Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Puzzled - Puzzle Of The Day :: HINT ADDED

Puzzled - Puzzle Of The Day :: HINT ADDED

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
questionasp-netcombusiness
38 Posts 9 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • E Ennis Ray Lynch Jr

    That is like saying I am wrong but not giving a reason because it would help others to further deduce a solution. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the Universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." -- Stephen Crane

    R Offline
    R Offline
    Raj Lal
    wrote on last edited by
    #11

    Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:

    The old man likely had 10 sheep or less.

    How did you deduce this ? Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


    Online Project Management
    Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

    E L J 3 Replies Last reply
    0
    • R Raj Lal

      A guy is owner of a certain number of sheeps for god's sakes and also the father of three sons who for some reason are expert logicians like Cpians So here comes the question Clever as you are will think to yourself, now all this guy needs is to believe he's about to die so that he can make a will to divide the sheeps among the sons, right? Right, Except He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 1. The eldest will inherit the most sheeps 2. The youngest the least 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime. 4. He then whispers in each son's ear how many sheeps he personally will inherit. After that he proceeds from the eldest to the youngest, asking each ALOUD if he can calculate how many sheeps each of his brothers will inherit and each replies, "NO". He does it again and again each replies, "No" But then the eldest son on being asked the question once more says, "Yes, each of the last two 'noes' (that's the plural of 'no') gave me some information, and I now know (no plural of 'knows') how many sheeps each of us will inherit." What's the bet you're already wondering how may sheeps each son will get? QUESTION IS HOW MANY SHEEPS EACH ONE WILL GET easy ????? are you ready to take the challenge ? ha ha ha can you hear me laughing * OK try this easy one Can you tell me the only common word in english literature which has U , F, and A somewhere in the word in the same sequence HINT FOR THE FIRST QUESTION

      Quartz... wrote:

      He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime.

      This ONLY says that the sons cannot have more than 10 sheeps nothing else * NO POINTS WITHOUT EXPLAINATION Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


      Online Project Management
      Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree -- m

      K Offline
      K Offline
      Kacee Giger
      wrote on last edited by
      #12

      Of course, all good shepherds only count in binary. Therefore, the eldest son gets 10 sheep (the maximum any son could have), the middle son 1 sheep, and the youngest 0 sheep.:laugh:

      R 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • K Kacee Giger

        Of course, all good shepherds only count in binary. Therefore, the eldest son gets 10 sheep (the maximum any son could have), the middle son 1 sheep, and the youngest 0 sheep.:laugh:

        R Offline
        R Offline
        Raj Lal
        wrote on last edited by
        #13

        that was funny explaination :) Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


        Online Project Management
        Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

        J 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • E Ennis Ray Lynch Jr

          The old man likely had 10 sheep or less. Which means each son receives less than ten. Obviously the first son didn't recieve 7 or more because then his brothers would get none or else he would have known the answer (7,2,1). By the same logic we know that the middle son did not get 2 or he would have known the answer same with the youngest. 6,2,2 is not valid because the youngest does not get the least. Therefore 5, 3, 2 is the only available answer assuming the father has 10 sheep. If the father had less than 10 sheep the boys would have known the answer on the first round of questioning. If the oldest son gets less than 5 sheep the father does not have 10 sheep. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the Universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." -- Stephen Crane

          J Offline
          J Offline
          JFarceur
          wrote on last edited by
          #14

          Hum... Being 5-3-2 (10) The last son, having 2, knows for sure that it's 5-3-2, it cannot be 4-4-2, 6-2-2, nor 7-1-2. Being 5-4-1 (10) The second son, having 4, knows for sure it's 5-4-1, it cannot be 6-4-0 Being 5-3-1 (9) The first son, having 5, knows for sure it's 5-3-1, it cannot be 5-4-0 nor 5-2-2 Being 6-2-1 (9) The middle son, having 2, knows for sure it's 6-2-1, it cannot be 7-2-0, nor 5-2-2 If the middle son cannot have as much sheep as it's brothers, maybe he just doesn't have sheep? So the first son knows that his brother has (X - the numbe of sheeps he owns). JFarceur

          R 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R Raj Lal

            that was funny explaination :) Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


            Online Project Management
            Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

            J Offline
            J Offline
            JFarceur
            wrote on last edited by
            #15

            but impossible since the old man could not own 11 sheeps at the beginning, since it's a crime. JFarceur

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • R Raj Lal

              Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:

              The old man likely had 10 sheep or less.

              How did you deduce this ? Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


              Online Project Management
              Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

              E Offline
              E Offline
              Ennis Ray Lynch Jr
              wrote on last edited by
              #16

              It was illegal to have more than 10 sheep. The old man is no exception to the law. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the Universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." -- Stephen Crane

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • R Raj Lal

                A guy is owner of a certain number of sheeps for god's sakes and also the father of three sons who for some reason are expert logicians like Cpians So here comes the question Clever as you are will think to yourself, now all this guy needs is to believe he's about to die so that he can make a will to divide the sheeps among the sons, right? Right, Except He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 1. The eldest will inherit the most sheeps 2. The youngest the least 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime. 4. He then whispers in each son's ear how many sheeps he personally will inherit. After that he proceeds from the eldest to the youngest, asking each ALOUD if he can calculate how many sheeps each of his brothers will inherit and each replies, "NO". He does it again and again each replies, "No" But then the eldest son on being asked the question once more says, "Yes, each of the last two 'noes' (that's the plural of 'no') gave me some information, and I now know (no plural of 'knows') how many sheeps each of us will inherit." What's the bet you're already wondering how may sheeps each son will get? QUESTION IS HOW MANY SHEEPS EACH ONE WILL GET easy ????? are you ready to take the challenge ? ha ha ha can you hear me laughing * OK try this easy one Can you tell me the only common word in english literature which has U , F, and A somewhere in the word in the same sequence HINT FOR THE FIRST QUESTION

                Quartz... wrote:

                He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime.

                This ONLY says that the sons cannot have more than 10 sheeps nothing else * NO POINTS WITHOUT EXPLAINATION Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                Online Project Management
                Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree -- m

                J Offline
                J Offline
                Joe Caffeine
                wrote on last edited by
                #17

                Unfortunately, the only answer I get to is 5, 3, and 2 with the eldest getting 5 sheep.

                R 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • J Joe Caffeine

                  Unfortunately, the only answer I get to is 5, 3, and 2 with the eldest getting 5 sheep.

                  R Offline
                  R Offline
                  Raj Lal
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #18

                  But then the eldest son on being asked the question once more says, "Yes, each of the last two 'noes' (that's the plural of 'no')
                  gave me some information, and I now know (no plural of 'knows') how many sheeps each of us will inherit."

                  How do you explain this ? Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                  Online Project Management
                  Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                  J 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • R Raj Lal

                    Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:

                    The old man likely had 10 sheep or less.

                    How did you deduce this ? Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                    Online Project Management
                    Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                    L Offline
                    L Offline
                    leppie
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #19

                    Quartz... wrote:

                    How did you deduce this ?

                    Because its a crime to have more than 10 sheep! :doh: :doh::doh::-O**

                    xacc.ide-0.2.0 preview - Now in 100% C# goodness

                    **-- modified at 18:54 Thursday 13th July, 2006

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • R Raj Lal

                      But then the eldest son on being asked the question once more says, "Yes, each of the last two 'noes' (that's the plural of 'no')
                      gave me some information, and I now know (no plural of 'knows') how many sheeps each of us will inherit."

                      How do you explain this ? Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                      Online Project Management
                      Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                      J Offline
                      J Offline
                      Joe Caffeine
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #20

                      neither of the other two knew how many sheeps the eldest had inherited and the yongest did not know how many sheeps the middle son had inherited. the eldest son, knowing how many sheeps he had inherited could deduce the correct number for the other two.

                      R 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • J JFarceur

                        Hum... Being 5-3-2 (10) The last son, having 2, knows for sure that it's 5-3-2, it cannot be 4-4-2, 6-2-2, nor 7-1-2. Being 5-4-1 (10) The second son, having 4, knows for sure it's 5-4-1, it cannot be 6-4-0 Being 5-3-1 (9) The first son, having 5, knows for sure it's 5-3-1, it cannot be 5-4-0 nor 5-2-2 Being 6-2-1 (9) The middle son, having 2, knows for sure it's 6-2-1, it cannot be 7-2-0, nor 5-2-2 If the middle son cannot have as much sheep as it's brothers, maybe he just doesn't have sheep? So the first son knows that his brother has (X - the numbe of sheeps he owns). JFarceur

                        R Offline
                        R Offline
                        Raj Lal
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #21

                        Very nice analysis but whats the answer you said ? i am not able to figure out from your explaination Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                        Online Project Management
                        Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                        J 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • R Raj Lal

                          Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:

                          The old man likely had 10 sheep or less.

                          How did you deduce this ? Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                          Online Project Management
                          Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                          J Offline
                          J Offline
                          jono338
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #22

                          Owning more than 10 sheep is a crime ...

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • J Joe Caffeine

                            neither of the other two knew how many sheeps the eldest had inherited and the yongest did not know how many sheeps the middle son had inherited. the eldest son, knowing how many sheeps he had inherited could deduce the correct number for the other two.

                            R Offline
                            R Offline
                            Raj Lal
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #23

                            If the youngest knew he had 2 sheeps and TOTAL is 10 then WHY WOULD HE SAY NO when he is asked Because if he had got 2 5,3,2 is the only option 1,7,2 is not an option 1st not HIGHEST 2,6,2 is not an option 1st not HIGHEST 3,5,2 is not an option 1st not HIGHEST 4,4,2 is not an option 1st not HIGHEST 6,2,2 is not an option Last not LEAST 7,1,2 is not an option Last not LEAST Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                            Online Project Management
                            Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • E Ennis Ray Lynch Jr

                              The old man likely had 10 sheep or less. Which means each son receives less than ten. Obviously the first son didn't recieve 7 or more because then his brothers would get none or else he would have known the answer (7,2,1). By the same logic we know that the middle son did not get 2 or he would have known the answer same with the youngest. 6,2,2 is not valid because the youngest does not get the least. Therefore 5, 3, 2 is the only available answer assuming the father has 10 sheep. If the father had less than 10 sheep the boys would have known the answer on the first round of questioning. If the oldest son gets less than 5 sheep the father does not have 10 sheep. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the Universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." -- Stephen Crane

                              R Offline
                              R Offline
                              Raj Lal
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #24

                              If the youngest knew he had 2 sheeps and TOTAL is 10 then WHY WOULD HE SAY NO when he is asked Because if he had got 2 5,3,2 is the only option 1,7,2 is not an option 1st not HIGHEST 2,6,2 is not an option 1st not HIGHEST 3,5,2 is not an option 1st not HIGHEST 4,4,2 is not an option 1st not HIGHEST 6,2,2 is not an option Last not LEAST 7,1,2 is not an option Last not LEAST Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                              Online Project Management
                              Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • R Raj Lal

                                A guy is owner of a certain number of sheeps for god's sakes and also the father of three sons who for some reason are expert logicians like Cpians So here comes the question Clever as you are will think to yourself, now all this guy needs is to believe he's about to die so that he can make a will to divide the sheeps among the sons, right? Right, Except He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 1. The eldest will inherit the most sheeps 2. The youngest the least 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime. 4. He then whispers in each son's ear how many sheeps he personally will inherit. After that he proceeds from the eldest to the youngest, asking each ALOUD if he can calculate how many sheeps each of his brothers will inherit and each replies, "NO". He does it again and again each replies, "No" But then the eldest son on being asked the question once more says, "Yes, each of the last two 'noes' (that's the plural of 'no') gave me some information, and I now know (no plural of 'knows') how many sheeps each of us will inherit." What's the bet you're already wondering how may sheeps each son will get? QUESTION IS HOW MANY SHEEPS EACH ONE WILL GET easy ????? are you ready to take the challenge ? ha ha ha can you hear me laughing * OK try this easy one Can you tell me the only common word in english literature which has U , F, and A somewhere in the word in the same sequence HINT FOR THE FIRST QUESTION

                                Quartz... wrote:

                                He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime.

                                This ONLY says that the sons cannot have more than 10 sheeps nothing else * NO POINTS WITHOUT EXPLAINATION Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                                Online Project Management
                                Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree -- m

                                R Offline
                                R Offline
                                Raj Lal
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #25

                                IF THE QUESTION IS RIGHT THAT MEANS THE ASSUMPTIONS ARE WRONG right or wrong ? Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                                Online Project Management
                                Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                                J R J 3 Replies Last reply
                                0
                                • R Raj Lal

                                  A guy is owner of a certain number of sheeps for god's sakes and also the father of three sons who for some reason are expert logicians like Cpians So here comes the question Clever as you are will think to yourself, now all this guy needs is to believe he's about to die so that he can make a will to divide the sheeps among the sons, right? Right, Except He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 1. The eldest will inherit the most sheeps 2. The youngest the least 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime. 4. He then whispers in each son's ear how many sheeps he personally will inherit. After that he proceeds from the eldest to the youngest, asking each ALOUD if he can calculate how many sheeps each of his brothers will inherit and each replies, "NO". He does it again and again each replies, "No" But then the eldest son on being asked the question once more says, "Yes, each of the last two 'noes' (that's the plural of 'no') gave me some information, and I now know (no plural of 'knows') how many sheeps each of us will inherit." What's the bet you're already wondering how may sheeps each son will get? QUESTION IS HOW MANY SHEEPS EACH ONE WILL GET easy ????? are you ready to take the challenge ? ha ha ha can you hear me laughing * OK try this easy one Can you tell me the only common word in english literature which has U , F, and A somewhere in the word in the same sequence HINT FOR THE FIRST QUESTION

                                  Quartz... wrote:

                                  He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime.

                                  This ONLY says that the sons cannot have more than 10 sheeps nothing else * NO POINTS WITHOUT EXPLAINATION Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                                  Online Project Management
                                  Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree -- m

                                  R Offline
                                  R Offline
                                  RC_Sebastien_C
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #26

                                  Threads are all mixed up when it ends, could you please post the solution under your original post ? I'll give a try to the easy part... since I assume you're not talking UFAs (unrestricted free-agents) I'll try manufacturing thanks!

                                  R 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • R Raj Lal

                                    IF THE QUESTION IS RIGHT THAT MEANS THE ASSUMPTIONS ARE WRONG right or wrong ? Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                                    Online Project Management
                                    Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                                    J Offline
                                    J Offline
                                    Joe Caffeine
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #27

                                    Never make assumptions...write unit tests and be sure about it! :)

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • R Raj Lal

                                      IF THE QUESTION IS RIGHT THAT MEANS THE ASSUMPTIONS ARE WRONG right or wrong ? Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                                      Online Project Management
                                      Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                                      R Offline
                                      R Offline
                                      RC_Sebastien_C
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #28

                                      right only answer I can come up is that's it's not possible with the constraints, but don't feel like spending a summer night proving it :) Waiting for the answer and would be curious to be proven wrong.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • R Raj Lal

                                        A guy is owner of a certain number of sheeps for god's sakes and also the father of three sons who for some reason are expert logicians like Cpians So here comes the question Clever as you are will think to yourself, now all this guy needs is to believe he's about to die so that he can make a will to divide the sheeps among the sons, right? Right, Except He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 1. The eldest will inherit the most sheeps 2. The youngest the least 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime. 4. He then whispers in each son's ear how many sheeps he personally will inherit. After that he proceeds from the eldest to the youngest, asking each ALOUD if he can calculate how many sheeps each of his brothers will inherit and each replies, "NO". He does it again and again each replies, "No" But then the eldest son on being asked the question once more says, "Yes, each of the last two 'noes' (that's the plural of 'no') gave me some information, and I now know (no plural of 'knows') how many sheeps each of us will inherit." What's the bet you're already wondering how may sheeps each son will get? QUESTION IS HOW MANY SHEEPS EACH ONE WILL GET easy ????? are you ready to take the challenge ? ha ha ha can you hear me laughing * OK try this easy one Can you tell me the only common word in english literature which has U , F, and A somewhere in the word in the same sequence HINT FOR THE FIRST QUESTION

                                        Quartz... wrote:

                                        He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime.

                                        This ONLY says that the sons cannot have more than 10 sheeps nothing else * NO POINTS WITHOUT EXPLAINATION Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                                        Online Project Management
                                        Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree -- m

                                        R Offline
                                        R Offline
                                        Raj Lal
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #29

                                        Quartz... wrote:

                                        He calls them together (the sons, not the sheeps) and tells them how many sheeps (not sons) he owns AND Adds that 3. Nobody having more than 10 sheeps, which as we all know is a crime.

                                        This ONLY says that the sons cannot have more than 10 sheeps nothing else Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                                        Online Project Management
                                        Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                                        J 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • R RC_Sebastien_C

                                          Threads are all mixed up when it ends, could you please post the solution under your original post ? I'll give a try to the easy part... since I assume you're not talking UFAs (unrestricted free-agents) I'll try manufacturing thanks!

                                          R Offline
                                          R Offline
                                          Raj Lal
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #30

                                          HollyHooo wrote:

                                          when it ends, could you please post the solution under your original post ?

                                          ofcourse

                                          HollyHooo wrote:

                                          since I assume you're not talking UFAs (unrestricted free-agents) I'll try manufacturing

                                          perfect :-> Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.


                                          Online Project Management
                                          Universal DBA | Ajax Rating | ExplorerTree

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups