Timeline for Five hats and four logicians in a circle
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 25, 2015 at 19:48 | comment | added | Mark Peters | In your second answer, you don't give any indication as to why "When the third one gives his answer, the other three have the clue needed to solve the problem. ". It seems like you're just handwaving, but you need to say why they now have enough information. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 19:14 | comment | added | Matheus Danella | No feedback? :( I'm quite disappointed now. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 18:57 | history | edited | Matheus Danella | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 136 characters in body
|
| Mar 25, 2015 at 18:56 | comment | added | Matheus Danella | Then, the second one is the answer to OP's question. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 18:54 | comment | added | Mark Peters | No, your conclusion for 3 is fine because 3 can deduce he is W, as 2's indecision means that 2 must not have seen R on 3. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 18:50 | comment | added | Matheus Danella | Go to the third one and try to see if there is a flaw as well if I apply that thought process again. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 18:27 | comment | added | Mark Peters | Excuse me? If they could talk to each other outside the allowed responses, they could just say "you are wearing white". | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 18:25 | comment | added | Matheus Danella | The problem didn't state that they couldn't talk to each other. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 18:00 | comment | added | Mark Peters | But the point is, #2 doesn't know that. All #2 knows is that #1 either saw BWW, or BWR. #2 has no reason to believe that #1 didn't see BWR. So he can't conclude that he's not an R. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 17:59 | comment | added | Matheus Danella | First one can't think that he can be a white, because he sees second and third ones with white hats. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 17:42 | comment | added | Mark Peters | I think there's a logical flaw here: "Second...If first one didn't know about it, it indicates that he thinks that he can be a red.". This doesn't follow; 2 could think he were R, meaning from 2's perspective, 1 could have seen one of each color and thought he was B or W, but not R. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 15:17 | history | edited | Matheus Danella | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 134 characters in body
|
| Mar 25, 2015 at 15:15 | comment | added | Matheus Danella | I think the first solution is the best one, since I believe that the second logician could apply the reasoning applied by the fourth one of the second case. | |
| Mar 25, 2015 at 15:08 | history | edited | Matheus Danella | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 882 characters in body
|
| Mar 25, 2015 at 14:51 | history | edited | Matheus Danella | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 5 characters in body
|
| Mar 25, 2015 at 14:48 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 25, 2015 at 14:58 | |||||
| Mar 25, 2015 at 14:46 | history | answered | Matheus Danella | CC BY-SA 3.0 |