The answer to finding a matching pair of socks from a drawer in the dark is 13, not 3. This seems to be a misprint.
Anonymous
12 January 2012
The answer to the socks problem is incorrect. With six pairs of each color in one drawer, you need to pick 13 socks to ensure at least one matching pair, as the first twelve could all be of the same color.
fala
21 May 2016
The card showing "8" should be turned to test the truth. :lol:
Zelarith
24 January 2017
You must turn the "8" to verify that it is red on the other side, but also the brown card to ensure the number on its other face isn't even.
Turning the other cards wouldn't matter because a 3 with it's other side red or a red card with its other side being an odd number doesn't invalidate the proposition.
GabbyD123
27 January 2017
The red card to see if there is an even number under it and the 3 card to see if there is red under it.....
Zelarith
29 January 2017
@GabbyD123 ; why would there be a red side under the card with number 3?
The rule we are trying to verify is that if there is and even number on a side of the card, the other side will be red. 3 is not an even number, turning it won't prove anything in regard of our hypothesis.
GabbyD123
30 January 2017
@Zelarith Turning over the cards with even numbers or red only would mean nothing without something to match it against.
For example, if we turned over the eight and there is red and we turned over the red and there is a six, we would draw the conclusion that even numbers are always under red cards and vice versa. But what if there was a 2 under the brown card but we never turned it over? Then our conclusion would be false and we'd feel like idiots if a three-year-old walked up to one of the brown cards, turned it over and said "Hey, look! That's a two! I know my numbers! YAAAAAY!!!". Therefore, we'd need to turn the eight to confirm that an even number has red under it and turn the three to confirm that ONLY even numbers have red under them.
It's basically the same thing you said in your previous comment.
[You must turn the "8" to verify that it is red on the other side, but also the brown card to ensure the number on its other face isn't even.]
Zelarith
31 January 2017
I still disagree, if you turn the 3 and there is red under it, it doesn't proove the proposition"" to be wrong.
It would proove the proposition "ONLY cards with an even number on one face have its opposite face red" to be wrong, wich is why the backface of that 3 is of no consequence for our proposition, and why I say it'ss pointless to turn it.
GabbyD123
2 February 2017
Ohhhh, we were supposed to prove that even number are on the back of red cards, regardless of what colour other numbers have?
Well, you're right then.
Add a Comment or Suggest an Answer
Rate this puzzle
No votes yet β be the first!Score: 0
β€οΈ 0
π 0
π§ 0
π 0
π 0
Comments (9)
The answer to finding a matching pair of socks from a drawer in the dark is 13, not 3. This seems to be a misprint.
The answer to the socks problem is incorrect. With six pairs of each color in one drawer, you need to pick 13 socks to ensure at least one matching pair, as the first twelve could all be of the same color.
The card showing "8" should be turned to test the truth. :lol:
You must turn the "8" to verify that it is red on the other side, but also the brown card to ensure the number on its other face isn't even.
Turning the other cards wouldn't matter because a 3 with it's other side red or a red card with its other side being an odd number doesn't invalidate the proposition.
The red card to see if there is an even number under it and the 3 card to see if there is red under it.....
@GabbyD123 ; why would there be a red side under the card with number 3?
The rule we are trying to verify is that if there is and even number on a side of the card, the other side will be red. 3 is not an even number, turning it won't prove anything in regard of our hypothesis.
@Zelarith Turning over the cards with even numbers or red only would mean nothing without something to match it against.
For example, if we turned over the eight and there is red and we turned over the red and there is a six, we would draw the conclusion that even numbers are always under red cards and vice versa. But what if there was a 2 under the brown card but we never turned it over? Then our conclusion would be false and we'd feel like idiots if a three-year-old walked up to one of the brown cards, turned it over and said "Hey, look! That's a two! I know my numbers! YAAAAAY!!!". Therefore, we'd need to turn the eight to confirm that an even number has red under it and turn the three to confirm that ONLY even numbers have red under them.
It's basically the same thing you said in your previous comment.
[You must turn the "8" to verify that it is red on the other side, but also the brown card to ensure the number on its other face isn't even.]
I still disagree, if you turn the 3 and there is red under it, it doesn't proove the proposition"" to be wrong.
It would proove the proposition "ONLY cards with an even number on one face have its opposite face red" to be wrong, wich is why the backface of that 3 is of no consequence for our proposition, and why I say it'ss pointless to turn it.
Ohhhh, we were supposed to prove that even number are on the back of red cards, regardless of what colour other numbers have?
Well, you're right then.
Add a Comment or Suggest an Answer