Jump to content


Welcome to BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers Forum

Welcome to BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers Forum. Like most online communities you must register to post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process. To be a part of BrainDen Forums you may create a new account or sign in if you already have an account.
As a member you could start new topics, reply to others, subscribe to topics/forums to get automatic updates, get your own profile and make new friends.

Of course, you can also enjoy our collection of amazing optical illusions and cool math games.

If you like our site, you may support us by simply clicking Google "+1" or Facebook "Like" buttons at the top.
If you have a website, we would appreciate a little link to BrainDen.

Thanks and enjoy the Den :-)
Guest Message by DevFuse
 

Photo
- - - - -

Photograph


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
80 replies to this topic

#11 colorclown26

colorclown26

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 254 posts

Posted 28 June 2007 - 01:47 AM

yeah. Admin is obviously rightl. It has to be his son.
  • 0

#12 banebrain

banebrain

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 28 June 2007 - 07:56 AM

I think Banebrain mis-read the question. It specifically says ' am looking at somebody's photo. Who is it I am looking at'.

The easiest way is work in reverse. With no brothers or sisters the ' Son of My Father' has to be Himself. but he himself is the father of the man in the picture. so the man in the picture has to be his own son.



Actually if you read my response again I am not denying that it is the son, I am agreeing. Everyone else (besides a few) said it must be himself, but I said; as you said to go backwards; it leads to his son. Sorry if the wording mislead you.
  • 0

#13 KValin

KValin

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 09 July 2007 - 06:27 PM

The "Father" in this example must be in a religious context. Therefore, the individual maybe looking at a picture of Christ.
  • 0

#14 speshall mareens

speshall mareens

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 11 July 2007 - 03:20 AM

The "Father" in this example must be in a religious context. Therefore, the individual maybe looking at a picture of Christ.


doubt ti. abviously he is lookin at a picture of himself. OR A CONJOINED TWIN!



OR A CLONE !!!!!
  • 0

#15 Sophiesmommy

Sophiesmommy

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 14 July 2007 - 07:25 AM

he is saying " son of my father" meaning he has a son, not that he is a father , but that he fatherd a son get it, so the person in the picture is his son.
  • 0

#16 wrzesinski

wrzesinski

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 15 July 2007 - 12:30 AM

the admin would be veiwing his son, if the father of the man in the photo was his fathers son it would be him...he is the father of the man in the photo...making it his son
  • 0

#17 kentttj

kentttj

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 21 July 2007 - 09:42 PM

I got the same answer with Rookie that the one in the picture is no other than the son.
  • 0

#18 tweak4

tweak4

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 24 July 2007 - 07:28 PM

1. This is an unusual wording of a classic puzzle. I've always heard it as follows:
(In reference to the photograph) "Brothers and sisters, I have none- but this man's father is my father's son"

2. This is a very easy puzzle, and everyone who is convinced that he is looking at himself need to re-read the clue and break it down.
starting with:
"father of that man on the photo is the son of my father"

"son of my father" = me (the speaker), since there are no siblings
thus:
"father of that man is me" ->
"I am that man's father" ->
"That man is my son"

and there is your definitive solution, as there are no other possible solutions without siblings in the scenario.


he is saying " son of my father" meaning he has a son, not that he is a father , but that he fatherd a son get it, so the person in the picture is his son.



Huh? That doesn't even make sense. "son of my father" means that the speaker's father has a son- the speaker. It in no way implies that the speaker has a son of his own.
  • 0

#19 Shades-X

Shades-X

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 25 July 2007 - 06:06 AM

I don't know how to feel about this but what if he is looking at a step-son? Same father different mothers, it wouldn't be a true brother. So the someone I think is the step-brother of who ever is narrorating! I wonder why no one else mentioned this?
  • 0

#20 xandarr

xandarr

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 25 July 2007 - 12:20 PM

I don't know how to feel about this but what if he is looking at a step-son? Same father different mothers, it wouldn't be a true brother. So the someone I think is the step-brother of who ever is narrorating! I wonder why no one else mentioned this?



Well firstly, a step-son isn't a true relative. If I marry a woman with children who are not my own, I am their stepfather and they are my stepchildren, but we are not related in anyway. Thus that cannot be a possible solution for this riddle.

Regarding your other possibility (same father, different mothers), I think what you are trying to say is "half-brother". Two men can be half-brothers if they share only one common parent. But either you are someone's parent, or you are not. There is no such thing as half-parents or half-children. Only half-siblings.

How does this relate to the puzzle? You mentioned two possibilities: either a step-son, or a step-brother. We've already eliminated the step-son possibility. Let's take a look at the half-brother option, shall we?

Photograph - I am looking at somebody's photo. Who is it I am looking at, if I don't have any brothers or sisters and the father of that man on the photo is the son of my father?



Breaking it down a bit, and changing the order (but not the logic), we have:

1. I am looking at a man's picture. Call him A.
2. A's father is the son of my father.
3. I don't have any brothers or sisters.
4. Who is A?

As far as the real solution goes, if we ignore the half-brother supposition for a moment:

Since #3 states I have no brothers or sisters, then "the son of my father" from #2 can only be me.

Based on that, #2 states A's father is me. Therefore, A must be my son.

Getting back to your suggestion: point #3 pretty much eliminates your half-brother option. If I don't have any brothers or sisters, I cannot have half-brothers, since they would count. But let us assume that they don't count as "true brothers", as you are suggesting, and revisit the previous solution:

Since #3 states I have no brothers or sisters, then "the son of my father" can either be me, or my half-brother (call him B.).

Based on that, #2 states A's father is either me or B. Therefore, A must be either my son, or B's son. If he is B's son, and half-brothers don't count as relatives, then neither do their children, and thus A is no relation to me.

Since we are given no other information, the riddle remains unsolved with 2 possible solutions (A is either my son, or is the son of my half-brother and thus no relation to me). Common sense dictates that all the riddles posted here must have one and only one logical solution. Since that is not the case with your suggestion, then your suggestion that half-brothers don't count cannot be a logical possibility.

However, it wasn't a bad guess... at least you're thinking outside the box. Keep trying.
  • 0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users