Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bauglir]

If anyone want a sortof logic puzzle (although not nearly as hard):

I have a set of four cards.  On each card, there is a number on one side and a shape on the other.  I want to test the hypothesis

"If a card has a square on one side, it has an even number on the other side".

The sides I can see show 13, a square, 28 and a triangle.  Which 2 cards should I flip over in order to confirm or deny the hypothesis?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

13 and the square, right? It's phrased so that not all even numbers need squares on the other side, and makes no statement about triangles.

[ed boy]

To avoid further topic-offing, perhaps you should start a new thread of logic conundrums.

[Bardum Idith]

Are offtopic posters intelligent?
I vote no 
Haha, I'm stupid.

[G-Flex]

I think I have it:

The chances of you picking the wrong door the first time is more likely than you picking the correct door the first time.
Therefore, at the start of part two, you are more likely to have the incorrect door.
Therefore the door that you did not choose is more likely to be the correct door.

The reason you ought to switch is because the game eliminates one of the wrong doors for you; in the 2/3 chance that you picked the wrong door the first time, the host helpfully tells you which of the remaining doors is correct by eliminating the one that's not. The key thing here is that the host provides you with new information: You know that, in the case that the other two doors contain the correct door, he's picking the right one for you. If he didn't, then obviously being able to choose again would be meaningless.

What? No, what the problem is is essentially you being asked whether you want two opportunities or one, but hidden behind a smokescreen. Since there is only one correct possibility, at least all but one of the two must be false, but the group as a whole has the same (2/3) probability. There is no elimenation, just a wonderfully crafted misdirection and a choice between two (or 999,999 or whatever) opportunities and one shot.

That's a pretty valid explanation as well. There are different ways of interpreting/explaining it to people.

[Nivim]

 I don't think we should switch to another forum topic, since we're on a roll. [5][2] [6]

, like trying to decide what color gravity is.

 You know, that actually makes an awesome question; "what color does gravity correspond to?" Spacetime travels at a certain speed, thus limiting the speed of light, but does it travel in waves? Would it be possible to measure the wavelength of these waves, and extrapolate a certain color from it depending on the gravitational fields nearby? I really don't know, and Wikipedia talks about special relativity with reference frames, not waves, but the limit of conflict for those reference frames needs to be defined by the speed of space, which I cannot find an article about. Help?

[Ø]

PETA: its so hard to take them seriously that you can't even keep a thread on topic about it.

[KaguroDraven]

We can't keep a thread on topic about anything >.>

[lordnincompoop]

I respectfully disagree. There are many on-topic threads here.

[KaguroDraven]

Most of those either just started, or dift on and off topic.

[Leafsnail]

The MSPA thread has been on topic for 691 pages.

[KaguroDraven]

Hence the term 'most' not 'all'

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I'm on topic all the time, you people just can't appreciate the relevance of Atheist Space Pope in regards to PETA.

[KaguroDraven]

We have a space pope, the current one AKA the emperor AKA darth vader's master, he's just not athiest, he's forcest

[lordnincompoop]

We have a space pope now?

Oh god, I really need to start paying attention to the news.

[ed boy]

Of course we have a space pope.

He's reptilian.