To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.funOpen lugnet.off-topic.fun in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Fun / 6355
6354  |  6356
Subject: 
Re: King, Queen & Jack
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.fun
Date: 
Fri, 22 Dec 2000 01:56:47 GMT
Viewed: 
187 times
  
Thanks, Shiri - I think I got it right the first time.  The statement I
figured could possibly be true was most likely to have been correct, and
after you posted, I think it is.


--
Cheers ...

Geoffrey Hyde

Shiri Dori <shirid@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:G5y385.I21@lugnet.com...
The thing is, Geoffrey, that the point is not proving a, b *or* c true or
false; but rather answering the question (is there, or is there not, an
ace). Which is why the wording *is* actually valid...

Haven't ever seen this before, but I love solving these. I'll provide a
little filler (if you wanna figure it out, don't read on!!)

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

The answer is no, there couldn't be an ace in the hand no matter what it • is.
An ace in the pack would make both a and b true, which is impossible since
the problem states only one statement is possible. Therefore, there cannot
be an ace in the pack. Either one of the three statements could still be
true (but *only* one). In case a, there would be a king in the pack, • making
a true; in case b, a queen, making b true; and in case three, either one • of
the three could be true (a jack, a ten, or both). Either way, however, the
answer remains: there is no ace in the hand.

Does that make sense?

Happy holidays!
-Shiri



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: King, Queen & Jack
 
(...) In your 1st post, you seem to think that it is a matter of probability, when in fact, it's not, as Shiri pointed out (quite correctly). Let's examine closely. (Don't read if for some reason you're still figuring it out) (...) Alright. There (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: King, Queen & Jack
 
The thing is, Geoffrey, that the point is not proving a, b *or* c true or false; but rather answering the question (is there, or is there not, an ace). Which is why the wording *is* actually valid... Haven't ever seen this before, but I love solving (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

10 Messages in This Thread:



Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR