
Content Count
1518 
Joined

Last visited

Days Won
35
Posts posted by flamebirde


Spoilerscrabble?

Spoilermaybe vowels?

Spoiler$0 each  the lottery only has three winners?
It's almost certainly a math question, and maybe to do with the names, but it doesn't hurt to try a first guess.

A more religious guess...
SpoilerJesus Christ?

SpoilerAt the bottom of the ocean, presumably...

That one stumped me for quite a while, and for such a simple pattern too! I'm definitely kicking myself over this cute little puzzle.

19 hours ago, rocdocmac said:Both Captain Ed and Thalia have transmitted vital clues in their previous remarks. Eish man, now you ought to get it!
Spoiler../  .... .. . ./ .. / ... .. . .. .. . ../ ..  /  .. !
What hath God wrought!

D'oh. Not a language...
Spoilerbut more like a code?

1 hour ago, rocdocmac said:Flamebirde, you're going to kick yourself!
Haha, you say that like I'm not already! Am I even on the right track? I think I'm about ready to throw in the towel, Rocdocmac  you've certainly stumped me.

Seems I'm the only one left in the dark now... but I will perservere:
SpoilerLatin/Greek alphabets? I'm assuming this has to do with some other language besides English, potentially an obscure one.

Spoilersomething to do with unicode maybe? it can't have to do with the order of the letters of the alphabet... I have a feeling my mind is too burnt out on organic chemistry to puzzle this one out.

I must admit I am also incredibly lost...
SpoilerDoes it have something to do with the pronunciation of the number with the given letter/phonemes?

Spoilerpancreas?
If not, I would guess the word ends in a double "ss" or something similar.

Spoilera chain?

haha, maybe I solved the clue unconsciously or something. That's an odd coincidence.

Got it in one, I think. Well done! I'll need to make the next one a bit harder, it seems. I'll leave it open to others until you post it in a spoiler, just to be sure.

I am named for what I do,
Friend of writer, teacher too.
I can keep your ramblings straight;
with chains your boredom I alleviate.
If you force me to not curve,
I cannot my function serve.

Spoilerwind?
I gotta say, these have been some top quality riddles, Shakee. How do you keep churning out such good riddles?

Spoilera kaleidoscope of some kind?

SpoilerI didn't realize probability was commutative that way. 2/5 choose three is equivalent odds to 3/5 choose two.

21 hours ago, Thalia said:fb Joe is trying to sell you his share. You are paying him the $200... if you accept his offer.
A question
Who owns the car? If you take his offer and he owns the vehicle, you've got transportation issues. That said, I agree with flamebirde's reasoning so I guess either way, the odds are against you. Not owning the vehicle would just make it worse.
whoops. In that case, I say refuse the offer. Assuming that the rest of the puzzle (i.e. the vehicle) is just story fluff and that the $1000 price tag of the rock is after processing, my answer remains the same. His share isn't even worth $100, let alone $200.

SpoilerYes. This is a question of Bayesian probability. The test results in a relatively large proportion of false positives. In fact, the majority of positives delivered by the test are actually false positives. Consider this case: say you scan a hundred rocks. Only 1%, or one rock, is actually gold. But your scan would result in ~910 false positives. That means you only have about a 10% chance that one particular positive rock actually has gold. Since the rock is worth $1,000 with a 10% chance or $0 with a 90% chance, the average value of the rock is just $100. Hence, it's a better deal to take the guaranteed $200 than the 10% chance at $1,000.

assuming five apples in each bowl,
Spoileryou have a 2/5*1/4 chance to survive in the first bowl, or 10%. You have a 3/5*2/4*1/3 chance to survive with the second bowl, or a 10% chance. Its the same chance either way. I say it doesn't matter. (I assume that after eating an apple you take it out of the bowl.)

SpoilerIt's very similar to the "read the line" solution, just in reverse.
one
one one
two one
one two, and one one
one two, and three ones
one three, one two, and two ones
one three, two twos, and three ones (1 3 2 2 3 1)
two threes, two twos, and two ones (2 3 2 2 2 1)
one three, four twos, one one (1 3 4 2 1 1)
and so on and so forth. The trick is that the largest number comes first, and then it descends. So instead of the read write sequence breaking up, say, 1 2 1 1 into one one, one two, two ones, this sequence breaks it up into one two and three ones.
Matching cards
in New Logic/Math Puzzles
Posted · Edited by flamebirde
Found the thread I was talking about. · Report reply
So the chances that the first two will match is 1/52. That much should be fairly obvious I think.
If they do, then the chances of the next two matching is 1/51, and if they do then the chances of the next two are 1/50, and so on.
If a pair doesn't match, then we're looking at an issue  at least one more pair is guaranteed not to match... but there's some finicky stuff going on there, since you could have a loop of 3 or more unmatched pairs if it chains down a bit. So at minimum if you draw a nonmatching card then you have at least 2 unmatched pairs right there and potentially more. Not to mention that you could spawn different "loops" in one run through.
if a pair doesn't match, then the chances of the next pair matching are... what? That's where the riddle lies next I guess. If we number the first deck 152 and the second 1'52' and the very first pair is 12', then we know that the next pair (the one starting with 2) must also not match. Then there's a 1/51 chance that the loop ends there  a 1/51 chance that the next pair is 21', in which case the probabilities continue as before. But there's also a 50/51 chance that the chain extends, and we draw something like 25', which means that now the fifth pair (the one starting with 5) is guaranteed to be a nonmatch with a 1/45 chance of terminating.
I'm sure there's an easier way to think about it, but I'm gonna let it percolate through the back of my head for now.
Seems similar to that airplane seating problem a while back, I'll see if I can't find and link it here.
Edit: here it is: