# Tag Info

1

What I will pay: Because: Why do I think that?

3

FINANCIER Take the difference between each pair of values Correspond these differences to alphabet letters (exclude 0's) Order the letters by the lowest value in either column in the original table.

0

Maybe I'm making a mistake in this reasoning, but I believe that the logical answer is: Explanation

5

$16, Consider what else we know: You are my best friend The currency you're using is US dollars You own a home (namely the one next to mine) What do these things imply? Because I'm your best friend, I won't want you to have to move away by you having to sell your house in order to pay me. We're in the USA The median price of a home in the USA is around$...

7

I would not pay anything. I would not play. I would encourage you to not play. Are you doing okay? I'm willing to help you out of you need help. I would offer you a hug. You are my best friend, and you live right next to me. Any outcome of this game that would be monetarily meaningful to either of us would also most likely be highly damaging to our ...

10

I would pay

2

Maybe: That is

7

There are several nuances to this question. First of all, it asks how much you are willing to pay, not what price is fair. Second, you have to understand, that even if a game is fair, that does not mean that It is reasonable to play it. For example, if someone offers me a one in a million chance to win a million dollars for 1, I will take it. It seems ...

0

No frills...

26

OK, let's actually take this seriously. As others have said, this is the so-called St Petersburg paradox, and the reason it isn't really much of a paradox is that (1) an extra dollar matters much less when you already have a lot of money and (2) our counterparty may not actually pay up. So let's model that. The simplest somewhat-plausible way to handle #1 ...

2

I believe the answer is Reasoning:

15

This gambling problem is the famous St. Petersburg paradox. It is a paradox because The one issue with this theoretical result is that it requires no upper limit on the possible winnings - if you make it through enough coin flips, you can win more money than the combined wealth of everyone on the planet. If we limit the lottery to a maximum payout of the ...

0

I will pay you to play this game, because

-1

To play once I would pay:

1

I would pay you because

17

Suppose we label the corner on the table like this: Now we want to move from $A$ to $D$. Now, imagine the table like this: Here, Now, to hits all $4$ edges, that means To get the shortest path, Thus, Which is like this:

7

The solution: Verification from clues: The hacker with 36 wins isn't from Portland. The hacker from Los Angeles is either Yvonne Ware or the hacker with 4 losses. Yvonne Ware is from Miami. Hannah Hak has fewer wins than the hacker from Boston. Diane DeAscii has 3 more wins than the hacker with 12 losses. Of the hacker from Philadelphia and the hacker ...

-1

The most simple answer would appear to be Or this, for those who think all three numbers need to be used

2

In Excel: or as Word equation:

14

I have found this solution

11

Could this be @Oray found another one, which might possibly be

9

6

7

I think it's: This means that:

13

The property seems to be related to: Explanation: So the property is, Or The title (Thanks to @trolley813): Old (and wrong) answer The property is: And,

21

The property is that

1

Well, the post by StephenTG is correct without asking questions. Following the hint, here's my answer for if you HAVE to ask a question.

11

Solution: Edit:

0

0

Typed this up on my phone, hoping I didn't end up being too slow haha. My answer is: My reasoning is below. Names are shortened to first letters, except Alyin is AN and Alayna is AA. Truth tellers are labeled with a T and liars with an X. The above satisfies all 8 clues. Also, if we took our initial assumption to be

-1

So let’s start with Alayna, she’s a We can say Skylar & Evelyn Roslina & Jonathon Iris Felix Madelyn Bob Iris & Lara

-1

Okay, I found an issue in my original post and instead of changing everything I'm reposting.. First, some logic: Let's assume Felix is Truthful (T) BUT... This is the same result I keep getting time and again.. but this time: What if this riddle isn't about what it says it's about? It's out of the box thinking, but it seems to me that the logic above ...

5

Let's call everyone by their initial, except that since there are two As we'll use N for Alyin and A for Alayna. Then the answer is Derivation: If you want to check my work, put the following into a Python interpreter and verify that you get a bunch of Trues out (I do):

-1

Therefore:

3

You just need one question and u have to use the stone. Ask the most left guard: "What would the middle guard answer, if I would ask him: What would the right guard answer, if I would ask him what's the door to hell" (crazy question but I needed to include all 3 guards in one question) With the stone, the event with the lowest chance would be that 2 guards ...

3

The real question is: Further more: Thus: Also:

0

Am I confused...It seems like asking Vlad with the stone is the best option because is has a 10% chance of telling the truth. "This stone makes the event with the lowest chance to occur". So Then Vlad tells the truth, and you leave asking only 1 question? Then just ask Michael a couple of times for fun because you already know the truth. Michael should ...

2

0

If, contrary to StephenTG's answer, we interpret the stone as only applying to random events, then we can simply ask

11

For clarify: No matter who you ask, he will answer the correct door.

3

9

Ask the following question of all three guards: Now the number of Yeses (Y) will be between 0 and 3 inclusive. If Y=1, go through that door. The position may either be 1. in which case you go to heaven, or it may be one of in which case you go to hell. If Y=2, namely 3. then pick one of the Yeses at random and ask the utterer the same question again. ...

2

I don't think this is really an answer. By only looking at the question I arrived at the right answer. It could be luck, but I think the puzzle might be improved slightly...

3

Thank you @user477343 for solving the puzzle. I found another(?) pattern. In general the puzzle above follows 2 simple rules: Rule 1: Let us take the shaded circle in box 1 is the starting point. Rule 2:

75

No questions are required!

6

I'd go with this: Special thanks to @Amorydai for their valuable feedback in comments If it is Michel If it is Vlad If it is John So

1

4

I think the answer is Reasoning: That leaves either Due to how the shapes in these boxes are positioned, I am leaning towards But also, in order to explain the colour scheme... And then one last rule: Let me explain: Get it, now? This is true

16

I believe the answer is Reasoning:

1