Followers 0

# Trains

## 60 posts in this topic

Posted (edited) · Report post

they'll be at the same distance

Edited by fisk88
0

##### Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Well I think that the train that was leaving New York at a slower mph should be closer.

I am not good at explaining things so I have to draw it out.

Boston.......................................................................New York

oooo> <oooo

60 mph 30mph

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>M<<<<<<<<

If both trains were going the same speed they would meet in the exact middle. But since the train from Boston was going twice as fast as the train from New York it would have gone 3/4 of the way and the NYTrain would have gone 1/4 of the way.And the NyTrain's behind was closer to its station.

That's just how I figure it.

0

##### Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

At first I thought this post was shamefully easy, but then I saw the idiots that didn't get it posting and thought otherwise.

0

##### Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

When the trains "encounter" they will both be the same distance from New York

0

##### Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I hate to be technical, but when they initially encounter, or pass, the train leaving from New York to Boston will be closer to New York. The rationale is that the caboose of the New York to Boston train, is most likely a couple hundred yards closer to New York. Ha, I know this is not the point of the riddle, but if someone did say the one that traveled from New York to Boston, even if they thought about it wrong, technically they are correct.

0

##### Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Trains - Back to the Logic Puzzles

A train leaves New York for Boston. Five minutes later another train leaves Boston for New York, at double the speed. Which train will be closer to New York when they encounter?

Trains - solution

Of course, when the trains encounter, they will be approximately the same distance away from New York. The New York train will be closer to New York by approximately one train length because they're coming from different directions. That is, unless you take "meet" to mean "perfectly overlap".

The one that left New York because when they "encounter," they will be at the same point, but the caboose of the train leaving New York will be the closest point to New York...

0

##### Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

the trains will be at the same distance when they will encounter

0

##### Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I think that if you define 'trains encounter' as in one specified point in both trains (for instance, the front or the engine, it doesn't really matter) encounter, you should also take this point in both trains to be the point from which you measure the distance to new york.

In other words, if you reduce a train to a point, which you have to do in order to define 'encounter', then you should also use this point in your definition of 'distance to'.

Of course, then both trains will be at exactly the same distance to New York.

I hope this settles your argument here.

0

##### Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I think the only reason anyone gets confused is because it does not state that the destination and departure point of each train is not the same, no congruently parallel.

0

##### Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I Love it....

Alrighty,,, I'm going to try to explain this one last time... WHY? I don't know, just for the shear fun of seeing how many of you will STILL NOT GET IT....

THE QUESTION IS A SHAM... IT DOES NOT MATTER THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE POINTS. LOOK AT IT LIKE THIS. LETS SAY YOU ARE AT ONE END OF YOUR STREET, WE WILL CALL YOUR SIDE "SIDE-A" AND I AM AT THE OTHER "SIDE-B". WE ARE BOTH ON BICYCLES. WE START HEADING TOWARD EACHOTHER. ONE IS TRAVELING FASTER THAN THE OTHER, BUT YOU DO NOT KNOW WHICH ONE. "WHEN WE SMACK INTO EACHOTHER, WHO IS CLOSER TO SIDE "A"??? your focusing on the fact that it is impossible to calculate the distance if you do not have more information, which is obvious. It WOULD be impossible to calculate unless you knew how fast they were going, and the distances between the two, HOWEVER......That's not the case....

THE ANSWER IS """""WE ARE AT THE SAME POINT BECAUSE WE JUST SMACKED INTO EACHOTHER""" NEITHER IS CLOSER, WE ARE AT THE SAME POINT. I MEAN, YOU COULD ARGUE IT SAYING THAT THE BACK OF YOUR HEAD IS CLOSER, BUT COME ON... THE POINT IS THAT THE DISTANCE/TIME RATIO DOES NOT MATTER IF THE 2 TRAINS SMACK INTO EACHOTHER. AT THAT POINT, THEY ARE THE SAME DISTANCE FROM BOTH SIDES....

Get it?

I THINK I explained it well,,,, I dunno

haha well said

i already knew this one, but thats very well explained!

0