Jump to content
BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by The_unbeliever

  1. Hmmm i have a different answer. Can you explain yours so i can see my mistake. 

    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.

    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.

    I've considered an ABC triangle with A as the center of the lap, C the anchor point :), B any point in the Jetski trajectory.
    (AB) perpendicular to (AC), with AC = h = anchor depth, BC = r = rope length, AB = lap radius = 10 miles / 2Pi
    1 line later,    h = sqroot(r^2 - (5/Pi)^2)

  2. if you beleive in destiny than what is the pount in life. im a christian and the difference is that i am with god

      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:

    But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee.

    For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

    Luke 14

  3.   I have three coins in my pocket.

    I take one coin out and look at it before putting it back: it is French.
    I do it three times and every time it is French.
    What is p(all are French)?

    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:

    I'm assuming you tell us "there's an equal starting probability of having 0,1,2 or 3 French coins in my pocket", 'cos there are an infinite number of countries in the EU :)
    P(3 draws are French) = 1/27 if I had 1 French coin, 8/27 if I had 2 French coins, 100% if I had 3 French coins.
    P(3 frogeaters in my pocket) = 1/3(1/27+8/27+1) = 1/3(36/27) = 12/27 ... I have the feeling I've fallen into an obvious trap (?)

    1st one:

    Worst case scenario, there's only one black among the 100 marbles. Chance of not picking it is 0.99^100. I'm no walking calculator, but I think that more than 20%, so I won't take the bet.

    ........ Windows tells me it's 36.6%, so even a 1:3 bet wasn't worth it.

  4. Should be:

    Hidden Content

    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.

  5. Fun :)

    1. Let's say (hypothetically) there is a bullet, which can shoot through any barrier. Let's say there is also an absolutely bullet-proof armour, and nothing gets through it. What will happen, if such bullet hits such armour?

    This bullet will never hit such armor, since they cannot coexist. Each one negates the other's very existence.

    2. Can a man drown in the fountain of eternal life?

    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.

    3. Your mission is to not accept the mission. Do you accept?

    I accept half-heartedly. Oh, lookie here! A regular workday paradox!

    4. This girl goes into the past and kills her Grandmother. Since her Grandmother is dead the girl was never born, if she was never born she never killed her grandmother and she was born.

    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.

    5. If the temperature this morning is 0 degrees and the Weather Channel says, "it will be twice as cold tomorrow,".... What will the temperature be?

    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.

    6. Answer truthfully (yes or no) to the following question: Will the next word you say be no?

    - Nyet, tovarish.
    - Sí, claro que sí. :)

    7. What happens if you are in a car going the speed of light and you turn your headlights on?

    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 ?

    8. I conclude with this challenge:

    Wrong. Quod erat demonstrandum. :)

    Let the God Almighty create a stone, which he can not pick up (is not capable of lifting)!

    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)

  6. Rich is man who believes in the No God god. He does everything that make a god a god to other men. He has faith in the idea there is no God and this idea is his god. He fights for his god, he defends his god, he has dogma and beliefs that reflect his no God god, and absolutely will not accept even the remotest possibility of any other God/gods. If a spade is a spade by any other name...does Rich have a god?

    Substitution jutsu!

    Rich is man who believes in the chocolate-flavored cookie.
    He does everything that make a cookie a cookie to other men.
    He has faith in the idea there is chocolate-flavored and this idea is his cookie.
    He fights for his cookie, he defends his cookie, he has dogma and beliefs that reflect his chocolate-flavored cookie, and absolutely will not accept even the remotest possibility of any other cookie/cookies.
    {If it barks and has fur, is it a dog?} [For the love of strawberries], does Rich have a cookie?

    "no god" -> chocolate-flavored
          "god" -> cookie

    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.

  7. If you say something is indescribable, haven't you just described it as indescribable?

    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.

  8. "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.

  9. 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...