Brain Teasers

[kw10]

One word in the English language changes its pronunciation and meaning simply by capitalizing the first letter.  What is it?

That reminds me of another one.

What one word in English when you say it, you break it?

silence.

Was it really that easy? lol

[jaketwice]

Ok, I've got one:

A man in a foreign land is arrested for a serious crime.  He is brought before a judge and sentenced to death.  The judge explains to him that the death penalty in their land is designed to not give the condemned the peace of mind of knowing when the end will come.  So, the judge explains, the execution will take place sometime during the next month.  The man will not know which day he will be executed until he is taken from his cell at noon on the day of the execution. He will be dead almost immediately after. The execution, the judge says, must be a surprise according to the law of the land.

"Wait!" says the man.  He asks to approach the bench and speaks to the judge quietly for a few minutes.  The judge thinks over what he has said and declares the death sentence to be invalid.  What did the man tell him to get him to change his mind? 

This is a logical answer, not anything like "I'm your son" or "I have your wife hostage".  Good luck!

What's the answer?? I can't get it....and doesn't seem like anyone is trying...

Well, the judge just told him that he will be taken from the cell at noon on the day he is to be executed.  That means that the prisoner will know when he is taken from the cell at noon, that he is going to be executed immediately after, which means that it will no longer be a surprise, and therefore is against the "law of the land".

I hope that isn't the answer.  Why wouldn't the guards just take him out of his cell *every* day at noon?  The judge didn't say he would *only* be taken out of his cell when it was time for his execution.

Clearly if the judge is able to be convinced that the death sentence is invalid by a little common sense from the prisoner, this country's legal system has not thought everything through.

There is only one day left in the month (i.e. 9/29).

Though that does not account for the possibility that the sentence is carried out on what we would traditionally consider a monthly basis (that is within 30 days of the execution).

[Roy Hobbs]

Ok, I've got one:

A man in a foreign land is arrested for a serious crime.  He is brought before a judge and sentenced to death.  The judge explains to him that the death penalty in their land is designed to not give the condemned the peace of mind of knowing when the end will come.  So, the judge explains, the execution will take place sometime during the next month.  The man will not know which day he will be executed until he is taken from his cell at noon on the day of the execution. He will be dead almost immediately after. The execution, the judge says, must be a surprise according to the law of the land.

"Wait!" says the man.  He asks to approach the bench and speaks to the judge quietly for a few minutes.  The judge thinks over what he has said and declares the death sentence to be invalid.  What did the man tell him to get him to change his mind? 

This is a logical answer, not anything like "I'm your son" or "I have your wife hostage".  Good luck!

What's the answer?? I can't get it....and doesn't seem like anyone is trying...

Well, the judge just told him that he will be taken from the cell at noon on the day he is to be executed.  That means that the prisoner will know when he is taken from the cell at noon, that he is going to be executed immediately after, which means that it will no longer be a surprise, and therefore is against the "law of the land".

I hope that isn't the answer.  Why wouldn't the guards just take him out of his cell *every* day at noon?  The judge didn't say he would *only* be taken out of his cell when it was time for his execution.

Clearly if the judge is able to be convinced that the death sentence is invalid by a little common sense from the prisoner, this country's legal system has not thought everything through.

There is only one day left in the month (i.e. 9/29).

Though that does not account for the possibility that the sentence is carried out on what we would traditionally consider a monthly basis (that is within 30 days of the execution).

Yeah, but the judge says the execution will occur during / within the *next* month, making it irrelevant what day of the month it is.

[jaketwice]

Ok, I've got one:

A man in a foreign land is arrested for a serious crime.  He is brought before a judge and sentenced to death.  The judge explains to him that the death penalty in their land is designed to not give the condemned the peace of mind of knowing when the end will come.  So, the judge explains, the execution will take place sometime during the next month.  The man will not know which day he will be executed until he is taken from his cell at noon on the day of the execution. He will be dead almost immediately after. The execution, the judge says, must be a surprise according to the law of the land.

"Wait!" says the man.  He asks to approach the bench and speaks to the judge quietly for a few minutes.  The judge thinks over what he has said and declares the death sentence to be invalid.  What did the man tell him to get him to change his mind? 

This is a logical answer, not anything like "I'm your son" or "I have your wife hostage".  Good luck!

What's the answer?? I can't get it....and doesn't seem like anyone is trying...

Well, the judge just told him that he will be taken from the cell at noon on the day he is to be executed.  That means that the prisoner will know when he is taken from the cell at noon, that he is going to be executed immediately after, which means that it will no longer be a surprise, and therefore is against the "law of the land".

I hope that isn't the answer.  Why wouldn't the guards just take him out of his cell *every* day at noon?  The judge didn't say he would *only* be taken out of his cell when it was time for his execution.

Clearly if the judge is able to be convinced that the death sentence is invalid by a little common sense from the prisoner, this country's legal system has not thought everything through.

There is only one day left in the month (i.e. 9/29).

Though that does not account for the possibility that the sentence is carried out on what we would traditionally consider a monthly basis (that is within 30 days of the execution).

Yeah, but the judge says the execution will occur during / within the *next* month, making it irrelevant what day of the month it is.

Well, the judge could have meant one of two things:

1). within the course of the next (this next) month. An equivalent being, within the course of January, it BEING January.

2). within the course of the next (the following) month. An equivalent being, in February, the judge discussing an possible execution in March.

Because the judge's exact words were: "during the next month," and because "during" is the ambiguous word, I'm going with the former, because during means something like "at some point during the period" or "throughout a period."

To me, since the period (the month) being described, is not defined, it makes the most sense to go with the current month, or the current period.

[Roy Hobbs]

Ok, I've got one:

A man in a foreign land is arrested for a serious crime.  He is brought before a judge and sentenced to death.  The judge explains to him that the death penalty in their land is designed to not give the condemned the peace of mind of knowing when the end will come.  So, the judge explains, the execution will take place sometime during the next month.  The man will not know which day he will be executed until he is taken from his cell at noon on the day of the execution. He will be dead almost immediately after. The execution, the judge says, must be a surprise according to the law of the land.

"Wait!" says the man.  He asks to approach the bench and speaks to the judge quietly for a few minutes.  The judge thinks over what he has said and declares the death sentence to be invalid.  What did the man tell him to get him to change his mind? 

This is a logical answer, not anything like "I'm your son" or "I have your wife hostage".  Good luck!

What's the answer?? I can't get it....and doesn't seem like anyone is trying...

Well, the judge just told him that he will be taken from the cell at noon on the day he is to be executed.  That means that the prisoner will know when he is taken from the cell at noon, that he is going to be executed immediately after, which means that it will no longer be a surprise, and therefore is against the "law of the land".

I hope that isn't the answer.  Why wouldn't the guards just take him out of his cell *every* day at noon?  The judge didn't say he would *only* be taken out of his cell when it was time for his execution.

Clearly if the judge is able to be convinced that the death sentence is invalid by a little common sense from the prisoner, this country's legal system has not thought everything through.

There is only one day left in the month (i.e. 9/29).

Though that does not account for the possibility that the sentence is carried out on what we would traditionally consider a monthly basis (that is within 30 days of the execution).

Yeah, but the judge says the execution will occur during / within the *next* month, making it irrelevant what day of the month it is.

Well, the judge could have meant one of two things:

1). within the course of the next (this next) month. An equivalent being, within the course of January, it BEING January.

2). within the course of the next (the following) month. An equivalent being, in February, the judge discussing an possible execution in March.

Because the judge's exact words were: "during the next month," and because "during" is the ambiguous word, I'm going with the former, because during means something like "at some point during the period" or "throughout a period."

To me, since the period (the month) being described, is not defined, it makes the most sense to go with the current month, or the current period.

If it's January, and somebody says something is going to happen "sometime during the next month", it either means within a 31 day period, or in February.  I'm a fairly astute guy, majored in English (and Government), and tend to understand the vernacular fairly well.  I have *never* heard or read somebody say "during the next month" to mean "from this date to the end of the month" (i.e., in your original example, from September 29 to September 30).  That makes very little sense to me.

[hwangjini_1]

Okay, here is one more.  Again, no tricks.  Just use your logic.

You are alone in a room. 

In the room there are two lengths of fuse (like the sort of thing used to light dynamite or a firecracker), a box of matches and a pair of scissors.    Each fuse is about five feet long, but not exactly.  You know that each fuse burns for exactly one hour.  But you also know that they burn unevenly (so that it could burn up four of the five feet in the first ten minutes but then take the next fifty minutes to burn the last foot, or in some other way, you don't know).  You also know that each fuse is different (so while they both burn unevenly, they both burn at different rates).  You don’t know the rate at which either fuse will burn, just that they each last exactly one hour.

The only way you can get out of the room is by measuring 45 minutes, exactly.  There are no watches, cell-phones, clocks, sundials, miniature stone henges or any other time telling devices available to you.  Just what you have, the two fuses, a box of matches and a pair of scissors (which can cut the fuses into any lengths you like).

How do you measure 45 minutes?

Okay, so maybe the rope one was too hard.  Here is a slightly easier one (and then I have to stop procrastinating!)

You are stranded on an island that is two miles long and fifty feet wide.  You hear some planes going over head and think you should set a fire on the island so they can see it and come rescue you.  This turned out to be a pretty bad idea.  The island is completely covered with old dried out trees and is quite flammable.  The fire quickly gets out of control. You are smart enough to run away from the fire.  For a while it looks like it will just burn itself out.  But just when you think you are safe, the wind picks up.  It is blowing very strongly.  The fire starts moving towards you quickly, maybe at about a foot per second.  The wind dies down and you see the fire stop moving towards you.  About a half a mile of the island is burned to a crisp.  You deduce that when there is no wind the fire does not spread, but when there is wind, the fire spreads only in the direction the wind is blowing. 

Suddenly the wind picks up again, and this time it is not stopping.  You have about a mile and a half of island that is not yet burned but if you don’t do anything, it will burn up in about two hours.  You could jump into the water, but the water is inhabited by carnivorous dingo fish that will eat you alive in seconds.  But if you just stand there and do nothing, you will be burned alive.  What do you do?

You can hope the tide is dropping and there is enough room on the beach to walk over to the side that is already burned without walking through the fire.  The fish can't get you and sand doesn't burn.  If the other side of the island is already burnt to a crisp it can't go up in flames again and you're safe.

escaping the fire on the island. not too hard.

first, grab a handful of unburned grass.
second, carefully go to the raging fire and set your handful of grass on fire.
third, run to within the last 50 feet or so of the unburned section.
fourth, set THAT section on fire.

the wind will blow the newly ignited fire AHEAD of the old fire. you stay in the gap inbetween them. eventually, the new fire section burns out (no more grass) and you stay there (with warm feet) safely since the old fire can NOT reach you now.

do i get a tp?

[jaketwice]

Ok, I've got one:

A man in a foreign land is arrested for a serious crime.  He is brought before a judge and sentenced to death.  The judge explains to him that the death penalty in their land is designed to not give the condemned the peace of mind of knowing when the end will come.  So, the judge explains, the execution will take place sometime during the next month.  The man will not know which day he will be executed until he is taken from his cell at noon on the day of the execution. He will be dead almost immediately after. The execution, the judge says, must be a surprise according to the law of the land.

"Wait!" says the man.  He asks to approach the bench and speaks to the judge quietly for a few minutes.  The judge thinks over what he has said and declares the death sentence to be invalid.  What did the man tell him to get him to change his mind? 

This is a logical answer, not anything like "I'm your son" or "I have your wife hostage".  Good luck!

What's the answer?? I can't get it....and doesn't seem like anyone is trying...

Well, the judge just told him that he will be taken from the cell at noon on the day he is to be executed.  That means that the prisoner will know when he is taken from the cell at noon, that he is going to be executed immediately after, which means that it will no longer be a surprise, and therefore is against the "law of the land".

I hope that isn't the answer.  Why wouldn't the guards just take him out of his cell *every* day at noon?  The judge didn't say he would *only* be taken out of his cell when it was time for his execution.

Clearly if the judge is able to be convinced that the death sentence is invalid by a little common sense from the prisoner, this country's legal system has not thought everything through.

There is only one day left in the month (i.e. 9/29).

Though that does not account for the possibility that the sentence is carried out on what we would traditionally consider a monthly basis (that is within 30 days of the execution).

Yeah, but the judge says the execution will occur during / within the *next* month, making it irrelevant what day of the month it is.

Well, the judge could have meant one of two things:

1). within the course of the next (this next) month. An equivalent being, within the course of January, it BEING January.

2). within the course of the next (the following) month. An equivalent being, in February, the judge discussing an possible execution in March.

Because the judge's exact words were: "during the next month," and because "during" is the ambiguous word, I'm going with the former, because during means something like "at some point during the period" or "throughout a period."

To me, since the period (the month) being described, is not defined, it makes the most sense to go with the current month, or the current period.

If it's January, and somebody says something is going to happen "sometime during the next month", it either means within a 31 day period, or in February.  I'm a fairly astute guy, majored in English (and Government), and tend to understand the vernacular fairly well.  I have *never* heard or read somebody say "during the next month" to mean "from this date to the end of the month" (i.e., in your original example, from September 29 to September 30).  That makes very little sense to me.

I would probably take that the judge's statement as "during the course of the next month" or 30 days from today (which I accounted for initially);  or failing that, within the course of the calendar month.

Your example could mean that the executed individual was to be killed "sometime in July" even though it was June 1.

Consider: "during the next month" is what the judge "explained" not what he said. I read "during" as meant to communicate to US when the execution was set to take place, not as the judge's verbatim statement.

The question may not have been perfect, but what's another reasonable answer in that case?

[Roy Hobbs]

The question may not have been perfect, but what's another reasonable answer in that case?

I don't know, but I'm not happy with the proposed answers so far.  I have a feeling I won't be terribly happy with the "official" answer, either, but I'll wait for it to be given.

My guess is that the prisoner tricked the judge with some faulty logic / induction.

[warriorspirit]

It’s the beginning of eternity,
the end of time and space.
It’s the beginning of the end
And the end of every place.

what is "it"?

[Roy Hobbs]

It’s the beginning of eternity,
the end of time and space.
It’s the beginning of the end
And the end of every place.

what is "it"?

The letter "e"?

[Roy Hobbs]

The question may not have been perfect, but what's another reasonable answer in that case?

I don't know, but I'm not happy with the proposed answers so far.  I have a feeling I won't be terribly happy with the "official" answer, either, but I'll wait for it to be given.

My guess is that the prisoner tricked the judge with some faulty logic / induction.

And...  looks like I was right.  See here.

A murderer had been found guilty of a particularly heinous crime. The judge sentencing the murderer decides that death is too good for him; he wants to make him suffer. He passes his sentence, "You will be taken from this place, and hanged from the neck until you are dead. Before that, though, you will suffer anguish, waiting, never knowing whether this will be the day that you will die. One morning, sometime in the next week, it will happen, but until it does you will live in fear."

The murderer leaves the courtroom with a light heart, knowing that the sentence handed down to him cannot be carried out.

He reasons like this:

Suppose that on the seventh morning I am alive. I will know that that is the day that I am to die. But the judge said that I would not know the day that I am to die. Therefore I will not be hanged on the seventh day. The sixth day is the last day that it could be.

But in that case, if I am alive on the sixth morning then I will know that it is the sixth day on which I am to be hanged. But the judge said that I would not know the day that I am to die. Therefore I will not be hanged on the sixth day.

He continues, applying the same reasoning to the fifth day, and then to the fourth, and so on, concluding that he cannot be hanged on any day according to the judge’s instructions. The sentence handed down to him cannot be carried out.

He is hanged on the morning of the third day, much to his surprise.

So, the prisoner simply used the above reasoning with the judge, and he fell for it.  Therefore, faulty induction.  Apparently, this is a famous paradox called "the unexpected hanging".

[warriorspirit]

It’s the beginning of eternity,
the end of time and space.
It’s the beginning of the end
And the end of every place.

what is "it"?

The letter "e"?

lol yup...this works better when you just tell them. not so much in print form.

[kw10]

"Wait!" says the man.  He asks to approach the bench and speaks to the judge quietly for a few minutes.  The judge thinks over what he has said and declares the death sentence to be invalid.  What did the man tell him to get him to change his mind? 

This is a logical answer, not anything like "I'm your son" or "I have your wife hostage".  Good luck!

He is hanged on the morning of the third day, much to his surprise.

The original brain teaser said he wasn't hanged, I know that it can work both ways, but I'm just wondering if there's another answer? One that perhaps he really can be excused from his sentence?

[Roy Hobbs]

"Wait!" says the man.  He asks to approach the bench and speaks to the judge quietly for a few minutes.  The judge thinks over what he has said and declares the death sentence to be invalid.  What did the man tell him to get him to change his mind? 

This is a logical answer, not anything like "I'm your son" or "I have your wife hostage".  Good luck!

He is hanged on the morning of the third day, much to his surprise.

The original brain teaser said he wasn't hanged, I know that it can work both ways, but I'm just wondering if there's another answer? One that perhaps he really can be excused from his sentence?

The original brain teaser only says that the judge declared the sentence to be invalid.  The judge got tricked.  Had he ordered the prisoner into custody, he could have / would have been killed.

It's a silly riddle, because we're all assuming that the judge isn't a moron.  Sadly, the only answer is, he is.

[celticmaestro]

It took me a little while to read through all these. Some real crackers, the only one I really struggled to get was the bird in Alaska one, and having seen the answer I'm not surprised I didn't get it!

I gave TP's to everyone who posted one i enjoyed.

Here's another:

A man having a meal asked the waiter for a glass, a plate, some water, a match and a lemon wedge.

When the man got them he poured enough water onto the plate to cover it.

"If you can get the water on the plate into the glass I'll give you $100" the man said to the waiter. "The only trick is, you must do it without touching or moving the plate. You're allowed to use the match and lemon to do it though."

After a while, the waiter walked away with $100 in his pocket.

How did he get the water into the glass?