talkmagic.co.uk

According to how i heard it the gasman theory is right. He turns the gas off to take a reading. She has the gas fire on (note- it doesnt say that this is nightime, only that she is sleeping, so the reasoning that a gasman would not call at night is invalid). The pilot light goes out when the gas goes off. When he turns it on, the gas supply carries on, but with no ignition, so the house fills up with the gas.


I suppose the exterminator theory would also work though

Ooh, ooh, let me do one...

This was told to me as a joke that most people don't get, but I think it's more of a riddle. Actually - no one write the answer to this please - just want to see who gets it, and how long it takes some people


A little boy and his father go to the zoo one day. All day the boy is bothering his father - "Dad, Dad! I want to see the camels! Please take me to see a camel Dad!" They see the fat bored looking lions, the timid monkeys and the stationary rhino, and finally, at the end of their visit, they get round to the camel enclosure.

In front of the double fence there is a big sign which says, "Beware! This camel spits!"

The father says to his son, "see that sign lad? Beware, this camel spits. Just be careful, OK?"

The son edges closer and closer to see the majestic desert beast. But the camel spies him out of the corner of his eye... too late, it snorts fiercely and spits right at the boy, covering him in camel saliva.

The boy shouts "Eeeeew! Dad! Dad! The camel just covered me in camel spit! It's gross!"

The father says, "I warned you! Didn't you see the sign?! "Beware, this camel spits!"

...the boy says, "but I was!"

i dont get it...upon thinking however, is this something to do with the odour variety of the arm zone?

The turn belongs to moonbeam

Farlsborough please wait for your turn, and by the way, I don't think this is a riddle it doesn't make any sense

It does make sense.
I got it so its not impossible.

Farlsborough wrote:"Beware, this camel spits!"

...the boy says, "but I was!"

I think I get it - is it just a matter of reading it in a way that one of the letters is moved ???


Anyway ........ on with another riddle .......


You have 3 tokens:

one is gold on both sides (gold/gold)
one is silver on both sides (silver/silver)
one is gold on one side and silver on the other (gold/silver)

You enter into a game for money with one other person.

All 3 tokens are placed into a bag (the tokens cannot be distinguished between, merely by touch) and whilst you close your eyes the other person removes one token and places it on a flat surface and moves the bag containing the other 2 tokens out of sight. You open your eyes and say for example the upper side of the token is gold, you place a bet on what the colour of the underside will be. You explain to him that because the upper side is gold, then that token can only be gold/gold or gold/silver (it obviously cannot be silver/silver ), and therefore it is a 50/50 chance on what the underside will be - gold or silver.

You make your guess and either pay up or receive your winnings.

The token is placed back in the bag, the bag is given a good shake and everything is repeated with the same stake used for each game. This goes on for, say, fifty goes.

What is your best strategy to help maximise your winnings .


At first glance it appears that your odds of winning are only 50/50 . However, there is a strategy that you can employ that will increase your chances of winning .

Ah, 'tis the Monte Hall problem

Dominic Rougier wrote:Ah, 'tis the Monte Hall problem

Not the actual Monte Hall problem itself - but you are correct insofar as the reasoning is basically the same .....

but with the mony hall problem you have a chance to switch? or am I way off course?

Blapsing_Beard wrote:but with the mony hall problem you have a chance to switch? or am I way off course?

This has nothing to do with switching boxes, as in the Monte Hall problem - it's just that the reasoning behind the solution is very similar to the Monte Hall problem.

Just to clarify - if you just make random guesses as to what the underside of the token will be (gold or silver), then probability says that you'll end up guessing correctly 50% of the time. However, there is a method that you can employ that increases your chances of winning.

technically, every go won;t be 50/50, when the gold/silver coin comes up and faces silver up, you know gold will be underneath

...

soooo......

you wait until silver comes up and hope they are thick enough and say "double or quits"?

Blapsing_Beard wrote:technically, every go won;t be 50/50, when the gold/silver coin comes up and faces silver up, you know gold will be underneath

...

soooo......

you wait until silver comes up and hope they are thick enough and say "double or quits"?

You got it all wrong, becouse there is a silver/silver token

You say gold.

Either

Gold/Gold face up
Gold/Gold face down
or
Gold/Siver face up.

So there is a two in three chance of it being the gold gold coin.

This is most closely related to the twin "paradox".

Sounds also very much like the Monte Hall problem to me, but you're right... the switching option is missing.

They also had the Monte Hall problem in one episode of Num3ers, and the geek with the curls also forgot to mention the switching option.

BTW, if you want to read a really good explanation on the solution of Monte Hall, read Derren's book "Tricks of the Mind". He's delivering two really good explanations for the phenomenon... and both of them only work when you have to choice to switch.

Or I am completely wrong, too...???

Mr Grue,

sound good, but isn't there also a siver/silver face up and a silver/silver face down option that we forget here all the time?