Exactly! It's finding the answer within the logic of the riddle itself. And within that logic, the answer makes sense. Currently you guys are like this:
But actually you need to be more like that:
PS. It's a slight exaggeration
Crack the code, solve the riddle, or answer the trivia
- Thread starter Gaze
- Start date
Exactly! It's finding the answer within the logic of the riddle itself. And within that logic, the answer makes sense. Currently you guys are like this:
But actually you need to be more like that:
PS. It's a slight exaggeration
Clearly the best option and by the way I'm sitting next to Charlize Theron in that train.
Last edited:
How does that work? By assuming the wall of fire is only following along the tracks perpendicular to the forest and that only the railway is burning?
@Ren said the fire will roast everyone inside the train.
Yeah, stop the train and find a pond.
Then get drunk in the pond
#pond orgy
#cigars underwater
#i don't obey no laws not even the laws of physics
Then get drunk in the pond
#pond orgy
#cigars underwater
#i don't obey no laws not even the laws of physics
Also realistically that's the best way to survive too, because if you're trapped in a forest fire you should dig a hole to lay in and cover yourself with dirt.
But assuming the fire will only burn everyone in the train and nothing else means that we can come up with a great number of solutions that defy the laws of physics or our experience of the world. In that case being rescued by aliens would be equally valid as a solution since we can abandon the assumption that the world of the train is this one. Or bombing the hurricane to stop the wind from blowing, calling a helicopter etc.
Bombing the Hurricane is going to be the title of my heavy metal band's first album, if I ever form a heavy metal band that is...
I don't think there's a logical way to make the train go faster. Definitely not a logical way to make the fire go slower. Not many options left.
@Gaze
Another way to solve the problem without turning it into a formal equation is to think in this way: if a plane weighs 100 tons plus half its weight, then 100 tons is one half, since a whole is composed of two halves.
Yeah, this makes more sense. But tbh, there is no way to determine the plane's weight because the wording is problematic. You can't determine half the weight based on the problem. At most what you have is y = 10+ 1/2x based on @Fidicen's equation, but how can you solve for x if you don't have a corresponding solution set? There is nothing in the problem to indicate that 100 is half the weight. It's simply a constant which get's added to the half the weight of the plane.
I think it's safe to conclude that we're all toast. Except for Ren. He's French toast.
@Lady Jolanda @Fidicen @sprinkles and company:
I can tell you the answer if you want, so you can judge me forever after for daring to fool around with you with such a silly riddle. ;P
I can tell you the answer if you want, so you can judge me forever after for daring to fool around with you with such a silly riddle. ;P