All Activity

Hi there, I got stuck in brain test 2 game, where can I see the answers for all levels of this game? I want it to be up to date and all the levels have been solved so that I can see the answer wherever I get stuck. thanks.

Existential Psychotherapy By Irvin D. Yalum

Generally, prophets lead people to goodness and psychics doesn't care.

I think it's way better that windows 8.1 and 8, Microsoft was trying to reach to windows 10 with those 2 other versions, and I think it's pretty good!

This is so hard!

haha i got tricked at first but i figured it out. Good one!!

Hi, I hope this attached photo help you :

The answer is SAND ! I get 30 point!

one word

i cant for the llfe of me find the flaw with his logic. somewhere between factoring each polynomial and the step before is wrong. but i see no mistake.

plasmid - Your observation is correct, with the added issue of having to select the first row from which to solve the puzzle manually. However, I suspect that by creating the AllSolutions structure, that multiple iterations should not be needed. However, as stated previously, there is a step/process missing from my solution. Also note that if the main algorithm were to be repeated again, I seriously doubt that the answer would change...

Answer is 24 feet Hope this Helps!

The first thing that jumps out at me is that when I do Einstein puzzles by hand I usually need to do many iterations of going through the rules and filling out as much as I can, and then going through the rules again to narrow things down further based on what I’ve eliminated so far. In this case there’s a single loop of For cr = 1 to cntRules that gets executed once, as if a human were to just go through all the rules once instead of iteratively. If you as a human are able to solve the puzzle by going over each of the rules once in the order that they're presented, then the program

Plasmid, Thanks for the reply. Please note that, at best, I am a hobbyist, so I am not sure if my code meets your need for ‘an algorithm’. I have attached my code – not too much of it. I have also attached the input file for a particular game. In this case, the game is from the cited app, difficulty ‘hard’, puzzle number 1. Here are some more comments about the code: Structure AllSolutions – a large array with every possible solution Structure gboard – an array the size of the puzzle that shows what is still there Description of code Lines 57-109: read in t

We'll have to see the algorithm and what it's doing in order to say much. Could you share it and walk through how it would handle an example Einstein puzzle that folks without the game could follow (say the one at https://web.stanford.edu/~laurik/fsmbook/examples/Einstein'sPuzzle.html)? If you solve the puzzle the old fashioned way and keep track of what you eliminate and why, is your algorithm able to recreate the path to the solution? If not, then what parts is it missing?

Just for fun, I have been trying, far less than successfully, to write a program to solve Einstein's Riddle Logic Puzzles, see https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rottzgames.logic. I code the board as layers, columns, and items. Each rule is them translated into two layer/item pairs; for example, a textual rule can become 1C-4B. The program I have written properly executes all of the games ‘rules’ and it also looks for a single item on a layer and recognizes that that must be the item in the column in which it appears. In fact, for one super simple game, my program actually

yup that makes sense! i originally thought that the answer should be a BIRD. Please let me know what are your thoughts on this?

Ah, I see. So in that spirit you could present your solution #2 this way (not particularly efficient, but crystal clear that it works)

NO as 2nd pirate will also get 100 laptops if he kill 3rd one . so if he is getting same no of laptops then he will kill 3rd one. and finally will get 100 laptops.

I'm afraid I might be missing something, because it seems like whenever you switch parity you end up losing all the ground you previously covered. Consider xp2008's solution... Similarly for EventHorizon's first solution You could argue that if you start off covering a finite area, then cover a slightly larger area, then cover a slightly larger area, etc. then you will eventually catch the groundhog because the groundhog must be at some finitely numbered hole which you will eventually reach. My counterargument to that is:

Only if they're imaginary stonenibblers.