Jump to content
BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

The_unbeliever's Achievements

  1. Well, it's nighttime, so you shouldn't see the Sun. The Sun is a star indeed, and it didn't occur to me the moon is not a star. Supposedly you could deduce the cardinals from the hour and the moon position?
  2. the owner of the jet ski can anchor it how they like Well, I usually set an anchor so my boat doesn't go adrift... Huh, I'm nitpicking, ain't I? >_> In fact, I was wondering whether you meant a logical problem in the guise of a simple geometrical one (with the rope length missing on purpose). And yes, I think I should keep the maths to pen & paper - I'm obviously missing ^2s here :/ My bad.
  3. How could you question the presented opinion? In order to question someone's opinion, you need to do so on some kind of common ground... Your religion is of no relevance. You have to leave your own beliefs at the doorstep of a home you've been invited to, or refuse the invitation: Luke 14
  4. I might not be a jetski expert, but are Jetskis NOT anchored, but tied to the pier instead? If you define "anchor" by where the other end of the rope is tied, it's at pier's height. Definitely not underwater.
  5. ....... Ok, I would never have thought about drawing an S, and I confess I'm a sore loser...
  6. There are 100 (quite small) marbles in a (quite large) jar. Pull out one marble, look at it, put it back. You have done it 100 times. All marbles were white. Would you bet 5:1 that they are all white? Bonus (and most interesting) question: Suppose you have 15-20 seconds to decide. 2nd one: 1st one:
  7. Yep, sorry. I forgot to use Spoiler, and the "edit post" button disappeared on me. I have a hard time understanding the 2nd one... I'll think about it a bit more - I suppose a play on words would be a poor answer.
  8. John sends the ring to Mary in a locked glass chest. - Mary can break the chest open with an hammer - Since the chest is locked, no one will steal from it
  9. Fun This bullet will never hit such armor, since they cannot coexist. Each one negates the other's very existence. Yes. The man drowns x times, is revived x times, until he either learn to swim, or grow gills... More seriously, one needs to define the "eternal life" granted, and perhaps how long will the fountain stands as it is. I accept half-heartedly. Oh, lookie here! A regular workday paradox! The girl comes from timeline a) and kills her grandma in timeline b) Since she could get to exist in timeline b) she can stay, slaughter her cousins, mate with her dad and go shopping with her kiddie b) version for all I care. Nothing whatsoever has changed in timeline a) if she's to go back there at the time of her earlier departure. The Weather Channel you describe are idiots. Make it "3.1416 as sunny" or a 'thousand times as stormy", that would hold as little meaning. Cold, hot, etc. are subjective. The statement lacks a base comparative: "We've gained two degrees compared to yesterday!" would be correct. Comparing numerical value is relevant, comparing scales is not. For instance, saying a Richter scale 6 earthquake is twice as dangerous as a scale 3 earthquake,would be similarly stupid. - Nyet, tovarish. - Sí, claro que sí. Nothing your eyes could see... Boring. Here's a more interesting one: What happens when you turn on a flashlight when you are in a car going the speed of light ? Wrong. Quod erat demonstrandum. I'll read that sentence as : "Can an omnipotent being create a stone that he is not able to lift ?" and replace 'omnipotent being" with 'Mickey Mouse". a) Mickey Mouse creates a stone. A regular stone is OK. A Daffy Duck statue is OK too. b) Mickey Mouse makes himself weaker until the stone is too heavy to lift. c) Mickey Mouse loses his virginity to Minnie, and renounces his impotency omnipotency. d) Mickey Mouse has henceforth created a stone he's not able to lift, and marries Minnie. (but yeah, he was able to lift it at some point, but at least that's a happy-ending story)
  10. Substitution jutsu! Jokes aside, your point is good, but you'd be better of ditching out the term "God". "Ideal" would work fine here (cookies were NOT my first substitution - I hate reading or hearing "cookie" (substituted) too many times in a row) "If one has his own set of beliefs, would that qualify as having a form of religion?" ->The answer would depend on one's own definitions, and as such, is a pointless question which holds no third-party answer that would benefit to the one asking. It is, however, a good question to ask oneself; as this was the basis for the creation of many religions schools of thought - History says so.
  11. That's definitely not a paradox, I'd say it's a tautology - a statement void of any value, which does not indicates anything new; Example: A or not A -> Either I'm bald, or I have hair. "an indescribable cake" or "a cake" are the very same thing, with "indescribable" basic meaning.. The adjective "indescribable" would be better defined as "hard to describe" - which would actually mean something.
  12. "You will eat my child" => "mother is right" => The crocodile must return the child but he can do so as crocodile dung. "You will eat my child after he dies from old age" => "nope, lady, will do right now" => mother is wrong => game over Only solution is to NOT reply - The crocodile can't verify whether mommy is right or wrong, hence he's forbidden to eat the child. NULL vs True & False! The sophism itself: A: you guess right; B: I eat the boy Sentence 1: A => not B (alternate: B => not A "I only eat the boy 'cos you guessed wrong") Sentence 2: not A => B (alternate: not B => A A <=> not B, hence the sophism.
  13. statement A: I went to the doctor (we're considering whether doing A or not A) statement B: I am not sick anymore (the most favorable result) I kinda like being healthy. So we're wondering whether: 1) Going to the doc will make me better: A => B 2) Not going to the doc will worsen my condition: not A => not B 1) Let's suppose A => B is true (The Doc is darn good) ***I'll definitely go visit the Doc, because I would be 100% sure to get better doing so. -> Logics made me go to the Doc, not destiny. Let's take it a step further: I'm considering not going to the doc anyway not B = > not A is also true by supposition. (not B) I am still sick (because) I didn't go to the doctor (not A) -> It's my choice and fault I'm still sick, not destiny's 1absurd) If we suppose not A => B (the Doc is Hannibal Lecter anyway) Then not B => A: I am still sick because I knowingly went to the Doc and fed him a few organs; my lack of judgment, not Destiny. 2) Let's suppose not A => not B is true (not going to the Doc will make me sicker) Then B => A is also true (B) I am not sick anymore (because) I went to the doctor (not A) ***My visit to the doctor is the reason I'm better, not destiny. 2absurd) If we suppose A => not B (your Doc has bubonic plague and Ebola) Then B => not A... Why would I be that stupid anyway, since I have the choice to go or not? Hence, considering whether going to the doctor or not will affect your health, makes destiny, Big Brother and all Gods absurd and irrelevant. You heretic! Bottom line: You've denied destiny the very instant you've asked "isn't it useless [...] to go to a doctor"?
  • Create New...