[I] Lateral Thinking
MP
might appeal to AFPers...
http://rinkworks.com/brainfood/latreal.shtml
Not to metion that the name of the actual file sounds like an entry in
the toilet naming contest... :-}
MP
David Chapman
news:3c979879...@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
> Just discoved this link, and it seemed to be the sort of thing that
> might appeal to AFPers...
>
> http://rinkworks.com/brainfood/latreal.shtml
Nah. Half the puuzles are antique and easy to work out, and
the rest are utter crap and either impossible to work out, have a
solution that doesn't work or have a phenomenally obvious
solution that doesn't need lateral thinking.
--
"Do you just keep your newbies locked up in cages all alone?"
"Of course! That's what pets are for!"
Richard Bos
> Just discoved this link, and it seemed to be the sort of thing that
> might appeal to AFPers...
>
> http://rinkworks.com/brainfood/latreal.shtml
Is it just me, or do others agree that most of these either have several
other, sometimes rather superior, solutions, depend on unexpected or
unrealistic assumptions, or both?
For example, for #9, a much more likely solution is that there was a
train crash, and the smoking waggons, being in another part of the train
than the non-smoking waggons, are the only ones to survive the crash.
For another, #29 assumes no Merkin whatsoever knows all verses of his
own national anthem. As a last example, #23 is just too unbelievable on
several points to even take seriously.
Ok, so you're supposed to think laterally. Problem is, when they're
called "realistic" lateral-thinking problems, I'm inclined to think of a
realistic solution, not of some far-out possibility.
Richard
David Chapman
news:3c986415...@news.tiscali.nl...
Oh, the best one is the one with the dead guy wearing a backpack
lying face down in the desert. The purported answer is that he was
a parachutist whose chute failed to open. Isn't it a little more likely
and realistic that he was a backpacker who died of thirst?
Richard Bos
> "Richard Bos" <in...@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl> wrote in message
> news:3c986415...@news.tiscali.nl...
> > Ok, so you're supposed to think laterally. Problem is, when they're
> > called "realistic" lateral-thinking problems, I'm inclined to think of a
> > realistic solution, not of some far-out possibility.
>
> Oh, the best one is the one with the dead guy wearing a backpack
> lying face down in the desert. The purported answer is that he was
> a parachutist whose chute failed to open. Isn't it a little more likely
> and realistic that he was a backpacker who died of thirst?
Yeah, that was the first thing I thought of, as well: another bloody
back-to-basics turist finding out the hard way that basically, he's an
imbecile.
Richard
Michael Yoder
>ju...@bleurgh.net (MP) wrote:
>
>>Just discoved this link, and it seemed to be the sort of thing that
>>might appeal to AFPers...
>>
>>http://rinkworks.com/brainfood/latreal.shtml
>
>
>Is it just me, or do others agree that most of these either have several
>other, sometimes rather superior, solutions, depend on unexpected or
>unrealistic assumptions, or both?
>[snip]
>
I first encountered several of these in the 1970s in California, when
they were called "little mysteries" and presented as a parlor game. The
person who knew the answer would present the mystery, and everyone else
would ask questions (IIRC yes-or-no questions only) to try and deduce
what was going on. There wasn't any limit on the number of questions;
the game would continue until the mystery was solved or the questioners
gave up.
IMO asking people to solve them without the questions and answers is
subject to exactly the problems you complain of.
Franz
Attention, human! The world of computers has declared war on your race.
If you wish to surrender, press Y.
If you wish to resist, press N.
kylet
Sorry, but I just don't see any attraction in these 'puzzles' at all...
0/10 - Must Try HArder,.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.338 / Virus Database: 189 - Release Date: 14 Mar 02
Sherilyn
Michael Yoder <m...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>Richard Bos wrote:
>
>>ju...@bleurgh.net (MP) wrote:
>>
>>>Just discoved this link, and it seemed to be the sort of thing that
>>>might appeal to AFPers...
>>>
>>>http://rinkworks.com/brainfood/latreal.shtml
>>
>>
>>Is it just me, or do others agree that most of these either have several
>>other, sometimes rather superior, solutions, depend on unexpected or
>>unrealistic assumptions, or both?
>>[snip]
>>
>I first encountered several of these in the 1970s in California, when
>they were called "little mysteries" and presented as a parlor game. The
>person who knew the answer would present the mystery, and everyone else
>would ask questions (IIRC yes-or-no questions only) to try and deduce
>what was going on. There wasn't any limit on the number of questions;
>the game would continue until the mystery was solved or the questioners
>gave up.
>
>IMO asking people to solve them without the questions and answers is
>subject to exactly the problems you complain of.
>
the website's answer and come up with something even more bizarre.
--
Sherilyn
M.S.R
"Michael Yoder" <m...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:3C98905E...@mediaone.net...
> Franz
> Attention, human! The world of computers has declared > war on your race.
> If you wish to surrender, press Y.
> If you wish to resist, press N.
>
Nahhhh I can't be bothered. They'll crash soon anyway.....
Torak
> lying face down in the desert. The purported answer is that he was
> a parachutist whose chute failed to open. Isn't it a little more likely
> and realistic that he was a backpacker who died of thirst?
Besides, wouldn't recreational parachutists jump somewhere where they don't
need to footslog it hundreds of miles back home?
Torak
> they were called "little mysteries" and presented as a parlor game. The
> person who knew the answer would present the mystery, and everyone else
> would ask questions (IIRC yes-or-no questions only) to try and deduce
> what was going on. There wasn't any limit on the number of questions;
> the game would continue until the mystery was solved or the questioners
> gave up.
At least that sounds fun. These are just daft.
MP
Bos) wrote:
>ju...@bleurgh.net (MP) wrote:
>
>> Just discoved this link, and it seemed to be the sort of thing that
>> might appeal to AFPers...
>>
>> http://rinkworks.com/brainfood/latreal.shtml
>
>Is it just me, or do others agree that most of these either have several
>other, sometimes rather superior, solutions, depend on unexpected or
>unrealistic assumptions, or both?
Yep! I was amused by that too!
>For example, for #9, a much more likely solution is that there was a
>train crash, and the smoking waggons, being in another part of the train
>than the non-smoking waggons, are the only ones to survive the crash.
Most of them have much more realistic solutions. I mean, most people
could probably think of better solutions, and indeed, better questions
than these... [1]
<snip>
>Ok, so you're supposed to think laterally. Problem is, when they're
>called "realistic" lateral-thinking problems, I'm inclined to think of a
>realistic solution, not of some far-out possibility.
I mean, they are at least more realistic than the sort of puzzles
where a man is stuck in a room with a table and nothing else, not even
a door, window or useful little pocket survival kit.
But still not very realistic, I'll concede!
MP
[1] Hint, hint... :-}
Chris Ahchay
>
> >ju...@bleurgh.net (MP) wrote:
> >
> >>Just discoved this link, and it seemed to be the sort of thing that
> >>might appeal to AFPers...
> >>
> >>http://rinkworks.com/brainfood/latreal.shtml
> >
> >
> >Is it just me, or do others agree that most of these either have several
> >other, sometimes rather superior, solutions, depend on unexpected or
> >unrealistic assumptions, or both?
> >[snip]
> >
> I first encountered several of these in the 1970s in California, when
> they were called "little mysteries" and presented as a parlor game. The
> person who knew the answer would present the mystery, and everyone else
> would ask questions (IIRC yes-or-no questions only) to try and deduce
> what was going on. There wasn't any limit on the number of questions;
> the game would continue until the mystery was solved or the questioners
> gave up.
>
> IMO asking people to solve them without the questions and answers is
> subject to exactly the problems you complain of.
>
To be fair...
The webby site thing _does_ mention that this is the best way to
pose the "puzzles" - i.e. one all-knowing bod and a bunch of people
asking questions.
However, I do agree that these are basically a pile of steaming
brown stuff. These kind of lateral thinking questions can be done
really well, but this site is not one of the best examples.
Another question then? What's your favorite lateral thinking
puzzle? Mine to follow (an oldie, and pretty simple, but a goodie)
<Explanation>
An explorer is wandering through the arctic wasteland when he
discovers two corpses. He takes one look them and exclaims
"Aha, here lie Adam and Eve!".
</Explanation>
<Question>
How does he know?
</Question>
Cheers
Chris
John
"David Chapman" <evil...@madasafish.com> wrote in message
news:u9h1iih...@corp.supernews.com...
And of course, a backpack is a backpack, an unopened parachute
is not.
Torak
> puzzle? Mine to follow (an oldie, and pretty simple, but a goodie)
>
> <Explanation>
> An explorer is wandering through the arctic wasteland when he
> discovers two corpses. He takes one look them and exclaims
> "Aha, here lie Adam and Eve!".
> </Explanation>
> <Question>
> How does he know?
> </Question>
They're still still wearing their McDonalds-patented "Hi, I'm [Insert Name
Here]!" nametags?
Richard Bos
> Another question then? What's your favorite lateral thinking
> puzzle? Mine to follow (an oldie, and pretty simple, but a goodie)
>
> <Explanation>
> An explorer is wandering through the arctic wasteland when he
> discovers two corpses. He takes one look them and exclaims
> "Aha, here lie Adam and Eve!".
> </Explanation>
> <Question>
> How does he know?
> </Question>
Answer one:
They died in a previous expotition, and he went to look for them.
Answer two:
They are two of his team-mates who went to feed the dogs, tend to the
sleds, or whatever, and got surprised by a snow-storm while he was
still in the tent.
Answers three and four:
They are two dogs of his or a previous team, see answers one and two.
Answer five:
They're wearing team suits with name tags. Or they're dogs wearing
collars with their names written on them.
Answer six:
He doesn't know, he's just being morbidly silly.
Answer seven:
They're still wearing their fig-leaves.
Next?
Richard
Søren Noort Hansen
> <Explanation>
> An explorer is wandering through the arctic wasteland when he
> discovers two corpses. He takes one look them and exclaims
> "Aha, here lie Adam and Eve!".
> </Explanation>
> <Question>
> How does he know?
> </Question>
>
> Cheers
> Chris
No navels?
Sřren
--
WYGIWYGAINGW - What You Get Is What You're Given And It's No Good
Whining
- Terry Pratchett et al. (The Science of Discworld)
Mary Messall
> <Explanation>
> An explorer is wandering through the arctic wasteland when he
> discovers two corpses. He takes one look them and exclaims
> "Aha, here lie Adam and Eve!".
> </Explanation>
> <Question>
> How does he know?
> </Question>
I strongly suspect the expected answer is...
No belly buttons.
-Mary
Torak
> > puzzle? Mine to follow (an oldie, and pretty simple, but a goodie)
> >
> > <Explanation>
> > An explorer is wandering through the arctic wasteland when he
> > discovers two corpses. He takes one look them and exclaims
> > "Aha, here lie Adam and Eve!".
> > </Explanation>
> > <Question>
> > How does he know?
> > </Question>
> Answer seven:
> They're still wearing their fig-leaves.
No wonder they froze to death...
Sherilyn
I fear you must be right. The arctic conditions are required to account
for the intact survival of the bodies, which would be necessary for
identification.
--
Sherilyn
Chris Ahchay
Well... I _did_ say it was pretty easy.
Although I will admit to quite liking Richard's (various) answers.
Cheers
Chris
gra...@affordable-leather.co.ukdeletethis
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002 21:24:02 GMT, ju...@bleurgh.net (MP) wrote:
>Most of them have much more realistic solutions. I mean, most people
>could probably think of better solutions, and indeed, better questions
>than these...
Erm, well this is going to be a bit irritating, but...
Many years ago (about 25, I think!) I heard a lateral thinking
problem, but never actually found out the answer! As far as I recall
it *does* have a reasonable and logical solution, it's just that I
can't figure out what it is!!
AFAIR it went like this:
* * * * *
There are two men in a desert, dying of thirst, when they find a
bottle full of water.
They want to divide the water fairly and evenly, but the bottle is a
completely irregular shape and all they have to mark it with is a
chinagraph (grease) pencil.
How do they do it?
* * * * *
Any suggestions would be welcomed.
Cheers,
Graham.
John
<gra...@affordable-leather.co.ukDELETETHIS> wrote in message
news:3c9a2daa...@news.ntlworld.com...
The first person drinks, and between sips turns the bottle
upside-down. When the level rightside-up equals upside-down,
the bottle is 1/2 empty.
Assuming they can stopper the bottle, and that it's completely
full.
Elliott Grasett
> ch...@arcadenirvana.com (Chris Ahchay) wrote:
>
<snip>
> >
> > <Explanation>
> > An explorer is wandering through the arctic wasteland when he
> > discovers two corpses. He takes one look them and exclaims
> > "Aha, here lie Adam and Eve!".
> > </Explanation>
> > <Question>
> > How does he know?
> > </Question>
>
> Answer seven:
> They're still wearing their fig-leaves.
>
> Next?
>
They have no navels.
Warning: members of the Plymouth Brethren
will NOT regard this answer as valid.
--
Cheers,
Elliott
Mary Messall
> The first person drinks, and between sips turns the bottle
> upside-down. When the level rightside-up equals upside-down,
> the bottle is 1/2 empty.
> Assuming they can stopper the bottle, and that it's completely
> full.
Surely not. If it has a long, narrow neck but a broad base, then the
upside down level for a given volume will be much higher than the right
side up level for the same volume...
-Mary
Sherilyn
Only when it isn't half full. The half-full level is that at which the
volume of air in the bottle is exactly equal to the volume of liquid in
the bottle. Invert the bottle and the liquid and air change positions
only. Each occupies exactly the same volume, so the liquid-air interface
line is in exactly the same place. For a conical bottle, that place will
be much closer to the base than for a cylindrical bottle, but when any
bottle, of whatever (reasonably convex, no air pockets) shape is half full
it doesn't matter whether you hold the bottle upside down or right way up,
the liquid level will still be in the same place.
--
Sherilyn
Peter Ellis
Not when exactly half full.
Think about it: When it's one way up, you have half-a-bottle's worth of
liquid in the broad end. When it's the other way up, you have
half-a-bottle's worth of air in the broad end.
Peter
Adrian Ogden
Yep, that works.
I'd've just turned the bottle on its side though. That shifts the
axis of symmetry so that top and bottom are visibly equal; it's only
left and right that are imbalanced.
--
<< Adrian Ogden -- "Sic Biscuitus Disintegrat" -- www.rdg.ac.uk/~sssogadr/ >>
"My grandmother always used to say that violence is the last refuge of the
green humpty people. Mind you, she was quite heavily on the Prozac."
Peter Ellis
>
>I'd've just turned the bottle on its side though. That shifts the
>axis of symmetry so that top and bottom are visibly equal; it's only
>left and right that are imbalanced.
Why do you assume it has any axes of symmetry?
Peter
Sherilyn
Edward de Bono's head.
--
Sherilyn
Mary Messall
> Peter Ellis <pj...@cam.ac.uk> writes:
> >On Fri, 22 Mar 2002, Mary Messall wrote:
> >>John wrote:
> >>> The first person drinks, and between sips turns the bottle
> >>> upside-down. When the level rightside-up equals upside-down,
> >>> the bottle is 1/2 empty.
> >>> Assuming they can stopper the bottle, and that it's completely
> >>> full.
> >>Surely not. If it has a long, narrow neck but a broad base, then the
> >>upside down level for a given volume will be much higher than the right
> >>side up level for the same volume...
> >Not when exactly half full.
> >Think about it: When it's one way up, you have half-a-bottle's worth of
> >liquid in the broad end. When it's the other way up, you have
> >half-a-bottle's worth of air in the broad end.
All right, fair enough. When the air has exactly the same volume as the
liquid... Yes.
> Yep, that works.
> I'd've just turned the bottle on its side though. That shifts the
> axis of symmetry so that top and bottom are visibly equal; it's only
> left and right that are imbalanced.
Only works with rotationally symettric bottles, of course. Try with a
milk jug that has a hollow handle, and it won't be exactly half way up
when half full however you turn it.
-Mary
Torak
news:a7f6vm$bkb$1...@vins1.reading.ac.uk...
> Peter Ellis <pj...@cam.ac.uk> writes:
> >On Fri, 22 Mar 2002, Mary Messall wrote:
> >>John wrote:
> >>> The first person drinks, and between sips turns the bottle
> >>> upside-down. When the level rightside-up equals upside-down,
> >>> the bottle is 1/2 empty.
> >>> Assuming they can stopper the bottle, and that it's completely
> >>> full.
> >>
> >>Surely not. If it has a long, narrow neck but a broad base, then the
> >>upside down level for a given volume will be much higher than the right
> >>side up level for the same volume...
>
> >Not when exactly half full.
>
> >Think about it: When it's one way up, you have half-a-bottle's worth of
> >liquid in the broad end. When it's the other way up, you have
> >half-a-bottle's worth of air in the broad end.
>
> Yep, that works.
>
> I'd've just turned the bottle on its side though. That shifts the
> axis of symmetry so that top and bottom are visibly equal; it's only
> left and right that are imbalanced.
But it's *completely* irregular; i e no axes of symmetry exist.
Paul Wilkins
> No navels?
Yep, since Adam and Eve are said to have been created by god, instead of
being given birth, they have no requirement or need for the umbilical cord
type of attachment and so it stands to reason that they have no navels nor
bellybuttons.
--
Paul Wilkins
| /\ Inform yourself | Paul Wilkins | When you ask a computer person to
| /__\ Project Mayhem | Christchurch | fix your machine, they will first
| http://tetrica.com/ | (03) 3433097 | spend hours downloading upgrades.
Sherilyn
Paul Wilkins <di...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>In article <3C99A616...@db.dk>, k99...@db.dk says...
>> No navels?
>
>Yep, since Adam and Eve are said to have been created by god, instead of
>being given birth, they have no requirement or need for the umbilical cord
>type of attachment and so it stands to reason that they have no navels nor
>bellybuttons.
Makes about as much sense as the rest of the story! :)
--
Sherilyn
David Chapman
news:MPG.1706212b8...@news.paradise.net.nz...
> In article <3C99A616...@db.dk>, k99...@db.dk says...
> > No navels?
>
> Yep, since Adam and Eve are said to have been created by god, instead of
> being given birth, they have no requirement or need for the umbilical cord
> type of attachment
I see no reason why this should be a given. (See: Matrix, The)
--
"Do you just keep your newbies locked up in cages all alone?"
"Of course! That's what pets are for!"
The Stainless Steel Cat
"Torak" <to...@andrew-perry.com> wrote:
If they're dying of thirst, they shouldn't be gulping water at all. Taking
alternate palmfuls of water would be fair and better for gently easing
their thirst.
Cat.
--
La Rustimuna ^Stalkato
stee...@mac.comtrousers
Remove trousers to reply
gra...@affordable-leather.co.ukdeletethis
On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:43:24 +1100, "John" <ju...@junk.com> wrote:
>> There are two men in a desert, dying of thirst, when they find a
>> bottle full of water.
>> They want to divide the water fairly and evenly, but the bottle is a
>> completely irregular shape and all they have to mark it with is a
>> chinagraph (grease) pencil. How do they do it?
>>
>The first person drinks, and between sips turns the bottle
>upside-down. When the level rightside-up equals upside-down,
>the bottle is 1/2 empty.
Having read this and the subsequent messages, YES!!!!!
Thank you!!!!!
(And, yes, I meant to use multiple exclamation marks, because it was
driving me *crazy*!!!!!)
As a matter of interest, did you know the answer, or was it just one
of those ones that is blindingly obvious to some people?
>Assuming they can stopper the bottle, and that it's completely
>full.
Well the "completely full" was, effectively, given, and because it's
in a desert and not evaporated away, it's presumably stoppered.
Cheers,
Graham.