Jump to content
BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by bonanova

  1. 7 hours ago, Thalia said:

    I did get really lucky with bonanova getting the UK lynched D1 so thanks for that. :P


    That was my huge screw-up (last I had looked, the vote was a tie which I took to be safe, then I forgot I had a work-out session at the gym - with a PT or I would have skipped it - that kept me from checking back before the 4pm EST deadline.) Damage control, I had to consider how much info to disclose to explain it, without it sounding like fake news / alternative facts. Decided to wait for conclusions and talk them down, quietly, instead, which seemed to work.Anyway, I let the goodie team down, especially MikeD, and I apologize for that.

    @Thalia, when you turned from chatty to serious you confirmed your identity.;)
    Too late, as it turned out.:unsure:
    Hoist on my own petard.

    Thanks to Araver for a fine game. I am totally up (down?) for another game.



  2. 1 hour ago, Thalia said:

    (1) The lead? I'm not sure what that means.

    (2) Maybe you live to lynch Sweden, maybe you don't. We shall see. ;)

    (1) Burying the lead is a mistake of amateur journalists. Instead of stating the main idea up front. (Like implying you're not Sweden.)

    (2) Exactly right, and the odds unfortunately seem to be in your favor.

  3. Agree.

    Our job today is to best-guess the secret countries, and keep them safe.

    Since only Thalia know who they are, we should comb thru her posts.
    Try to see when she targeted specific country(ies) without an (otherwise) apparent reason.

    That said, does lynching China today make sense?
    Thalia's point (2) above advocates lynching China, so we know that would benefit her.

    Unfortunately, I acted last night so I can't un-quarantine Thalia today - she can't be lynched.

    After more thought ... this post just reiterates FB and MM.
    We may be screwed.

  4. Great puzzle from the past, resurrected by TinkuVNCK.

    Because the OP seems to have left the forum, I'm 

    • marking mghoffman78 as first solver
    • upvoting plasmid for heroic calculation of the answer
    • upvoting guru_bhai for an "elegant proof"
    • upvoting TinkuVNCK for a cute, quick-and-dirty algorithm
    • upvoting fritzb for a nice closed form solution

    Good work all.

  5. 8 hours ago, Thalia said:

    (1) Here's hoping I'm not Sweden's target...

    (2) The fact that maurice hasn't tried to claim Australia makes him a lynch target for me. 

    (3) I think telling Sweden who everyone is was a mistake.

    (4) I suppose I can try to leave enough doubt to make things rough for kills. 

    (1) Not likely ... B))  Deception Rule #1: Bury the lead when you're lying; don't lead with it.

    (2) You agree killing China before Sweden is best. Plus, it lets you breathe a little longer.

    (3) It exposed the rest of us, but why wouldn't you want to know? Oh, you're one of us.  I get it.

    (4) It seems that's all you've got left to try.

  6. Sounds good.

    Host: araver
    1. Thalia - quarantined by Sweden
    2. bonanova - voting for Maurice
    3. Molly Mae - voting for Maurice
    4. Flamebirde - voting for Maurice
    5. maurice - voting for Flamebirde


    6. MikeD - Lynched D1 as United Kingdom
    7. plasmid - Invaded N1 by China

  7. 1 hour ago, flamebirde said:

    What about you, Bonanova? claim now or forever hold your peace. Two people have claimed already, and there's only one Sweden, so...

    If if matters, I'm throwing another shrimp on the BBQ.
    I'm also the reason, through a fantastic guess, that you're alive (yer welcome, mate.)

    I'm not following all the what-if's here, but if the claim is true that the goodies win if we all claim,
    then I'm happy to use the occasion to publicly opine that DJT is an SOB for the way he treated my PM.

    EDit: btw, after D1 does everyone voted for get lynched?

  8. Good outcome indeed. High cunning and great fortune at their best.

    So maurice's identity is known?  Have to think about that.
    Edit: moreover, one thinks he's clear, another wants to target him.

    I have an uneasy feeling about China ...

  9. I played in two games, a year or two ago, which were organized in hopes of re-convening the forums. Rookie sent out invites to past players. I think I even won in one game as the baddie. Here, (1) I'm puzzled by maurice's silence, unless he signed up and forgot, (2) I voted MikeD to get him to talk, then thought he would stay in a tie vote and not be lynched (and was preoccupied by another matter and missed checking in in time to remove my vote,) (3) have no clue as to who China is unless it's you, but only because China would be wise I think to actively deflect suspicion, more that any other player, and you have posted as much as anyone. But that's flimsy evidence.  I hope I survive the night if only to learn an identity or two. But I wouldn't mind dying if learning my identity would help the goodies win.

    btw this could be slippery garbage even if I hadn't played before ... I have it in me....B))

  10. @Thalia, good points.

    I've played only a few Mafia games. I wish I had accepted Unreality's invite to play, back in the day, and learned it better. Coupled with a hope for a few more games to follow this one. My comfort zone is math and logic, where all the needed info is provided, just needing insight and clear thought. This is more fun, actually, and with experience I might get better. Or, I'm a very slippery guy and everything I just said is garbage. :P.

    When does the night end?

    • Upvote 1

  11. OK. And I won't suggest Thalia.

    Except there is the intellect needed to pull off a great ruse. (meant as a compliment.)

    My idea about maurice is that he seems to be a no-show, not a night killer.
    C'est la vie.


  12. One last plea for mercy, now based on maurice being a better target..
    (Edit: anyway, if I die, I'll get to watch the experts. I fear I've just screwed things up.

    Could maurice be China? Probably not since China acted N1.

    Could maurice be Sweden?

  13. Sad to see Araver gone as his analyses are usually pretty insightful, and I rank myself still as a newbie.
    Anyway that said, I'm fairly certain that y'all want me in the game for reasons stated in a previous post.

    Hello MikeD:


    1. Thalia - voting for bonanova
    2. bonanova - voting for MikeD
    3. Molly Mae - voting for Thalia
    4. Flamebirde - voting for bonanova
    5. maurice - quarantined by Sweden
    6. MikeD

    7. plasmid - Invaded N1 by China

  14. On 1/28/2017 at 7:46 AM, araver said:

    Oh, and also, you can vote for playing the game with individual wincons OR deleting these wincons and making it a normal Den Game: Goodies versus Baddies versus Indy.

    I would cast a mild vote for G / B / Indie game because I'm such a novice. Having said that, the present rules are nicely done.

  15. On 1/21/2017 at 9:15 PM, Kt.Kpop said:

    I believe there are multiple answers for Morty's:







    This is my first puzzle. Did I do ok?

    Hi Kt.Kpop.

    Welcome to the Den, and congratulations on solving the puzzle.

    Feel free to post some of your favorites here, too.

    On 1/25/2017 at 4:27 PM, phaze said:

    An interesting follow up question would be if Morty cheated by switching dice between 3 dice with the same numbers  (2,4,5,7,8,11) but different configurations could he ensure that there would be no possible solution no matter which way the dice landed on each throw?

    NOTE I haven't personally figured this out yet

    Interesting twist phaze. Is this an accurate paraphrase?

    Arrange 2,4,5,7,8,11 (differently) on three dice in such a manner that throwing each of them once cannot disclose enough information to deduce the six numbers separately.

    My intuition says that it is possible. But proving it seems to require a list of every combination of all possible throws, 24 possibilities for each throw, and the application of a program that is verified to find a solution if one exists for each set of three throws. Proving something does not exist is always harder. Still it's interesting.


  16. Well the issue is what 0,000...1 means. That question must be answered before asking whether it has a value, and if so what the value is.

    The expression contains a string that is both infinite and terminating. A terminating string can be counted. Each digit occupies a numbered place. What place does the 1 occupy? This expression implies that a finite string that terminates with a 1 can contain an infinite sub-string of zeros. That fact is equivalent to saying that any explanation of the meaning of the expression must contain a contradiction.

    We can construct the sequence

    • 0.1
    • 0.01
    • 0.001
    • 0.0001
    • 0.00001
    • ...

    and ask whether the sequence converges. Yes. It easily can be proved to converge to zero. But the proof never mentions 0.000...1. So it does not apply to the OP.

    Regarding your student's proof I question the assertion 1 - 0.000....1 = 0.999.... Why? Because it equates an infinite string to a terminating string.

    I would say 1 - 0.000....1   =   0.999... - 0.000...1   =   0.999...8 whose meaning is equally problematical. Saying that it evaluates to unity carries the same difficulty as the original question.

  17. Spoiler

    This question appears similar to the one that asks for a proof that 0.9999... = 1 which is paradoxical until we establish that the notation "..." stands for infinite repetition. That is, the equality holds only if there is no "last" nine: they go on forever. But then the expression given in the OP has no clear meaning. It implicitly claims that after an infinite number of zeros there can be (a) five more zeros and then (b) a final unity. There can be neither. The infinity represented by "..." has the lowest cardinality of all the infinities, but it is infinity nonetheless. Nothing follows it.

    If we change the meaning of "..." we might say that 0.000...000001 reads: limit (n->inf) [0.000 followed by n zeros followed by five zeros followed by 1]. In that case, the expression evaluates to zero and the proof is simple. The expression is positive, decreasing and bounded below by zero. For any positive epsilon, no matter how small, there is an n for which the expression is (positive and) smaller than epsilon.