bonanova

Maybe it takes a visit to Morty's to appreciate it, but when the boys gather there, it's more about swagger than brains. They're near-genius, some of them, at times, but they're what one might call closet geniuses. And visiting a Library [there's a rumor of Internet access coming to town, soon, but for now the Library is their main resource] just might cast a shadow of weakness at their nightly discussions. I guess they'd like the others to think they get answers all on their own. In the story, each visited less frequently than the others as they admitted their habit. And, since you caught me on the Internet physics thing, Alex was visiting the States when he did that ... uh ... Anyway, we have a motion already on the floor -- uh, puzzle still to solve -- before we next look in on Morty's. What day do I visit the Library? [Clue - it's multiple choice. ... take a stab at it.]

A good lateral-thinking game strategy, if a bit underhanded. Bravo. But the questions in the OP were about the analysis of the game. If the boys were thinking clearly, how could the game favor both of them? Or if not, where is the flaw in their reasoning? Can a game favor both participants [if the rules are followed]? Its symmetry seems to favor neither. If that's true, supply an analysis leading to that conclusion. It may not be correct to analyze for very nearly equal amounts. Only that neither has reason to think one has more. For example, one be willing to bet the other visited a cash machine more recently.

O Lord, another planning meeting. Well, at first they loved the idea, calling it forward looking and innovative. Then their graph theoretician [where did HE come from?] started talking about nodes and verticies ... And the safety guy got concerned about access to all the stores from just one point. In the end, sorry to say, all they would offer for the plans was the plastic magnifying glass from a box of Cracker Jacks. If the maximum is six stores, as has been suggested, they likely will scrap the project. But they're leaving a 24-hour window for another plan. Oh, and did I mention? Two more stores want in, bringing the total to 10. As I left the room I heard someone suggest an evaluation from a guy named Petersen. Didn't get his first name, but I think it started with J.

It took 10 years for me to acclimate to New York.

And, I assume, a large number of people among whom to divide. Seems a fair point to consider.

Anyone get the special player mentioned in the previous post?

Ouch. You had to ask ... I couldn't get a straight answer on that, so the architects and planners called an emergency meeting. Even the mayor came. The problem with getting executives together is ... when they meet, they think they have to make more decisions. As you might expect, there is Good News and Bad News. The good news: Awaiting your feasibility findings, they haven't laid it out yet. They want your advice on the best layout. Also, they're dropping some restrictions: You don't have to connect the walkways to the 2nd floor of the stores. The bad news: They were going to allow curved walkways. That's out. They have to be straight, and level. And you won't believe this: one architect told the group he could get a huge price break on the walkways if they were all of the same length. So they'd like that, if possible; otherwise use whatever lengths work. They really just want to get this thing done. Oh, and if it's impossible? tell them the largest number of stores that can be connected, and they'll just lop some names off the planning list. By the way, they were impressed with your initiative and insight so far, and they voted to double your consultant fee. I hope they don't meet again, tho, before we get this thing settled.

In my home town of Minneapolis, the Farenheit temperature can remain continuously negative for weeks at a time. 2nd-story walkways were constructed between some of the downtown buildings so shoppers can spend all day indoors while walking from store to store. In the new suburb of Frigid City, MN, city planners have decided to duplicate that practice. The planning architects have advised that for security reasons, no building may connect to more than three walkways. But the planners want to provide an indoor path between any pair of stores that involves walking through no more than one intervening store. Eight anchor stores are to be walkway enabled. Not knowing whether this is possible, the Frigid City Council [FCC] has called in an Expert in All Things of Every Nature [EATEN] - namely you. What do you tell them?

It was only yesterday they found out -- I guess Morty's just isn't the place to talk about such things. They all love to read! Alex ran into Jamie at the town library, and just minutes later Davey showed up. I didn't know you boys loved the books, said Alex, I guess we browse different shelves. It does seem strange we haven't run into each other before, said Jamie, especially since I come here every other day. Davey seemed surprised as well. And I come here every third day, he said. Well, said Alex, I must load up on more books than you boys do, because I only drop by every fourth day. The librarian, overhearing the conversation, reminded them that the library was closed on Wednesdays. They all nodded, and each of them explained that when their normal visit falls on Wednesday, they come on Thursday instead, and count from there. Well I'm off to the math books, winked Alex, I hope we all see each other here again soon. If I'm right in my figuring, it will be on a Monday. Well that's my story. And now you know an interesting secret about the boys down at Morty's. And about me, too, I guess. You see, I just noticed that this is the day for my weekly visit to the library. If you've followed the clues, you know my library visits fall on ....

I think so. At least, C would include that, among others. A and B are those who agree or not. C would be for the others, including myself - I neither agree nor disagree with Barth. The interesting part to me is how others describe or choose C. No disrespect taken, for sure... thanks for the response...

John and Jim play 5 games of checkers. Explain how this could happen?

Group A, but not Group 1. [i.e. you agree with Barth, and you do not put people into two groups] Why? Because if both groups are all-encompassing for EVERYONE it CAN be done... so ONLY if that is true. So it's very hard to get two groups that can fit that, where EVERYONE must be either. Not neither, not both. So Groups 1/2 I believe there can be more possibilities, for example indecisive people, dead people, etc. Are monkeys people? etc But if both groups are completely ALL-ENCOMPASSING then of course you can Group A but not Group 1. Group A - That means you agree with Barth, who puts everyone into Group 1 or Group 2. But not Group 1 - that means you yourself do not put everyone into two groups. How does that agree with Barth? Regarding the counter-examples ... indecisive people and dead people would I think clearly belong to group 2: indecisive people can't decide and dead people can't do anything, so they both fit the condition of not placing people into two groups. Want to include monkeys? OK, Barth would put all the monkeys that divide people into two groups into Group 1 and those that don't into Group 2.

Monty Hall = Dartboard? O, I get it ... they both have the number 3 [doors and darts], and one of the 3 wins. There are a lot of problems that have a 3, so let's dig a little deeper: I didn't get your answer. But if you say that essentially MH = DB, then I guess you're thinking that Alex should have bet the third dart.

Karl Barth once suggested ["Barth's Distinction"] that you can divide everyone into two groups: Group 1: those who divide people into two groups. Group 2: those who do not divide people into two groups. You may agree with Barth or not; either way, you belong to either Group A: those who agree with Barth, or Group B: those who do not agree with Barth. Which group [A or B] are you in? If you don't like the A and B alternatives, you must belong to Group C. Describe Group C.

Two persons can fairly divide a piece of cake if one person cuts it, and the other person chooses which piece to take. Suppose there are three persons who want to fairly divide the cake? Suppose there are N persons?

A man divided his collection of silver coins among his sons and their wives. To the eldest son he said, select for yourself the choicest of the coins, and your wife may take one ninth of the remaining coins. The next oldest son was given as many coins as the first son, plus one more since the eldest son had first pick, and his wife also received one ninth of the remaining coins. The third son received one coin more the the second son, and his wife received one ninth of the rest. Each of the remaining sons also received as many coins as the previous son, plus one coin, and each wife took one ninth of the rest. Until the last son took his coins. At that point, there were none left for his wife. So the father said, here are seven gold coins, each worth twice the value of a silver coin. Divide these coins among yourselves so that each family will own coins of equal value. Every coin remained intact. No coin was cut. How many silver coins did the man originally have? How many sons does the man have?

Good catch. I dropped him cutting and pasting. To make up of that, here's another of note: probably the first and last of his kind. You might call him special. Odd Shard Women Repay Becks Anger

I'll give you the anagrams for a group of seven athletes who share an achievement that is unique in the history of their sport. They all play the same sport, and no one else has achieved what each of them has achieved. To make things interesting, anagrams of their teams are tacked on. But the boundary that separates the two anagrams is not given. The player and team anagrams divide on word boundaries, and the words from the two anagrams are not mixed together. Altho ... that would be the next level of fun, wouldn't it? An example might help explain. One of the players might be Alex Rodriguez of the New York Yankees. His anagram might read like this: Rig Our Axle Zed / Sneaky Key Owner Where Rig Our Axle Zed is for Alex Rodriguez and Sneaky Key Owner is for Hank Steinbrenner. Uh, no, it's for New York Yankees. Sorry, Hank. [not!] But I won't give you the "/" - that's part of the puzzle. I'll just give you Rig Our Axle Zed Sneaky Key Owner You break it up into two anagrams [on word boundaries] and solve each. If this isn't clear, post a question. [As if you wouldn't. ] Here are the anagrams. Give me the athletes' names and teams, and figure out their unique achievement. Good luck! Wiry Sale Rents Labia Mover Taste Jock Oil Damn His Imp Third Dancer Bags Ace Choir Trade Whiny Allow Body Sacs Wry Lorn Bra Blows Lacy Soda Rather Ivy Man Swabs Loco Lady Jerks Can Detox Amateur Cabby Pecans

GmEiNnIdUS -- Hello? You gonna give us some help? Inquiring minds around the globe are on edge! Bumping this to the top of the list ...

That works. Good one!

Four related anagrams with two clues. Enjoy! Sewage Going North Man Offshores Jet Loose Tooth Revered Hairball Conman