Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Solve this riddle
- Thread starter anjinha
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The answer is somewhere in that page.
The guard would point to one of the paths, and you still wouldn't know whether that guard is the liar or the truth teller, and now you've used up your one question.
Okay then, you don't bother asking. Pull out a gun and say, "Tell me how to get to the village or I'll blow your stupid brains out."
That's bound to get the desired response.
Why? How does that help?
Its so confusing! Was i right? I think that would be a good question.
Or.... You dont go to either village.
The answer is:
"If I were to ask the other guard which path leads to the good village, what would he tell me?"
If the guard you ask is the truth teller, he'll tell you what the liar would tell you, which will be the opposite of the path you want.
If the guard you ask is the liar, he'll lie about what the truth teller would say, again resulting in an answer that describes the path opposite of the one you want.
So, you ask that question, and whichever path the guard tells you the other guard would direct you to, you go on the opposite one.
"If I were to ask the other guard which path leads to the good village, what would he tell me?"
If the guard you ask is the truth teller, he'll tell you what the liar would tell you, which will be the opposite of the path you want.
If the guard you ask is the liar, he'll lie about what the truth teller would say, again resulting in an answer that describes the path opposite of the one you want.
So, you ask that question, and whichever path the guard tells you the other guard would direct you to, you go on the opposite one.
But which one do you ask that to? And it doesn't tell you the path to go down.
edit: Just saw StephenCampbell posted the right answer.
Mmm... rice cakes! Especially when done Asian style, like the Korean dish below (tteokbokki):
Om nom nom. F'real.
Now, on to another "riddle", similar in concept to StephenCampbell's. I read this one in an article about a logic professor...
I have a penny, and a $100 bill. You may make any statement you wish. If it's true, I must give you one of these, but I won't tell you which one beforehand. If it's false, I give you nothing.
What statement logically forces me to give you the $100?
Om nom nom. F'real.
Now, on to another "riddle", similar in concept to StephenCampbell's. I read this one in an article about a logic professor...
I have a penny, and a $100 bill. You may make any statement you wish. If it's true, I must give you one of these, but I won't tell you which one beforehand. If it's false, I give you nothing.
What statement logically forces me to give you the $100?
I have a penny, and a $100 bill. You may make any statement you wish. If it's true, I must give you one of these, but I won't tell you which one beforehand. If it's false, I give you nothing.
Hrmm...if you have a bill, you have to give it to me? Haha...this is a good one. Let me talk with my roommate!
Hrmm...if you have a bill, you have to give it to me? Haha...this is a good one. Let me talk with my roommate!
I think a 12 gauge shotgun suites this occasion more.Hum... "Give me the bill", accompanied with a 9mm gun?
You will still have a penny after I say this.
"You won't give me a penny" also works.
If the riddler keeps the penny the statement is true, thus he must give me something. He cannot give me the penny or else the statement will become false. If the statement is false, he cannot hand anything over. Ergo, he is compelled to hand over the bill to satistfy the truthful condition.
Hum... "Give me the bill", accompanied with a 9mm gun?
That's a command, not a statement. Violence is not necessary.
I can logically say that's false, and I give you nothing.
You will still have a penny after I say this.
Mousse, you're getting warm, in a roundabout way.
EDIT: Mousse gets the credit, because his logical explanation (added via edit) mirrors what was explained in the original article.
The original answer was, "You will not give me the penny," and the logic is similar. If the statement "You will not give me the penny" is false, its exact negative is "You will give me the penny," but I can't give anything for a false statement. Thus, "You will not give me the penny" must be true, and if so, then I really won't give you the penny. But I must give you something for a logically true statement; hence, the virtual $100 is yours.
As I said above, Mousse's logical explanation mirrors the professor's, so Mousse's statement is equivalently correct. I didn't see Mousse's explanation until after my initial response, thus my edit.
Here's an fairly easy one for English speakers:
With my first 2 letters, I a man.
With my first 3 letters, I a woman.
With my first 4 letters, I a brave man.
Complete, I am a brave woman.
What word am I?
With my first 2 letters, I a man.
With my first 3 letters, I a woman.
With my first 4 letters, I a brave man.
Complete, I am a brave woman.
What word am I?
