Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Puzzle time

Puzzle time

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
23 Posts 8 Posters 215 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by
    #12

    Can’t just throw out a number, you have to say why

    Only non-witches get due process.

    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
    1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ Online
      jon-nycJ Online
      jon-nyc
      wrote on last edited by
      #13

      This one took me a little while.

      Only non-witches get due process.

      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
      1 Reply Last reply
      • KlausK Online
        KlausK Online
        Klaus
        wrote on last edited by
        #14

        OK, let's see.

        Since there are at most 20 people anyone can shake hands with, the different numbers of the other 21 partygoers must be the numbers from 0 to 20...

        1 Reply Last reply
        • KlausK Online
          KlausK Online
          Klaus
          wrote on last edited by Klaus
          #15

          What I don't understand is how Ms. Klaus plays any designated role in your puzzle that would allow me to distinguish her from anyone else.

          Let's say we name the other 21 persons p-0 to p-20, whereby p-0 shook 0 hands, p-1 shook 1 hands etc.

          Ms. Klaus could be any p-i without raising a contradiction.

          So, let's say Ms. Klaus is p-7 and shook hands with 7 other people. If the puzzle is well-designed, that should lead to some kind of contradiction. But I don't see a contradiction.

          1 Reply Last reply
          • KlausK Online
            KlausK Online
            Klaus
            wrote on last edited by Klaus
            #16

            Hm, wait a minute.

            The guy with the 20 handshakes, p-20 must have shaken Ms. Klaus hand because he shook everyone's hand except his own partner's.

            So Ms. Klaus cannot be p-0. And p-20's partner must be p-0, by the same argument.

            Presumably this is the base case of some kind of inductive argument...

            But on the other hand, what prevents Ms. Klaus from being p-20? Hmm...

            1 Reply Last reply
            • KlausK Online
              KlausK Online
              Klaus
              wrote on last edited by Klaus
              #17

              Ah, I think I got it.

              p-20 must have shaken my hand and hence cannot be Ms. Klaus.
              p-20's partner must have been p-0, who can hence also not be Ms. Klaus.

              p-19 must have shaken my hand, too, because he didn't shake p-0's hand, hence p-19 cannot be Ms. Klaus either.
              By the same argument as above, p-19's partner is p-1, who also cannot be Ms. Klaus.

              If we continue in the same way until p-11 and p-9, we see that the only number that is left is p-10.

              Ms. Klaus shook 10 hands.

              Correct?

              1 Reply Last reply
              • jon-nycJ Online
                jon-nycJ Online
                jon-nyc
                wrote on last edited by
                #18

                No, your first statement is not correct.

                Hint - first find out how many hands you shook.

                Only non-witches get due process.

                • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                1 Reply Last reply
                • KlausK Online
                  KlausK Online
                  Klaus
                  wrote on last edited by Klaus
                  #19

                  Oh, I see. I think my solution is still correct.

                  p-20 must be married to p-0, ..., p-11 must be married to p-9.

                  Hence my wife can't be any of p-0,...,p-9 or p-11 to p-20, because I'm not among the ones they are married to.

                  That leaves only the p-10 spot for her.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • KlausK Online
                    KlausK Online
                    Klaus
                    wrote on last edited by Klaus
                    #20

                    Here's the full solution.

                    p-0 : {}
                    p-1 : {p-20}
                    p-2 : {p-19,p-20}
                    ...
                    p-9 : {p-12,....,p-20}
                    p-10 = Ms. Klaus : {p-11,...,p-20}
                    p-11 : {Mr. Klaus, Ms. Klaus, p-12, ..., p-20}
                    p-12 : {Mr. Klaus, Ms. Klaus, p-9, p-11, p-13, ..., p-20}
                    p-13 : {Mr. Klaus, Ms. Klaus, p-8, p-9, p-11,p-12, p-14, ..., p-20}
                    ...
                    p-20: {Mr. Klaus, Ms. Klaus, p-1, .., p-9, p-11,...,p-19}
                    Mr. Klaus: {p-11,...,p-20}

                    Is this not correct?

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • Doctor PhibesD Online
                      Doctor PhibesD Online
                      Doctor Phibes
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #21

                      Typical German. You should just ask her.

                      I was only joking

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #22

                        Yes you are right, Klaus

                        Only non-witches get due process.

                        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • KlausK Online
                          KlausK Online
                          Klaus
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #23

                          It's a pretty neat puzzle.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • Users
                          • Groups