What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

A quick puzzle to test your problem solving (1 Viewer)

I'm not totally sure how this proves the point, although me arguing with the explanation probably inherently does.

I tested 3 examples:
1 - 2 - 4
6 - 12 - 24
38 - 76 - 152

They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no? When I clicked that I think I know it, there was no response that I was incorrect or anything like that.
 
They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no?
This is exactly the point. You were just asking stuff to confirm what you thought you already knew. You weren't asking sequences that might disprove your initial hypothesis.

 
I'm not totally sure how this proves the point, although me arguing with the explanation probably inherently does.

I tested 3 examples:

1 - 2 - 4

6 - 12 - 24

38 - 76 - 152

They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no? When I clicked that I think I know it, there was no response that I was incorrect or anything like that.
Because you never submitted a case that violated what you thought the rule was. How can you expect to confirm the rule without a negative example?
 
They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no?
This is exactly the point. You were just asking stuff to confirm what you thought you already knew. You weren't asking sequences that might disprove your initial hypothesis.
The problem is if someone asks a question, I answer, and they say CORRECT!, I have no real reason to keep guessing. That's a waste of time.

 
I'm sure the number of responses tested to show you know the rule says a lot about someone. Some may test 1 or 2 responses before giving an answer. I did 7.

 
They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no?
This is exactly the point. You were just asking stuff to confirm what you thought you already knew. You weren't asking sequences that might disprove your initial hypothesis.
The problem is if someone asks a question, I answer, and they say CORRECT!, I have no real reason to keep guessing. That's a waste of time.
Not sure if this is intended as a joke.
 
I tried 2 3 5 and it worked. That tested the doubling, even numbers, and all odd/all even.

then I tried 1 5 3 and it didn't work.

Then I guessed that they have to get bigger.

 
They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no?
This is exactly the point. You were just asking stuff to confirm what you thought you already knew. You weren't asking sequences that might disprove your initial hypothesis.
I'm not totally sure how this proves the point, although me arguing with the explanation probably inherently does.

I tested 3 examples:

1 - 2 - 4

6 - 12 - 24

38 - 76 - 152

They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no? When I clicked that I think I know it, there was no response that I was incorrect or anything like that.
Because you never submitted a case that violated what you thought the rule was. How can you expect to confirm the rule without a negative example?
mm, I see what you mean.

 
I tried 2 3 5 and it worked. That tested the doubling, even numbers, and all odd/all even.

then I tried 1 5 3 and it didn't work.

Then I guessed that they have to get bigger.
How did you know that they could be negative, or that the second number couldn't be smaller than the first?

 
Yeah I tried a bunch of weird stuff like 10, 10, 11 to knock off possibilities like "both of the latter numbers are larger than the first"

 
I work for a small company with a board that oversees and we report to monthly. There is also another board we report to quarterly.

The best conversations and most productive activity happens when we get the "and what if that doesn't work?" questions.

You have to consider all of the negative consequences of your actions and think through probabilities and solutions in order to be successful over the long term. A lot of people were caught off guard by either the dot-com bubble or the housing bubble (or both). The idea that the dot-com's and people's homes were overvalued had not even been considered by many people that once the reality of their true value hit, people were stunned.

In business, it is important to approach all projections, predictions and assumptions with a healthy dose of skepticism.

ETA: Oh and....I only did two tests and got the answer wrong. I'm not the best person at this kind of thing...I'm kind of an optimist.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I tried 2 3 5 and it worked. That tested the doubling, even numbers, and all odd/all even.

then I tried 1 5 3 and it didn't work.

Then I guessed that they have to get bigger.
How did you know that they could be negative, or that the second number couldn't be smaller than the first?
I think your reply says a lot.

The simple rule is the numbers must increase. Nothing more, nothing less. :)
 
I tried 2 3 5 and it worked. That tested the doubling, even numbers, and all odd/all even.

then I tried 1 5 3 and it didn't work.

Then I guessed that they have to get bigger.
How did you know that they could be negative, or that the second number couldn't be smaller than the first?
I think your reply says a lot.

The simple rule is the numbers must increase. Nothing more, nothing less. :)
:lol:

 
I told them to "just show me the answer." When I did, instead of just showing me the answer, they gave me some long-winded spiel about why most people are stupid and they (the makers of the clever little puzzle thingy) were clearly superior intellects.

I take this to mean that mine was one of the most correct approaches, since all roads led nowhere, and mine got there PDQ. Obviously, clicking the back arrow on my browser or never visiting the link in the first place would have been objectively superior to my solution. :shrug:

I'm claiming a B+ on the whole thing for my resume to get into heaven, if it comes up.

 
1 2 3

1 2 4

5 2 7

10 18394 385932

Guessed correctly. Technically, this hadn't yet proven a single rule, but seeing as this was NY Times, I assumed it wouldn't be a college or higher level proof, and figured my guess was safe.

 
I'm not totally sure how this proves the point, although me arguing with the explanation probably inherently does.

I tested 3 examples:

1 - 2 - 4

6 - 12 - 24

38 - 76 - 152

They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no? When I clicked that I think I know it, there was no response that I was incorrect or anything like that.
I think the point was, most people only look for information that confirms their idea. It did not enter your mind to test alternative theories and challenge your own ideas.

 
Since it said you could guess as many times as you wish, I assumed that there would be a benefit in doing so. I think I tried about 8 times and had it figured out for good at about seven.

 
5 yes guesses as I sort of felt it out... 6, 7, 8 were no's... that was enough for me to guess Col. Mustard in the observatory with the candle stick.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top