The Four Seasons
David C. Jones
>was asked for directions to the 'baby needs' section by a woman with four
>babies. To be precise, she had one of those monster-size multiple-seat baby
>"You have a big family there," I observed.
>"Oh, yes!" she said with a smile. "Aren't they adorable? I call them my
>'four seasons' because each one was born in a different season of the year."
>"They all still look pretty young," I observed.
>"Well, of course! The oldest will be having his first birthday soon."
>I immediately sensed a puzzle here, and elicited the following
>additional information:
>- All the children were the biological children of herself and her
> husband
>- None were gestated via "odd" reproductive technology, like surrogacy,
> egg or sperm donation, etc.
>- She had never been outside the continental U.S.
>- All the children were human, btw, not mice etc. :)
>So: describe a scenario consistent with this information...
Well, I'm just guessing here:
The first child was born on February 29 (Spring)
The second two children were twins. Since twins are not born at
the same time, once child could have been born on one side of
the seasons soltice while the other one could have been born
on the other side of the soltice. (Autumn and Winter)
The fourth child, being say a month pre-mature, could be born
in the Summer. The "oldest" child would be the child having
his first birthday, which would be Autumn, 4 months after
Summer was born, while Springs birthday would not be for
another three years.
Am I close?
Davy J.
>By the way, all words and terms used here have their ordinary and
>generally accepted meaning....
>Peter Kimball
>American College of Healthcare Executives
Pete Kimball
: In <3gb5cd$d...@nntp.interaccess.com> (Pete Kimball) writes:
(puzzle deleted)
: The first child was born on February 29 (Spring)
Um... that's winter :)
Anyway, in this theory, the oldest child will not have a 'birthday' until
1996, which is not exactly 'soon'...
For the record, 'soon' (in the context of birthdays) HAS to mean
some time period less than 4 months. Hey, that's the accepted meaning :)
PK
spu...@pomona.edu
Kimball) writes:
> "Oh, yes!" she said with a smile. "Aren't they adorable? I call them my
> 'four seasons' because each one was born in a different season of the year."
>
> "They all still look pretty young," I observed.
>
> "Well, of course! The oldest will be having his first birthday soon."
Well, admittedly, this is a FAQ, and a well-worn one, at that, but it
is one of the best versions of the "first birthday" conundrum that I have
seen. Suffice it to say that the oldest is the Spring child. Presumably,
they would have to progress backward from there, but I guess there is room
for some wiggle in that statement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
spu...@pomona.edu | Fools of the World Unite under the
Sco4tt "Fool" Purdy | leadership of Loki, Till Eulenspiegel, Puck and Nixon
Jonathan Haas
FYI, February 29 is in the winter.
All of this (having twins born just on other sides of midnight of
a specific day, etc) isn't even really necessary. Winter is born on
February 29, 1992. Fifteen months later, Spring is born on May 29,
1993. Another fifteen months elapse, and Summer is born on August
29, 1994. Fifteen more months go by, and Autumn is born on
November 29, 1995. Three months after that, on February 29, 1996,
Winter, the eldest, will celebrate his first birthday. Of course,
having babies fifteen months apart is rather risky, but possible.
This, of course, assumes that by "oldest", she meant the child who
had been alive the longest. There's a difference between celebrating
your first birthday and being one year old.
--
__/\__ Jonathan S. Haas | Jake liked his women the way he liked
\ / posi...@neosoft.com | his kiwi fruit: sweet yet tart, firm-
/_ _\ Finger for PGP 2.3 key | fleshed yet yielding to the touch, and
\/ Don't Tread On Me | covered with short brown fuzzy hair.
Dr D F Holt
djo...@ponder.csci.unt.edu (David C. Jones) writes:
>In <3gb5cd$d...@nntp.interaccess.com> achepak@interaccess (Pete Kimball) writes:
>
>>was asked for directions to the 'baby needs' section by a woman with four
>>babies. To be precise, she had one of those monster-size multiple-seat baby
>
>>"You have a big family there," I observed.
>>"Oh, yes!" she said with a smile. "Aren't they adorable? I call them my
>>'four seasons' because each one was born in a different season of the year."
>>"They all still look pretty young," I observed.
>>"Well, of course! The oldest will be having his first birthday soon."
>
>>I immediately sensed a puzzle here, and elicited the following
>>additional information:
>>- All the children were the biological children of herself and her
>> husband
>>- None were gestated via "odd" reproductive technology, like surrogacy,
>> egg or sperm donation, etc.
>>- She had never been outside the continental U.S.
>>- All the children were human, btw, not mice etc. :)
>
>>So: describe a scenario consistent with this information...
>
>Well, I'm just guessing here:
>
>The first child was born on February 29 (Spring)
Yes, then there is no problem - they were all born a year apart in different
seasons. But what is a child of nearly 4 doing being pushed around in a
baby seat?
This problem would be just as good if you missed out
>>- She had never been outside the continental U.S.
and substituted
- no child was born on 29 Feb.
Then she could have two babies in the Souther hemisphere, just to the
East of the international dateline, say,
one just before midnight on 20th March and one just after midnight
on 21st March.
(That makes the summer and autumn (=fall) babies.)
She then takes a trip North and crosses the dateline (in the family private
plane, because no airline would carry her in that condition),
has labour pains for a day, and has another two babies, one on 20th March
(now west of the dateline) and one on 21st. They are the winter and spring
babies.
I like that solution better!
(The trouble is she would probably have said "they are all coming up to
their 1st birthday" -oh well.)
Derek Holt.
Wei-Hwa Huang
>David C. Jones <djo...@ponder.csci.unt.edu> wrote:
>> achepak@interaccess (Pete Kimball) writes:
>>
>>>"You have a big family there," I observed.
>>>"Oh, yes!" she said with a smile. "Aren't they adorable? I call them my
>>>'four seasons' because each one was born in a different season of the year."
>>>"They all still look pretty young," I observed.
>>>"Well, of course! The oldest will be having his first birthday soon."
>>
How about if the mother had many twins, but moved from Hawaii to Australia
as they were born?
Dr D F Holt
spu...@pomona.edu writes:
>In article <3gb5cd$d...@nntp.interaccess.com>, achepak@interaccess (Pete
>Kimball) writes:
>> "Oh, yes!" she said with a smile. "Aren't they adorable? I call them my
>> 'four seasons' because each one was born in a different season of the year."
>>
>> "They all still look pretty young," I observed.
>>
>> "Well, of course! The oldest will be having his first birthday soon."
>
> Well, admittedly, this is a FAQ, and a well-worn one, at that, but it
>is one of the best versions of the "first birthday" conundrum that I have
>seen. Suffice it to say that the oldest is the Spring child.
?????
Well in that case you must know a differnt solution - can you expand?
In the one I know, the oldest was born on 29th Feb., which is in winter.
Derek Holt.
fin...@vax.sbu.ac.uk
> Kimball) writes:
>> "Oh, yes!" she said with a smile. "Aren't they adorable? I call them my
>> 'four seasons' because each one was born in a different season of the year."
>>
>> "They all still look pretty young," I observed.
>>
>> "Well, of course! The oldest will be having his first birthday soon."
>
> Well, admittedly, this is a FAQ, and a well-worn one, at that, but it
> is one of the best versions of the "first birthday" conundrum that I have
> seen. Suffice it to say that the oldest is the Spring child. Presumably,
> they would have to progress backward from there, but I guess there is room
> for some wiggle in that statement.
>
1) Spring child was born on feb 29th (standard answer) and the rest were born
in the ensuing four years.
2) Spring in australia = autumn in england. So - give birth to twins twice, the
first pair are born normally, but the woman jets from Australia to UK during
the birth, second pair are born preamaturely, and the woman jets from UK to
australia during the birth (it can take hours between the first and second
birth, so give a _very_ fast plane)
3) Woman gives birth to quintuplets and crosses the international date line as
well as the equator (work it out - it does work)
4) Woman has help from a surrogate mother/adopts.
5) Woman gives birth on a planet where the seasons occur every 6 hours - it
could be zippng around a very heavy dwarf star.
Keir Finlow-Bates |
----------------------+
E506 |
S.C.I.S.M. |
South Bank University |
103 Borough Road |
London SE1 0AA |
----------------------+
0171-8157441 |
----------------------+
FIN...@vax.sbu.ac.uk |