30 Nov 06
11 edits
Originally posted by chess kid1
- These five homeowners each drink a different kind of beverage, smoke different brand of cigar and keep a different pet.
Einstein's riddle is: Who owns the fish?
------------------------------
Is it possible that the solution to this problem comes down to these two words?
"keep" and "own"
When my neighbor goes on vacation, I might “keep" their pet for a while.
Even though one of the neighbors in this problem may be keeping, lets say a bird - the problem statement allows that this bird might actually be owned another neighbor.
In this case, the answer would be nobody or unknown.
???
30 Nov 06
Originally posted by GastelYou didn't answer my question.
Why would I solve the rest (although it is not difficult)? The question does not ask - "What does everyone have for pets, smokes, houses and drinks?" It asks, "Who owns the fish?"
Why waste time solving everything that is not asked? Did you determine or conclusively disprove the existence of gravitons before posting? If not, why not?
Did you actually solve for the rest, or not?
30 Nov 06
Originally posted by GastelHow do you know that solving for the rest is "not difficult" (your words) if you've never done it?
No. It was not required. And I answered the first time. I know reading can be a problem for some, but do try and keep up.
The reason that people find it hard to keep up with what you write is because you love making self-contradictory claims.
01 Dec 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemI would like to point out that assessment of a problem can be achieved with out solving. Eg. sum[(f{x}=7x+4),(R={17....134})]
How do you know that solving for the rest is "not difficult" (your words) if you've never done it?
and before you ask, No I did not solve for mr. fishie either. I am far more entertained by reading 300 posts about how unsolvable something is.
[edit] sum=64990
01 Dec 06
Originally posted by preachingforjesusHmm, shouldn't the sum be 62835?
I would like to point out that assessment of a problem can be achieved with out solving. Eg. sum[(f{x}=7x+4),(R={17....134})]
and before you ask, No I did not solve for mr. fishie either. I am far more entertained by reading 300 posts about how unsolvable something is.
[edit] sum=64990
I disagree that assessment of difficulty is possible without solving. At a minimum, you should successfully solve at least one problem of similar type before claiming such problems are 'easy'.
01 Dec 06
Originally posted by dmnelson84Insufficient data! What are the odds that a German would own a fish? They probably prefer cats or dogs as pets. You need to do a survey of German pet-owners before you presume to know what kind of pets they have. Einstein wants you to think outside the box, dammit! 😵
In all likelyhood, the semantics are just that...semantics. I think "The German owns the fish." is what Einstein was looking for.