Thread:
A Final Logic Question
10-08-2021, 11:02 AM
-
#31
- miscerForLulz
- Join Date: Aug 2016
- Posts: 8,455
- Rep Power: 50878
-
-
hated discrete math srs
2:136
Say, ˹O believers,˺ We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us; and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and his descendants; what was given to Moses, Jesus, and other prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them. And to Allah we all submit.
10-08-2021, 11:04 AM
-
#32
- FarmersSon
- Old but not ancient
-
- FarmersSon
- Old but not ancient
- Join Date: Apr 2021
- Posts: 5,042
- Rep Power: 182108
-
-
Sorry, I think I'm too much of an engineer.
Every time I start to think about the scenario, I wish the first logician would have switched the order of his questions and asked A if he was a knave and then asked B if it is true that A once said he was a knave. It would have been so much simpler.
Every time I start to think about the scenario, I wish the first logician would have switched the order of his questions and asked A if he was a knave and then asked B if it is true that A once said he was a knave. It would have been so much simpler.
MFC
10-08-2021, 11:04 AM
-
#33
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By betaProvider117⏩
Where you went wrong is you spent all the time trying to go through all the probabilities with logician 1 when you should have just started with logician 2. I went through a handful of variables from logician 1 and realized that it's just mental gymnastics that leads nowhere and moved onto 2.see post 26 and tell me where I'm wrong
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 11:09 AM
-
#34
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By Spazzzzy⏩
I'll spill it in time....or rather one of you will probably get to the right answer, lots of good discussion. I can say the problem as stated is solvable, without extra hidden assumptions.How about you just spill the beans boyo
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
The argument is not correct, thus the problem is not answered. To see why, you have to follow that reasoning above....and ask what would happen in Logician one's case if they were both knights. You will see why it doesnt work. Spazzzzy talked about this. For the record, Im not saying the final answer can or cant be both knights w/ Logician #2 being the solver. If I started eliminating or confirming answers throughout the thread, with only 8 possible answers, it will give it away in short time.Bruh, did i get the answer right in my first post in the most simple way possible, yes or no?
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 11:20 AM
-
#35
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
Dude, saying that knight/knight in the example i gave for logician 2 completely eliminates logician 1 altogether. This thread is ova. lolI'll spill it in time....or rather one of you will probably get to the right answer, lots of good discussion. I can say the problem as stated is solvable, without extra hidden assumptions.
The argument is not correct, thus the problem is not answered. To see why, you have to follow that reasoning above....and ask what would happen in Logician one's case if they were both knights. You will see why it doesnt work. Spazzzzy talked about this. For the record, Im not saying the final answer can or cant be both knights w/ Logician #2 being the solver. If I started eliminating or confirming answers throughout the thread, with only 8 possible answers, it will give it away in short time.
The argument is not correct, thus the problem is not answered. To see why, you have to follow that reasoning above....and ask what would happen in Logician one's case if they were both knights. You will see why it doesnt work. Spazzzzy talked about this. For the record, Im not saying the final answer can or cant be both knights w/ Logician #2 being the solver. If I started eliminating or confirming answers throughout the thread, with only 8 possible answers, it will give it away in short time.
My initial unedited answer. I extended later in another post that no other variables are required.
logician # 2 Askedaknight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From thisand the other variableslogician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
Remove bolded text giving you this:
logician # 2 Asked knight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From this logician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 11:23 AM
-
#36
- exxtracool
- Registered User
-
- exxtracool
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2018
- Location: Canada
- Age: 34
- Posts: 20,766
- Rep Power: 77972
-
-
the first logician was right and A is the knight
10-08-2021, 11:31 AM
-
#37
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
You are saying it is impossible for logician #1 to deduce when both A and B are knights. I claim this is not correct.Dude, saying that knight/knight in the example i gave for logician 2 completely eliminates logician 1 altogether. This thread is ova. lol
My initial unedited answer. I extended later in another post that no other variables are required.
logician # 2 Askedaknight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From thisand the other variableslogician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
Remove bolded text giving you this:
logician # 2 Asked knight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From this logician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
My initial unedited answer. I extended later in another post that no other variables are required.
logician # 2 Askedaknight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From thisand the other variableslogician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
Remove bolded text giving you this:
logician # 2 Asked knight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From this logician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
If A and B were both knights, the answers to logician #1 would be both "no", "no". This is fairly clear and almost immediate.
There are no other combinations of Knight/Knave for A to B such that a "no", "no" answer could possibly be given to Logician #1. If you disagree....provide me with a possibility besides A= knight, B= knight, that would result in "no", "no".
Thus Logician #1 deduces what they are if they are both knights- they had to say "no","no", and from this he has it narrowed down to 1 case: Knight-Knight. As does Logician #2. So doesnt fit problem.
Originally Posted By exxtracool⏩
Need an explanation. But also keep in mind that it doesnt have to be an either A or B is the knight type thing, they could both be knights. Or any of the 4 possible combinations.the first logician was right and A is the knight
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 11:35 AM
-
#38
- exxtracool
- Registered User
-
- exxtracool
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2018
- Location: Canada
- Age: 34
- Posts: 20,766
- Rep Power: 77972
-
-
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
if A answers yes and is telling the truth then B must be lying, he cannot answer yes and be telling a lie.Dude, saying that knight/knight in the example i gave for logician 2 completely eliminates logician 1 altogether. This thread is ova. lol
My initial unedited answer. I extended later in another post that no other variables are required.
logician # 2 Askedaknight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From thisand the other variableslogician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
Remove bolded text giving you this:
logician # 2 Asked knight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From this logician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
My initial unedited answer. I extended later in another post that no other variables are required.
logician # 2 Askedaknight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From thisand the other variableslogician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
Remove bolded text giving you this:
logician # 2 Asked knight(a) if b ever said they were both knaves, a says no, then asks a again if the other (b) is a knave and says no. From this logician 2 can deduct that both a and b are knights.
Impossible for logician #1 to deduct who is who.
if A answers no and is lying then B must be telling the truth, he cannot answer yes and be telling the truth.
10-08-2021, 12:08 PM
-
#39
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
Log 1 asks Knave A "is it true that B once said you are a knave"? A says no. Log 1 asks Knave B if A is a knave, B says no. There's no way for logician 1 to know if A is telling the truth in saying no because of the way logician 1 phrased the question "is it true that B once said you are a knave"? This question was asked to knave a first so he can lie and say no because he's not at the mercy of b's answer because the question hasn't been asked yet. There you have your Knave no A and knave no B. The logician will never have any idea whether B had once said A was a knave prior to the questions being asked but you still get a no,no. In this case, The logician is stuck thinking that it's possible A could be a knight because in the case that he was a knight a truthful answer could be no because it's possible that b never called him a knave prior to the first question. Thus you can have a knave no, knave no, knight, no, knight no scenario.You are saying it is impossible for logician #1 to deduce when both A and B are knights. I claim this is not correct.
If A and B were both knights, the answers to logician #1 would be both "no", "no". This is fairly clear and almost immediate.
There are no other combinations of Knight/Knave for A to B such that a "no", "no" answer could possibly be given to Logician #1. If you disagree....provide me with a possibility besides A= knight, B= knight, that would result in "no", "no".
Thus Logician #1 deduces what they are if they are both knights- they had to say "no","no", and from this he has it narrowed down to 1 case: Knight-Knight. As does Logician #2. So doesnt fit problem.
Need an explanation. But also keep in mind that it doesnt have to be an either A or B is the knight type thing, they could both be knights. Or any of the 4 possible combinations.
If A and B were both knights, the answers to logician #1 would be both "no", "no". This is fairly clear and almost immediate.
There are no other combinations of Knight/Knave for A to B such that a "no", "no" answer could possibly be given to Logician #1. If you disagree....provide me with a possibility besides A= knight, B= knight, that would result in "no", "no".
Thus Logician #1 deduces what they are if they are both knights- they had to say "no","no", and from this he has it narrowed down to 1 case: Knight-Knight. As does Logician #2. So doesnt fit problem.
Need an explanation. But also keep in mind that it doesnt have to be an either A or B is the knight type thing, they could both be knights. Or any of the 4 possible combinations.
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 12:46 PM
-
#40
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
If both A and B are knaves, and Log 1 asks A if B once said he is a knave, let's see what happens.Log 1 asks Knave A "is it true that B once said you are a knave"? A says no. Log 1 asks Knave B if A is a knave, B says no. There's no way for logician 1 to know if A is telling the truth in saying no because of the way logician 1 phrased the question "is it true that B once said you are a knave"? This question was asked to knave a first so he can lie and say no because he's not at the mercy of b's answer because the question hasn't been asked yet. There you have your Knave no A and knave no B. The logician will never have any idea whether B had once said A was a knave prior to the questions being asked but you still get a no,no. In this case, The logician is stuck thinking that it's possible A could be a knight because in the case that he was a knight a truthful answer could be no because it's possible that b never called him a knave prior to the first question. Thus you can have a knave no, knave no, knight, no, knight no scenario.
B could never actually have said "A is a knave", because A actually is a knave, and that would be telling the truth. So B never said that. So when A is asked whether B said it, being the knave A is, he lies and says "Yes".
Only Knight-Knight could result in a "no", "no" answer for Logician 1.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 12:57 PM
-
#41
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
The question proposed to B was whether or not A is a knave to which he is but B says no, therefore lying. no, noIf both A and B are knaves, and Log 1 asks A if B once said he is a knave, let's see what happens.
B could never actually have said "A is a knave", because A actually is a knave, and that would be telling the truth. So B never said that. So when A is asked whether B said it, being the knave A is, he lies and says "Yes".
Only Knight-Knight could result in a "no", "no" answer for Logician 1.
B could never actually have said "A is a knave", because A actually is a knave, and that would be telling the truth. So B never said that. So when A is asked whether B said it, being the knave A is, he lies and says "Yes".
Only Knight-Knight could result in a "no", "no" answer for Logician 1.
My answer is a bit of a mind fuk but it logically works. You're assertion is that Knave A can't say no to the first question if b says no to the second question. Knave A isn't bound to the answer of the second question so he can say anything he wants and still be lying in the eye's of the logician.
Give me my cookie now.
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 01:21 PM
-
#42
- FarmersSon
- Old but not ancient
-
- FarmersSon
- Old but not ancient
- Join Date: Apr 2021
- Posts: 5,042
- Rep Power: 182108
-
-
The first logician 1st question:
To the first question, if A answers “yes” there are two possible explanations.
1. A is a knight and B is a knave
2. A is a knave but B has never said anything about A (B could be knight or knave)
If A answers no, there are three possibilities
3. A is a knight but B has never said anything about A (B could be knight or knave)
4. A is a knight and B is a knight
5. A is a knave and B is a knight – B says A is knave, A lies
The first logician 2nd question, case numbers below match those above:
For case #1 – answer to the 2nd question will be yes, no matter what
For case #2 – a yes answer from A means B is a knight and a no answer means B is a knave. A yes answer from B means B is a knight and a no answer from B means B is a knave
For case #3 – a yes answer from A means B is a knave a no answer from A means B is a knight. A yes answer from B means B is a knave, a no answer means B is a knight
For case #4 – both will answer no
For case #5 – A will answer yes, B will also answer yes
Yes/Yes response – Knight/Knave (case #1), Knave/Knight (case #2)
Yes/No response – Knave/Knave (case #2)
No/Yes response – knight/knave (case #3), knave/knight (case #5)
No/no response – knight/knight (case #3) (case #4)
This is just for the first logician. You will notice that I have not assumed that B has ever said anything about about A. I'm not sure if you intended that or not. To me it is a valid possibility. If you eliminate those options (cases #2 ) then Logician A can reach a solution with his questions. Lunch time is over, not sure I'll get to the 2nd logician tonight.
(also go easy, I didn't have time to check my work)
To the first question, if A answers “yes” there are two possible explanations.
1. A is a knight and B is a knave
2. A is a knave but B has never said anything about A (B could be knight or knave)
If A answers no, there are three possibilities
3. A is a knight but B has never said anything about A (B could be knight or knave)
4. A is a knight and B is a knight
5. A is a knave and B is a knight – B says A is knave, A lies
The first logician 2nd question, case numbers below match those above:
For case #1 – answer to the 2nd question will be yes, no matter what
For case #2 – a yes answer from A means B is a knight and a no answer means B is a knave. A yes answer from B means B is a knight and a no answer from B means B is a knave
For case #3 – a yes answer from A means B is a knave a no answer from A means B is a knight. A yes answer from B means B is a knave, a no answer means B is a knight
For case #4 – both will answer no
For case #5 – A will answer yes, B will also answer yes
Yes/Yes response – Knight/Knave (case #1), Knave/Knight (case #2)
Yes/No response – Knave/Knave (case #2)
No/Yes response – knight/knave (case #3), knave/knight (case #5)
No/no response – knight/knight (case #3) (case #4)
This is just for the first logician. You will notice that I have not assumed that B has ever said anything about about A. I'm not sure if you intended that or not. To me it is a valid possibility. If you eliminate those options (cases #2 ) then Logician A can reach a solution with his questions. Lunch time is over, not sure I'll get to the 2nd logician tonight.
(also go easy, I didn't have time to check my work)
MFC
10-08-2021, 01:26 PM
-
#43
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
No, it does not logically work. Ok, to be clear, the second question has no bearing on the first question.....it hasnt even been asked yet, nothing depends on it.The question proposed to B was whether or not A is a knave to which he is but B says no, therefore lying. no, no
My answer is a bit of a mind fuk but it logically works. You're assertion is that Knave A can't say no to the first question if b says no to the second question. Knave A isn't bound to the answer of the second question so he can say anything he wants and still be lying in the eye's of the logician.
Give me my cookie now.
My answer is a bit of a mind fuk but it logically works. You're assertion is that Knave A can't say no to the first question if b says no to the second question. Knave A isn't bound to the answer of the second question so he can say anything he wants and still be lying in the eye's of the logician.
Give me my cookie now.
Consider just the very first question Log 1 asks to A, who is a knave if we are considering the possibility A=knave, B=knave. A is asked "is it true B once said you are a knave?". The truth of that answer is not related to or dependent on what happens afterwards. Log 1 simply is asking if B has ever, until that point, said A is a knave.
But B couldnt have said A is a knave. Thus A, being the knave he is,hasto lie and say "Yes".
So if they were both knaves, then the answers, in order, to Log 1's questions would be "yes","no".
This is all a small tangent, but worth going over for the broader picture. We realized that if both A and B are knights, then all four answers are "no", and both logicians figure out what A and B are. This is inconsistent with the problem and so cant be the case.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 01:29 PM
-
#44
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
"is it true that B once said you are a knave"? "Once said" is past tense. The logician can never know what happened between the two prior to asking these questions so he cannot deduct anything from a no/no from knave knave. There is a hole in the question and i found it. jokes on you. lol Knave A can literally say anything he wants and it's simultaneously true or false but the fact that it can be false at all gives you a no/noNo, it does not logically work. Ok, to be clear, the second question has no bearing on the first question.....it hasnt even been asked yet, nothing depends on it.
Consider just the very first question Log 1 asks to A, who is a knave if we are considering the possibility A=knave, B=knave. A is asked "is it true B once said you are a knave?". The truth of that statement is not related to or dependent on what happens afterwards. Log 1 simply is asking if B has ever, until that point, said A is a knave.
But B couldnt have said A is a knave. Thus A, being the knave he is,hasto lie and say "Yes".
So if they were both knaves, then the answers, in order, to Log 1's questions would be "yes","no".
This is all a small tangent, but worth going over for the broader picture. We realized that if both A and B are knights, then all four answers are "no", and both logicians figure out what A and B are. This is inconsistent with the problem and so cant be the case.
Consider just the very first question Log 1 asks to A, who is a knave if we are considering the possibility A=knave, B=knave. A is asked "is it true B once said you are a knave?". The truth of that statement is not related to or dependent on what happens afterwards. Log 1 simply is asking if B has ever, until that point, said A is a knave.
But B couldnt have said A is a knave. Thus A, being the knave he is,hasto lie and say "Yes".
So if they were both knaves, then the answers, in order, to Log 1's questions would be "yes","no".
This is all a small tangent, but worth going over for the broader picture. We realized that if both A and B are knights, then all four answers are "no", and both logicians figure out what A and B are. This is inconsistent with the problem and so cant be the case.
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 01:33 PM
-
#45
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By FarmersSon⏩
See where this takes youThe first logician 1st question:
To the first question, if A answers “yes” there are two possible explanations.
1. A is a knight and B is a knave
2. A is a knave but B has never said anything about A (B could be knight or knave)
If A answers no, there are three possibilities
3. A is a knight but B has never said anything about A (B could be knight or knave)
4. A is a knight and B is a knight
5. A is a knave and B is a knight – B says A is knave, A lies
The first logician 2nd question, case numbers below match those above:
For case #1 – answer to the 2nd question will be yes, no matter what
For case #2 – a yes answer from A means B is a knight and a no answer means B is a knave. A yes answer from B means B is a knight and a no answer from B means B is a knave
For case #3 – a yes answer from A means B is a knave a no answer from A means B is a knight. A yes answer from B means B is a knave, a no answer means B is a knight
For case #4 – both will answer no
For case #5 – A will answer yes, B will also answer yes
Yes/Yes response – Knight/Knave (case #1), Knave/Knight (case #2)
Yes/No response – Knave/Knave (case #2)
No/Yes response – knight/knave (case #3), knave/knight (case #5)
No/no response – knight/knight (case #3) (case #4)
This is just for the first logician. You will notice that I have not assumed that B has ever said anything about about A. I'm not sure if you intended that or not. To me it is a valid possibility. If you eliminate those options (cases #2 ) then Logician A can reach a solution with his questions. Lunch time is over, not sure I'll get to the 2nd logician tonight.
(also go easy, I didn't have time to check my work)
To the first question, if A answers “yes” there are two possible explanations.
1. A is a knight and B is a knave
2. A is a knave but B has never said anything about A (B could be knight or knave)
If A answers no, there are three possibilities
3. A is a knight but B has never said anything about A (B could be knight or knave)
4. A is a knight and B is a knight
5. A is a knave and B is a knight – B says A is knave, A lies
The first logician 2nd question, case numbers below match those above:
For case #1 – answer to the 2nd question will be yes, no matter what
For case #2 – a yes answer from A means B is a knight and a no answer means B is a knave. A yes answer from B means B is a knight and a no answer from B means B is a knave
For case #3 – a yes answer from A means B is a knave a no answer from A means B is a knight. A yes answer from B means B is a knave, a no answer means B is a knight
For case #4 – both will answer no
For case #5 – A will answer yes, B will also answer yes
Yes/Yes response – Knight/Knave (case #1), Knave/Knight (case #2)
Yes/No response – Knave/Knave (case #2)
No/Yes response – knight/knave (case #3), knave/knight (case #5)
No/no response – knight/knight (case #3) (case #4)
This is just for the first logician. You will notice that I have not assumed that B has ever said anything about about A. I'm not sure if you intended that or not. To me it is a valid possibility. If you eliminate those options (cases #2 ) then Logician A can reach a solution with his questions. Lunch time is over, not sure I'll get to the 2nd logician tonight.
(also go easy, I didn't have time to check my work)
Edit:
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
No lol, no hole. Log 1 may not know what was said before initially, but once he asks the two questions hecandeduce from a Yes/No answer that it must be Knave/Knave he's talking to, and if it's a No/No answer, that it must be a Knight/Knight he's talking to. These are perfectly logical deductions, explained above."is it true that B once said you are a knave"? "Once said" is past tense. The logician can never know what happened between the two prior to asking these questions so he cannot deduct anything from a no/no from knave knave. There is a hole in the question and i found it. jokes on you. lol Knave A can literally say anything he wants and it's simultaneous true or false but the fact that it can be false at all gives you a no/no
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 01:39 PM
-
#46
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
Dude, lol. I know this maybe wasn't the answer you're looking for but this is an answer that works with my other answer. I literally just broke the game. srs.See where this takes you
Edit:
No lol, no hole. Log 1 may not know what was said before initially, but once he asks the two questions hecandeduce from a Yes/No answer that it must be Knave/Knave he's talking to, and if it's a No/No answer, that it must be a Knight/Knight he's talking to. These are perfectly logical deductions, explained above.
Edit:
No lol, no hole. Log 1 may not know what was said before initially, but once he asks the two questions hecandeduce from a Yes/No answer that it must be Knave/Knave he's talking to, and if it's a No/No answer, that it must be a Knight/Knight he's talking to. These are perfectly logical deductions, explained above.
Edit: Read back, Knave A can say whatever he want's and it's a lie either way. The fact that Knave B could have said anything or nothing about knave A prior to log 1 asking the questions gives Knave A the ability to say anything and have it be a lie.
Broke the Game
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 01:40 PM
-
#47
- FarmersSon
- Old but not ancient
-
- FarmersSon
- Old but not ancient
- Join Date: Apr 2021
- Posts: 5,042
- Rep Power: 182108
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
I still think these supposedly perfect logicians could have save a lot of trouble with better questions. lolSee where this takes you
Edit:
No lol, no hole. Log 1 may not know what was said before initially, but once he asks the two questions hecandeduce from a Yes/No answer that it must be Knave/Knave he's talking to, and if it's a No/No answer, that it must be a Knight/Knight he's talking to. These are perfectly logical deductions, explained above.
Edit:
No lol, no hole. Log 1 may not know what was said before initially, but once he asks the two questions hecandeduce from a Yes/No answer that it must be Knave/Knave he's talking to, and if it's a No/No answer, that it must be a Knight/Knight he's talking to. These are perfectly logical deductions, explained above.
MFC
10-08-2021, 01:46 PM
-
#48
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
My man you didnt break the game lol. You gotta look over the posts above on this subject carefully. If both A and B are knights, then both logicians will figure it out.Dude, lol. I know this maybe wasn't the answer you're looking for but this is an answer that works with my other answer. I literally just broke the game. srs.
Originally Posted By FarmersSon⏩
Yea they could have just asked "is the earth flat" to each and figured out what they were, but that wouldnt be a fun puzzle, would it lolI still think these supposedly perfect logicians could have save a lot of trouble with better questions. lol
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 01:49 PM
-
#49
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
They can be knights or knaves and both say no, i just outlined that. Thus Log 2 is the only log that can deduct an accurate conclusion. Later.My man you didnt break the game lol. You gotta look over the posts above on this subject carefully. If both A and B are knights, then both logicians will figure it out.
Yea they could have just asked "is the earth flat" to each and figured out what they were, but that wouldnt be a fun puzzle, would it lol
Yea they could have just asked "is the earth flat" to each and figured out what they were, but that wouldnt be a fun puzzle, would it lol
Introducing!!!! Logician 3,l2ambo!!!!!!! lol
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 01:53 PM
-
#50
10-08-2021, 01:56 PM
-
#51
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
And I responded why that was not correct. I mean you can also repeat that 18 is odd, and it's not going to make it correct. FarmerSon above has also acknowledged that a No/No response to Log 1 means he must be dealing with Knight/Knight.They can be knights or knaves and both say no, i just outlined that. Thus Log 2 is the only log that can deduct an accurate conclusion. Later.
Introducing!!!! Logician 3,l2ambo!!!!!!! lol
Introducing!!!! Logician 3,l2ambo!!!!!!! lol
It's basically immediate that a Knave/Knave combo cant give the answer No/No to Log 1.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 01:58 PM
-
#52
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
You're not grasping my answerAnd I responded why that was not correct. I mean you can also repeat that 18 is odd, and it's not going to make it correct. FarmerSon above has also acknowledged that a No/No response to Log 1 means he must be dealing with Knight/Knight.
It's basically immediate that a Knave/Knave combo cant give the answer No/No to Log 1.
It's basically immediate that a Knave/Knave combo cant give the answer No/No to Log 1.
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 02:02 PM
-
#53
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
There is nothing to grasp, that Knave/Knave must result in Yes/No to Log 1 is immediate. If you are not following my answers above to that, let someone else like FarmerSon or Spazzzzy try to explain it differently.You're not grasping my answer
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 02:03 PM
-
#54
Pretty obnoxious question.
I'll try without reading anything.
-
The combination must induce different conclusions from the two approaches.
Both knights:
All "no".
Both knaves:
yn, yn.
A knight, B knave:
y?, y?
A knave, B knight:
n?, y?
In case 4, the first logician knows B is a knight from the first answer. He can ask B if the other is a knave to deduce.
The second logician only knows at least one is a knave from the first answer. A knight would answer, "yes" while a knave might answer "yes" (if the other is a knight) or "no" (if the other is a knave). The second logician cannot deduce. His second question will be answered "yes", revealing only a mixed pair, which Knight/Knave and Knave/Knight both satisfy.
Answer: A is a knave, and B is a knight. I discovered this by inspecting the interesting looking answer set of the four cases.
Inspecting further, I think both logicians can deduce the answer from the other three cases.
I'll complete the reasoning since others are looking at the answer sets.
Both knights:
nn, nn
Both knaves:
yn, yn.
A knight, B knave:
yy, yy
A knave, B knight:
ny, yy
We can see L1 can always deduce the two. L2 cannot distinguish mixed pairs from each other.
I suppose this means the two mixed cases solve the problem.
I'll try without reading anything.
-
The combination must induce different conclusions from the two approaches.
Both knights:
All "no".
Both knaves:
yn, yn.
A knight, B knave:
y?, y?
A knave, B knight:
n?, y?
In case 4, the first logician knows B is a knight from the first answer. He can ask B if the other is a knave to deduce.
The second logician only knows at least one is a knave from the first answer. A knight would answer, "yes" while a knave might answer "yes" (if the other is a knight) or "no" (if the other is a knave). The second logician cannot deduce. His second question will be answered "yes", revealing only a mixed pair, which Knight/Knave and Knave/Knight both satisfy.
Answer: A is a knave, and B is a knight. I discovered this by inspecting the interesting looking answer set of the four cases.
Inspecting further, I think both logicians can deduce the answer from the other three cases.
I'll complete the reasoning since others are looking at the answer sets.
Both knights:
nn, nn
Both knaves:
yn, yn.
A knight, B knave:
yy, yy
A knave, B knight:
ny, yy
We can see L1 can always deduce the two. L2 cannot distinguish mixed pairs from each other.
I suppose this means the two mixed cases solve the problem.
10-08-2021, 02:06 PM
-
#55
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
You missed my edit above. I simplified it hereThere is nothing to grasp, that Knave/Knave must result in Yes/No to Log 1 is immediate. If you are not following my answers above to that, let someone else like FarmerSon or Spazzzzy try to explain it differently.
Edit: Read back, Knave A can say whatever he want's and it's a lie either way. The fact that Knave B could have said anything or nothing about knave A prior to log 1 asking the questions gives Knave A the ability to say anything and have it be a lie.
Broke the Game
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 02:10 PM
-
#56
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
Ok, lets do it step by step. I need a simple yes or no answer for everything that follows. Suppose both A and B are knaves.You missed my edit above. I simplified it here
Edit: Read back, Knave A can say whatever he want's and it's a lie either way. The fact that Knave B could have said anything or nothing about knave A prior to log 1 asking the questions gives Knave A the ability to say anything and have it be a lie.
Broke the Game
Edit: Read back, Knave A can say whatever he want's and it's a lie either way. The fact that Knave B could have said anything or nothing about knave A prior to log 1 asking the questions gives Knave A the ability to say anything and have it be a lie.
Broke the Game
First up:
Could B, ever in the past, have said "A is a knave". Yes or no
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 02:13 PM
-
#57
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
He could have and could not have. The fact that the question is phrased, "once said" leaves it open.Ok, lets do it step by step. I need a simple yes or no answer for everything that follows. Suppose both A and B are knaves.
First up:
Could B, ever in the past, have said "A is a knave". Yes or no
First up:
Could B, ever in the past, have said "A is a knave". Yes or no
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 02:15 PM
-
#58
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By l2ambo⏩
Nope. He never could have. A knave can never say that a knave is a knave. That would be telling a true statement. A knave can never utter a true statement.He could have and could not have. The fact that the question is phrased, "once said" leaves it open.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
10-08-2021, 02:17 PM
-
#59
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
Where was there a yes answer? lolNope. He never could have. A knave can never say that a knave is a knave. That would be telling a true statement. A knave can never utter a true statement.
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
10-08-2021, 02:20 PM
-
#60
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
If B once said that A is a knave. A could say no it's not true that he said it (in the past) Then log asks b whether or not a is a knave and he lies and says no. Logician 1 still has no idea that B is a knave. He could be a knight for all log 1 knows.Nope. He never could have. A knave can never say that a knave is a knave. That would be telling a true statement. A knave can never utter a true statement.
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts