snafu@ihuxi.UUCP (10/30/83)
I disagree with the assumption several people have made to the effect
that "since the sum and product do not provide enough information, we
must look at the solutions that have the same sum..." It seems that
the only justification for this assumption is that it is the only way
to find a unique solution. Would you make this assumption if there
were three solutions with the same sum? Since this condition was not
specified or suggested or even hinted at in the problem statement, I
contend that while it produces a valid solution, it can not be the
"correct" solution.
Nice try, but I think "back to the drawing board" is in order!
--
D. Wallis
AT&T Western Electric, Naperville Il.
(312) 979-5894CSvax:Pucc-H:Pucc-I:Pucc-K:ags@pur-ee.UUCP (10/31/83)
*****
I disagree with the assumption several people have made to the effect
that "since the sum and product do not provide enough information, we
must look at the solutions that have the same sum..." It seems that
the only justification for this assumption is that it is the only way
to find a unique solution. Would you make this assumption if there
were three solutions with the same sum? Since this condition was not
specified or suggested or even hinted at in the problem statement, I
contend that while it produces a valid solution, it can not be the
"correct" solution.
Nice try, but I think "back to the drawing board" is in order!
--
D. Wallis
AT&T Western Electric, Naperville Il.
(312) 979-5894
*****
Since you think that the problem statement did not contain enough information
to produce a unique solution, you must have in mind a second solution, other
than (3,3,8), which satisfies the conditions of the problem.
Before you answer, let me point out why (2,4,9) (to choose a random example)
is NOT a possible solution. If the ages had been (2,4,9), then the house
number would have been 15. We do not know the house number, but the census
taker did. Given that the product of the ages was 72 and the sum was 15, the
census taker (who, like all people in puzzles of this type, has a computerlike
mind and never makes mistakes) would have deduced immediately that the only
possible answer was (2,4,9). However, he deduced no such thing! He said
he did not have enough information. This means that the house number could
not have been 15, and therefore that the ages were not (2,4,9).
Do you have in mind a solution other than (3,3,8) which passes the above
test? If so, please share it with us.
Dave Seaman
..!pur-ee!pucc-k:agswbpesch@ihuxp.UUCP (Walt Pesch) (11/04/83)
I think that Dave Wallis may have had the germ of the idea behind the
solution. In his example, you know for that element of the set of
possible answers that the answer is "15". This is a unique solution,
according to Dave. Is there a house number that does not have a
unique "age of the children" solution. I haven't done the
calculating, nor will I, but is it possible that the way that you
"cannot tell" is that there is an answer that is not unique, i.e. more
than one element of the answer solution is the house number. I have
this feeling in my logic center that this is the road to the
solution.
--
Walt Pesch
AT&T Western Electricjjb@pyuxnn.UUCP (11/04/83)
I can find no flaw whatsoever in the reasoning for the 'new puzzle'.
Although I didn't figure it out on my own, it made perfect sense to
me when it was explained. If you are going to send anyone back to the
drawing board on this, it would have to be MENSA since it is their puzzle.
Jeff Bernardis, AT&T Western Electric @ Piscataway NJ
{eagle, allegra, cbosgd, ihnp4}!pyuxnn!jjb