The worlds first riddle!

PM sent. This one is similar to the 1000 lockers riddle except with cubes not squares.

Adrian, Sidney's answer to Crocodile Dundee has, yet again come up with the right answer. to the 40 men question. How does he do it? Is one of you giving him the answer?

Well, in contrast to his success, my failures include the following, can you get them right?

What is the largest number you can write out with numbers 1, 2, and 3

Tom and Jerry were cell-mates at a state prinson. In the beginning the two argued daily, largely because they couldn't very well share the soup that was served to them in a can. One of them always thought the other one got more than his fair share. Finally they established an arrangment that was acceptable to both of them: one of them would pour the soup and the other one would get to choose which bowl of soup he wanted.

Then Sam was added to their cell. Now the three of them must find a new way to share the soup fairly to keep peace. Do you have any idea

The police, while investigating a case of bank-robbery, arrested three suspects -- Little Moe, One-Eyed Bob, and Smooth Ricky. Upon interrogation, they determined the following facts:

The criminals left the crime scene in a car; Smooth Ricky would never get involved in a crime if Little Moe was not participating; One-Eyed Bob couldn't drive; and one or all of the three were indeed the culprits.

Was Little Moe guilty

third one seems pretty easy, but since you are mentioning that you failed with it, I wonder if there is some trick I can't see
However, the way it's put - of course, Little Moe was guilty. Fact is they used car, fact is One-Eyed Bob couldn't drive, so either Smooth Ricky or Little Moe had to drive. If Smooth drive, then Little is also involved because third condition says that SR would never get involved if LM is not participating.

There is also possibility (it's not clear said in the task) that One-Eyed Bob and some other criminals commited robbery, but in that case you cannot assume anything for Little Moe (neither that he is guilty nor innocent), so I suppose it's out of question.


As for three convicts, I suppose they can agree that every day one of them pours soup and one chooses - for example: Day 1: Tom pours, Jerry chooses first, then Sam, Day 2: Jerry pours, Sam chooses first, then Tom, Day 3: Sam pours, Tom chooses first, then Jerry, etc.

biggest number that can be wrote of 1,2,3, without using any symbols, and using every digit only once, is (12)3 (I don't know how to write it - it's 12x12x12)

You mean 12 cubed--here, we would write 12 with a superscript 3, which i cannot do in this quick reply window (don't know the format code). Nice answer, MOU . . .

ah, cubed, yes thanks

"third one seems pretty easy, but since you are mentioning that you failed with it, I wonder if there is some trick I can't see"

No trick, but if the answer does not ?'click' then they are difficult. Looking back I don't know how I failed to find the answer. By the way, I like your soup answer better than the one I have.

"What is the largest number you can write out with numbers 1, 2, and 3?"
How about 10,460,353,203?
That is, 10,460,353,203 = 321.

"Then Sam was added to their cell. Now the three of them must find a new way to share the soup fairly to keep peace. Do you have any idea?"

One of them would pour soup. As he does this, anyone of them could ask him to stop at any moment, and the person who made this call would take the first bowl of soup. Then, the remaining two cellmates could go back to the old method of sharing.

"Was Little Moe guilty?"
Yes, he was. We may begin our reasoning with One-Eyed Bobby. If One-Eyed Bobby was innocent, then either Little Moe or Smoothy Dicky or both of them were guilty. If Smoothy Dicky was guilty, Little Moe was guilty too since Smoothy Dicky would never attempt a crime without Little Moe's participation.

If One-Eyed Bobby was guilty, then either Little Moe or Smoothy Dicky or both of them were guilty too since One-Eyed Bobby couldn't drive. If Smooth Dicky was guilty, Little Moe was guilty too for the reason said above. So One-Eyed Bobby might be or might not be guilty, but Little Moe was definitely guilty.

Setanta, was in bras-de-chemise, in an eternal waiting room, arguing with two lesbians . . . and no way out . . . He pulled on the door of the room, but it wouldn't open. (I have no idea why he would want to get out) The room had no windows. Two empty champagne bottles lay on the floor. How could he get out

Disclaimer; The names of persons involved have been changed to protect the innocent. :wink:

A helicopter was flying at the altitude of 3,000 feet above sea level. A soldier jumped out of the helicopter with no parachute, yet he landed safely. How come

Agent 007 needed to infiltrate into a top secret enemy base. There was a bridge leading to the gate of the base, and in the middle of that bridge a guard was posted around the clock. The guard would order anyone who try to leave the base to return to the base and anyone who tried to enter the base to go back where he came from.

After careful observation, Bond decided that the only promising opportunity for him to go through was when a new guard came out to replace the one already on duty. It took about 3 minutes for the guards to complete their procedure, during which time they did not watch the bridge. The bridge was of such length, however, it would take at least 6 minutes for anyone to cross. In other words, there was no chance that Bond could reach the other end of the bridge without being detected.
Still, Bond managed to get in. How did he do it

Try, I assume you mean 3 to the power of 21.

What about 3! to the power of 21?

Or 321!. That would be a REALLY big number.

Or is the point that you can't use any symbols?

You know me, these mathy ones confuse me.



I assume they weren't flying over the sea then.



So this would be the 'ol coming and going trick 'ay?

Oh, and another small clarification. What the hell was Setanta doing in the arm of a shirt? Better yet how did he fit in there with 2 lesbians? :wink:

of course adrian - 3 to the power of 21, hmm...but maybe 2 on power of 31 is even bigger - can't calculate in head though probably not.
I thought of 321! too but I guess no symbols allowed.

helicopter was on mountain 3,000 feet above the sea level?

but I still want to find this smiley that smashes his own head with hammer for saying 12 cubed 3 when there is 3 cubed 21 in front of my eyes

But, "I assume they weren't flying over the sea then." "helicopter was on mountain 3,000 feet above the sea level"
Answer: The helicopter was hovering over a mountaintop that is 2,999 feet above sea level. Lets not quibble over 1ft.

3 to the power of 21 would do it.

Adrian returns to his predictable best with," So this would be the 'ol coming and going trick 'ay?" Which of course it would.

As for his question, "Oh, and another small clarification. What the hell was Setanta doing in the arm of a shirt? Better yet how did he fit in there with 2 lesbians?"

Only history can say for sure, unless of cause you wish to borrow the security video? :wink:

Quote, "...for saying 12 cubed 3 when there is 3 cubed 21 in front of my eyes"

After you with the hammer. This illustrates my point, no matter how ?'easy' the question, if you cant see the answer, then it is hard, if not impossible.

A jewellery store was broken into, and the police investigation narrowed the suspects down to four men. When interrogated, the four suspects made the following statements respectively:

A: "I didn't do it."
B: "D did it."
C: "B did it."
D: "B is a liar."

We know that only one of the four suspects told truth. Who committed the crime

Ava is a beautiful woman. Quite a few men around her have tried to take her out for dinner, but none of them succeeded. To those who persist in asking her out, Ava would say very nicely but very firmly: "I let people ask me twice, but if I said no the second time, I don't want people to ask me the third time. I'm a woman of my words and I want others to be the same way."

Young fellow Richard came up with an idea, which, he told his friends, would get him a date with Ava. Indeed the next time Richard saw Ava, he walked up to her and said: "I've heard you allow people to ask you twice, so I'm here to claim my share of questions. You can just say yes or no, but your answers must be logical and consistent with each other. Deal?"
"Sure," replied Ava, all smiling.
Richard asked his questions and Ava agreed to go out with him.
How did Richard ask his questions

(I really cant believe I didn't see this answer)

A taxi driver felt sleepy, so he parked his car outside a shopping mall, intending to take a nap in his car. Just then someone came by, knocked on his window, and asked him what time it was. The driver told him and went back to trying get some. Before long, however, another man emerged, knocked on his window, and asked for time. The driver again provided the needed information, but, rather annoyed by the disturbances, he pulled out a piece of paper and wrote on it, in large and clear letters, that he didn't know what time it was. He put the notice up on the windshield so that no one could possibly not see it. Quite confident that no one would bother him now, he closed his eyes.
But just as he was about to doze off, yet another man walked up and knocked on his window.

How come There was no chance that the pedestrian could have overlooked the sign put up by the poor driver.

as for taxi, so far I thought of possibilities that it's a closed parking lot (I mean, closing when mall closes) so security guard knocked - then maybe some foreigner knocked - finally, someone that simply needs taxi (question does not say that last man asked about time)

Jewelry - edit: WRONG!

Jewelry II: B and C can't be truth tellers because in that case also A would be saying truth and condition is that only one speaks truth.

A: if he is saying truth then all of others have to be liars, but:
a) if B is liar, then D is saying truth
b) if D is liar, then B is saying truth
C becomes irrelevant

So, D is the only one saying truth. Where it gets us. It's pretty simple and we don't need complications. A did it. Because only one is truth teller and this is D, therefore A's claim "I didn't do it" is false. Also, B and C are liars too.

MOU I will let you know tomorrow, after the other side of the world have had a chance to give an opinion, or not as the case maybe.

In the meantime, solve these two, which drove me to

The year is in the 19th century. If you multiply it by 4.5, and then put the result in front of a mirror, you see the same year. Which year is it

There are six cups in a line. The first three filled water and the next three are empty. How do you move just one of them and makes the order of the cups filled, empty, filled, empty, filled, empty

F1, F2, F3, E1, E2, E3

You take F2, pour water in E2, put F2 back on its place.
Now you have F1, E2(now empty), F3, E1, F2(now filled), E3, or FEFEFE

If you multiply 1804 with 4,5 you get 8118 which looks same in the mirror, but I wonder if that's the real solution or you have to get the year that looked in mirror shows this year from 19th century?

and if that's so then answer is 1818 /multiplyed by 4,5 gives 8181/

I had the same problem as this taxi driver once. I was trying to get some sleep on a park bench, but all these people kept disturbing me to ask for money. Finally I wrote a sign saying, "I have no money", put it on my chest and went to sleep. Woke up with almost $15 in change on my chest.
:wink:

As for getting a date with Ava. I don't think it's possible. There are ways of forcing her into a logical inconsistancy, but unless you ask both questions at the same time there is no way of MAKING her accept a date.

Or am I missing something?

These pure logic ones are confusing.

MOU moves from ?'Enthusiast' to trainee Wizard.

(question does not say that last man asked about time)
Answer: The sign that the driver put up was his problem, on the last occasion anyway. The sign read: "I don't know what time it is!" The third person had come over to tell him what time it was.


A did it. Since only one of the four told the truth, B and D, who contradicted each other, couldn't be right or wrong at the same time. In other words, one of them must be telling the truth. And, if the truth-tell was either B or D, then A and C both lied. C lied when he said "B did it," and A lied when he said "I didn't do it." So A was the culprit.

F1, F2, F3, E1, E2, E3

You take F2, pour water in E2, put F2 back on its place.
Now you have F1, E2(now empty), F3, E1, F2(now filled), E3, or FEFEFE

answer is 1818 /multiplied by 4,5 gives 8181

"I had the same problem as this taxi driver once. I was trying to get some sleep on a park bench, but all these people kept disturbing me to ask for money. Finally I wrote a sign saying, "I have no money", put it on my chest and went to sleep. Woke up with almost $15 in change on my chest."

This is no joke folks. He told me his ?'house' had a very big garden! An e-mail is already on its way to the tax people.

"These pure logic ones are confusing."
Obviously, not confusing enough for some.

"I don't think it's possible. There are ways of forcing her into a logical inconsistency, but unless you ask both questions at the same time there is no way of MAKING her accept a date."

Answer.
Richard asked his two questions together: "Would you go out with me this Saturday night?" and, "Is your answer to this question the same as your answer to my previous question?" To be logical and consistent, Eva couldn't give "No" as an answer to Richard's first question. Because, if she answered "No" to the first question, it would become impossible for her to answer the second question logically.

Suppose Eva said "No" in responding to Richard's first question. To the second inquiry "Is your answer to this question the same as your answer to my previous question?" Eva would want to answer "Yes." But in that case, her answer to the second question was in fact "Yes," not "No," and therefore not the same as her answer to the first question. If to the inquiry "Is your answer to this question the same as your answer to my previous question?" Eva answered "No," she was being illogical again because her answer to the second questions was indeed "No" and therefore the same as her answer to the first question. To avoid this conflict, Eva must answer "Yes" to both questions.

Questions I should have got right.

A missionary landing on a remote island brought with him two watches. He presented them to the local chieftain, telling him that he could choose one of them as a gift from him. Both watches were damaged: one was falling behind the real time by one minute per day while the other stopped working altogether.

After looking over the two timepieces carefully, the chieftain said: "I want the one that shows more correct times."
Which watch would he get

John and his wife went on a sightseeing trip through countryside. Mary was driving, and John, who didn't rest too well the night before, started to doze off. The last impression he had before he finally fell asleep was that they were going on a lakeside road which is one-lane and one-way only, and that an old Beatle was trailing behind them.

Some time later, John woke up and he saw that they seemed to be still going on the same road, except that now they were trailing behind the old Beetle.
"We stopped somewhere?" John asked.
"No, we didn't," said Mary.
"Part of this road has two lanes?"
"No, same old one-lane all through."
"Then how did the Beetle get by us?"
Indeed how did it

A mouse was chased by a cat. Just as the cat was about to catch it, the mouse jumped into a swimming pool, which was round in shape. The cat circled around the pool, waiting for the mouse to come out of water.

Knowing that the cat could run 2.5 times faster than the mouse could swim, do you think the mouse could get out of the pool safely

watches - stopped of course, this one shows correct time twice a day