes that I missed?
>>
>>8352775
Ok here is a reasoning.

Let's take a number M of missed shots.
Let's write N the total number of shots.

We know that M/N > 80% in the end.

Question is: does P exist so that M/(N-P) = 3/4 exactly ?
4M = 3(N-P)
Question is equivalent to: does this equation has a solution in P? 3P = 3N - 4M
>>
>>8352033
>everyone has been on /sci/ forever
>everyone has read all the threads ever posted
>>
>>8352592
The master monk marked his own forehead because he broke the rule of no communication by telling the other monks he would be marking foreheads. He stayed awake for a couple of days to troll a few perfect logicians, then marked his forehead and fucked off.
>>
>>8352830
Its not exactly this but keep searching this way. You want (N-M)/N = 3/4
>>
>>8352785
Do other tries, you might see something trying.
>>
>>8352830
Okay, stupid question, can you explain the Formula, especially what P is supposed to represent?
I have solved the problem for myself, but i can't really grasp the way you wrote it down.
>>8352918
Oh, okay, that's not the question OP, i was really racking my sleep deprived brain over this solution.

Anyway, the general thing i came up with is this:
s= Shots
m= Missed Shots
n= Base Denominator
s, m, n are all Integers.
s, m > 0 , n>1

If you have the threshold of [math](n-1)/n[/math] and start below it you have to cross [math]s-m/s = n-1/n[/math] if you want to go bigger than [math]n-1/n[/math] .

And here i am somewhat stuck and maybe can't express it mathematically correct anymore, i might get a bit rambly, but please bear with me.

In every interval [math]n[/math] [math]m[/math] can increase between [math]0[/math] and [math]n[/math].

Therefore the difference [math](s-s/n)-(s-m)[/math] can decrease at most by [math]1[/math].

The easiest way to prove that [math]s-m/s = n-1/n[/math] falls on a number divisible by n by proving that there are no integer solutions otherwise.
[math]s-m/s = (n-1)/n[/math] while
[math] s = kn+y and 0<y<n [/math]
And if we substitute this in, we get:
[math](kn+y)-(m/(kn+y)) = 1-1/n[/math] then [math]-1[/math] and [math]*(-1)[/math]

[math](m/(kn+y))+1-kn-y) = 1/n[/math] flipping Denominator and Numerator around for:

[math]n = 1/((m/(kn+y))+1-kn-y)[/math]
As we know that n is an Integer and n>1 we can see that [math](m/(kn+y))+1-kn-y[/math] has to be between 1 and 0: [math] 1>((m/(kn+y))+1-kn-y)>0, m>0, k>=0, n>1, 0<y<n, kn+y>m [/math]
I'll refer to Wolframalpha for some of the smoothing and alternate forms [ 1>((m/(kn+y))+1-kn-y)>0, m>0, k>=0, n>1, 0<y<n, kn+y>m ]
but we get this, which shows that there is not integer solution:
[math]m/(kn+y)<kn+y ∧ m/(kn+y)>kn+y-1[/math]
>>
>>8352382
Already posted in this thread is an answer with 3, so maybe it's better than you think
>>
>>8351407
Taking dials 1 and 2, iterate through the 100 combinations. If 3 is broken, then one will work.

If it doesn't work, hold 2 fixed and iterate through 1 and 3, all 100 combinations. If 2 is broken it will open, otherwise you know 1 must be broken.

Now hold 1 fixed and go through 2 and 3, knowing that the solution must be a combination of those 2.

Actual answer 300 tries to open, 299 to know the combination.
>>
>>8352538
Best case 2, worst case 7, O(n)

Brute force isn't a particularly good solution.
>>
>>8352753
To get from 0/1 to 4/5 I guess at some point you need to pass through 3/4.

To get 80% score rate you need to have a total number of throws divisible by 5. At some point to get there you need to have taken a number of throws divisible by 4.

I'm not sure the correct way to prove it, but to go from 0/1 to 4/5 you need to pass through 3/4 at some point, either at your 4th throw, or 8th, 12th, etc. I can see that you can't cross 3/4 without landing right on it, but I don't see a reason why. Even if you take 100 throws, by (.75*.8*n)/(.8*n)=80 at the latest you need to get 75%.

I don't know how to prove this kind of thing. What's the best method to use? Perhaps induction?
>>
>>8351432
A slight modification to this solution can give you a chance of figuring it out in 2 moves if you get lucky (assuming marking is allowed).

If the first weighing is unequal, you can remove two balls from one side, say C and D from the heavier side, and transfer one ball from the lighter side to the heavier side, say d. If, by chance, the scale changes directions, you know the transferred ball is the odd one, and you know whether it is heavier or lighter (depending on which side it came from on the original measurement). If not, you can proceed the same way.
>>
>>8353500
Oops. Switching one ball from one side to the other in the second move, knowing the ball is in the group somewhere (which is guaranteed if you start with 6v6), you are always going to have a chance of getting lucky and moving that ball, and solving it in two moves. However, doing this in the scenario I mentioned in >>8353500 would present the possibility of requiring 4 steps to solve it, rather than the guaranteed 3 following the steps in >>8351432
.
>>
>>8351132
here is one that i enjoyed

you are in a room with 3 light switches, all in the off position, and a door.
you are told that through the door and around the corner are three identical light bulbs, all curently off.
each different switch toggles a different corresponding bulb, but you cant see the bulbs from the switches

your task is to determine which switch works which bulb, you can only pass the door once.

google will tell you the answer, but if you havent heard it before, it will be very gratifying to discover the answer yourself.
>>
>>8351132
Half balls on one scale, half balls on other scale.

Record difference.

Take one of the halfs and half it again, putting one half on one side, and one half on other side

If balance then discard; else discard other pile.

Use recording from earlier with knowledge of which pile different ball is in to determine if ball is heavier or lighter.

Continue halving piles and weighing them until different weight ball is found.

Around 6 moves.
>>
>>8352724

I like this a lot, but I find myself wondering: if there is no communication between the monks (not even meaningful looks or similar), why don't more than one assume they are marked and leave? The ones that are not marked should reach the same conclusion as the marked ones (although erroneously), shouldn't they?
>>
>>8353693

I see your point. The others, the unmarked ones, are making the same reasoning. They see 3 marked monks. They cannot conclude, each of them thinking "I see 3 marks, but maybe I'm the 4th one", so they all stay. Even after dinner 3, because they made the reasoning we did: they know they have to wait until dinner 4.

At dinner 4, they see the marked monks left, they all conclude at the same time that they are not marked.
>>
File: imaget.png (144KB, 2214x1248px) Image search: [Google]
imaget.png
144KB, 2214x1248px
>>8352830
Ok thank you, I misused the quantities... If M is missed shots, N total numbers of shots, then yeah we want (N-M)/N > 80% in the end, and we wonder if integers N and M exist so that (N-M)/N=3/4.

That yields 1-M/N = 3/4. This always solutions in N: N=4M.
For example, if the lad misses 5 shots, he needs to perform good shots so that he shoots 20 times. And then his success rate will be (20-5)/20=3/4
If the lad misses 27 shots, he will need 108 shoots.

That's not a proper demonstration though. I don't know how to "write" it, and what are the exact hypothesis and so on...
>>
>>8353790

Ah right, missed that. Thank you for the explanation
>>
>>8353349
Your question is not stupid. I missed the thing. P was supposed to be an arbitrary variable, going from 0 to whatever needed, and I was wondering if the fraction representing the success rate was reaching for a given P, the value 3/4. It doesn't lead anywhere interesting, so I left that...

On safari, the maths/eqn environments don't seem to produce anything readable, so I struggle read your explanations, but did you anwser "yes it's possible" or "no it's impossible" ?
>>
>>8353584
This one is funny. With the disappearing of filament bulbs for the benefit of LED bulbs, this will become trickier for the next generations. Maybe it will become a pre-historical riddle one day.
>>
>>8353584

You're right, that is a good one and it feels nice to get it by yourself. Helps to visualize it, too.


>>8353875

True, power saving bulbs are also out.
>>
>>8352642
Obviously works for n = 1 and n = 2, but what if n = 3? The chance is clearly different from 1/N as you have a one in five chance to get the correct match with ONLY the first pair, thus the chance is actually higher.
>>
>>8353875
Run really fast and you will be able to see the last of the rays of light? Dunno.
>>
>>8354073
Don't be daft. You'd need a meme drive to be able to do that.
The actual way is to feel each of the switches. If the middle one is warm then hold your dowsing rods over it until it cools, THEN go into the other room, and your rods will show you which is which.
>>
>>8351132
You have 100 swimming pools filled with water, save for exactly one, which has been filled by mistake with a highly toxic liquid which differs from water ONLY by its weigh : while 1liter of water weighs 1 kg, 1 liter of the toxic liquid weights (say) 2 kg.

You have a big scale, but you can only use it ONCE.

How do you determine which pool is filled with toxic liquid ?
>>
>>8353934
I don't get what you are saying, desu.

There are N pairs of sock. And i assumed every pair was distinct, so there are no four socks that are the same.
Also the formula i posted is indeed only for the first draw, as the math for later draws is more complicated and Stochastic 101 is way too far in my past so i am not 100% on the right notation, so bear with me here:
N is the number of pairs, T = 2N is the total number of socks, S is the number of socks drawn so far before this pair-up, C is the chance of a match.

Cₛ = ((T-S)/(T-S-1))-(S/T-S)

Chance for a Match is the Number of available socks divided by the available Socks after

>(Sock Total - Drawn Socks) divided by (Sock Total - Drawn Socks -1 )

Minus the Chance that the partner has already been drawn
> ( Drawn Socks divided by Total Socks )

Cₛ = ((T-S)/(T-S-1))-(S/T-S)
>>
>>8352592
This one, or rather a variant of it, is my favorite.
>>
>>8352049
The thief doesn't even need to enter the temple. Simply climb onto the roof and cut them off from there.
>>
>>8354088
Take 1l from pool 1, 2l from pool 2, 3l from pool 3 etc.
The difference between the measured weight and the expected weight (5050kg) is the number of the pool with the toxic stuff.
>>
>>8354933
clever
>>
>>8354079

What? Turn on one switch for like a minute. Turn it off again, turn another one on.
Enter the room. The lighted bulb belongs to the last switch you activated. Touch the other two off bulbs and the warm one belongs to your first switch, leaving only the cold one.

No rods, nothing overcomplicated.
>>
>>8356069
But what if the ambient temperature I the second room is somewhere around 200 Fahrenheit? Won't that make it difficult to tell which of the two darkened bulbs is the warmer?
You need a solution that works in all conditions.
>>
>>8352049
He could basically steal all of it (barring short stumps at the top).
First, he climbs up all the way and cuts the rope B, which he is not currently on.
He doesn't let it fall to the ground, thou, but attaches it to rope A.
He holds on to B and cuts of A.
Then he knots A back onto the stump that it has one tensionable end and one end that can be pulled to release the knot with the tensionable reaching down to the ground. (I don't know the right knot terminology, sorry)
He holds on to A again, unties B and attaches it to the releasing end of A.
Carefully he climbs down and when he is at the end of the rope janks on B which releases the knot and makes almost 200m of golden rope come down.
>>
AKA the "chances of ever being paired up with your soul mate when there are >7 billion people on this planet" riddle
>>
>>8352027
>>8356234

forgot to quote the riddle
>>
>>8356200

Then you wouldn't walk around the corner, as you'd die in that heat.
Fucking autism, it is a clearly and simply stated riddle.

Plus, this is /sci/, please fuck off with Fahrenheit. Use Kelvin or Celsius
>>
>>8352753
OP of this riddle here. Still unsolved :p
>>8353349
Hard to follow, keep searching.
>Therefore the difference (s−s/n)−(s−m) can decrease at most by 1
Finding something like this (that can only move by 1) is a very good step.

>>8353437
You don't know that in the end of the day, you reach exactly 80% btw. But that's not important.
When you want to do """"""induction with real numbers""""", how do you do?

>>8353813
Keep going :) Try the simplest cases and see why it always work.

Ok I'll give you a hint for the method. It might help a lot, it might not. Consider the first moment he goes beyond 75% success rate. (considering the first moment smth is not true is an equivalent alternative to induction that can be adapted to the real case, that's what I meant up there with my 5 commas).
>>
>>8352753
>>8356700
I am struggling to express this simple truth mathematically:
No matter what, when you have a fraction n-1/n you eventually land exactly on it as the most you can gain on it in an interval of n is 1.
If you are "one short" in the numerator at x you can reach it only at x+n.
x also has to fall on a number that's a multiple of n, as we are working with integers for numerator and denominator.
>>
>>8356700
>induction with real numbers
Here's the recipe that generally works, in most practical cases:
* prove something for all n in N.
* then generalize to all n/p in Q.
* then use the density of Q in R.

For the last bit, you generally use this property of the density - not true in all spaces where density is defined though: for all x in R, x is a limit of a series (q_n) with terms in Q.

However, we're discussing here a discrete function.

And anon previously showed that there always existed an N and a M that, on the way to 80%, was making (N-M)/N reaching the exact value of 75%.

We can now also wonder if 75%=3/4 has something special.We could now wonder are the other values x that (N-M)/N exactly reaches on its way to 80% ?
>>
>>8352015
Take one from the first, two from the second, three from the third and so on.
Take 550 minus the weight on the scale; that result will be the number of the chest with the fake gold.
>>
File: FB_IMG_1472629504302.jpg (10KB, 480x319px) Image search: [Google]
FB_IMG_1472629504302.jpg
10KB, 480x319px
>>8356391
> objects to Fahrenheit
> doesn't object to dowsing rods
Yeah, that's fine.
>>
>>8351132
Weigh 6 and 6 and see which side is lighter.
Then weigh 3 and 3 and see which side is lighter.
Then weigh 2 and 1 and you can use this to deduce which balls is a different weigh in only 3 attempts.
I'm also extremely stupid so yea, there's that.
>>
>>8356731
You got something exact here, the generalisation say that number on which you will always fall if you go greater are the proportions (n-1)/n. Keep searching a proof :o)
>>
>>8357505
The odd ball might be heavier
>>
>>8357648
My odd ball is heavier.
>>
>>8354073
You let a mice in the room first, then you see if it died from UV-induced cancer
>>
>>8353875
1: turn on first switch
2: wait 1.5 to 2 decades for dimming to start
3: ...
>>
>>8357707
You take the cat with you, leaving the dog and the mouse in the room with the switches. Then you go back alone and collect the dog. Swap the dog and cat. Leave the cat and take the mouse. Leave the mouse with the dog and go back alone for the cat. Then you turn all the switches on and make the last trip, with the cat.
>>
File: Carl_Friedrich_Gauss.jpg (236KB, 576x738px) Image search: [Google]
Carl_Friedrich_Gauss.jpg
236KB, 576x738px
>>8354933
very good sir

have a Gauss for your troubles
>>
>>8358136
I can't see how >>8354933 is different from >>8352025
>>
>>8356731
You can deal with it with inequalities for instance. There is another way, more visual, to see it, but inequalities can make miracles with integers (as there is no inttegers strictly between two integers for instance).
>>
>>8351992
There's a problem, though, the ball can be either heavier OR lighter, and we need to determine that as well
Thread posts: 103
Thread images: 7


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]

I'm aware that Imgur.com will stop allowing adult images since 15th of May. I'm taking actions to backup as much data as possible.
Read more on this topic here - https://archived.moe/talk/thread/1694/


If you need a post removed click on it's [Report] button and follow the instruction.
DMCA Content Takedown via dmca.com
All images are hosted on imgur.com.
If you like this website please support us by donating with Bitcoins at 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties.
Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site.
This means that RandomArchive shows their content, archived.
If you need information for a Poster - contact them.