Were there people in the non smoking car who died?

Was there something that wasn't in good condition in the non smoking car?

Did something relevant made him not go in the non smoking car?

A man is returning from Switzerland by train. If he had been in a non-smoking car he would have died.

Quote:

---

Were there people in the non smoking car who died?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Was there something that wasn't in good condition in the non smoking car?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Did something relevant made him not go in the non smoking car?

---

No.

Ok, I will give a few whacks here although I have a feeling this one will be difficult, with little information to go off. Also, it is early here so bear with me on my questions. A lot may be irrevelant.

Did the smoke save him?

Did he smoke?

Was he in Switzerland for business?

Was he in Switzerland for pleasure?

Was the train full of people?

Did everyone in the non-smoking rooms die?

Did the train crash?

Was it sitting still?

Were the smoking rooms in the front of the train?

Were the smoking rooms in the back of the train?

Was he traveling alone?

I can't think of anything right now, hopefully I get a few yes's here. Now after all that smoke talk, it is time for a cigarette.

Lol, later Adam :)

Well, getting back... here's a couple more...

Did anyone else died?

If he was in the non smoking car, would he have:
Been shot?
Been poisoned?
Been injured?
Been asphyxiated?
Been stung by a bug?
Had the head cut?
A stroke?
A complication of health?
Bled to death?

Now that I'm thinking about something...
Would he have lost his life?
Would he have not enough food (or any food at all)?
Would he have not enough to drink (or any drink at all)?

Maybe something will trigger another thought... anyway, you can group many and say only once, yes, no or irrelevant instead of saying several 'no' or 'yes' or 'irrelevant'

It's funny cause my brother called just as I was about to answer these and then started asking me questions and solved it. Of course, I was talking about it and gave one thing away. But it still made me realize just how convoluted this puzzle is. Hope y'all brought food and drinks. :p

Quote:

---

Did the smoke save him?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Did he smoke?

---

Already asked, but irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Was he in Switzerland for business?

---

"Business" as in work, no.

Quote:

---

Was he in Switzerland for pleasure?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Was the train full of people?

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Did everyone in the non-smoking rooms die?

---

This was asked earlier: Were there people in the non smoking car who died? No.

(Everyone couldn't have died if no one died.)

Quote:

---

Did the train crash?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Was it sitting still?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Were the smoking rooms in the front of the train?

---

Irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Were the smoking rooms in the back of the train?

---

Irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Was he traveling alone?

---

I'd say yes.

Quote:

---

Did anyone else died?

---

No.

Quote:

---

If he was in the non smoking car, would he have:
Been stung by a bug?
A stroke?
A complication of health?

---

No.

Quote:

---

If he was in the non smoking car, would he have:
Been shot?
Been poisoned?
Had the head cut?
Been injured?
Been asphyxiated?
Bled to death?

---

All possibilities.

Quote:

---

Would he have lost his life?

---

It says he would have died. Isn't that the same thing? (If not, you would have to clarify what you mean.)

Quote:

---

Would he have not enough food (or any food at all)?
Would he have not enough to drink (or any drink at all)?

---

It's easier if you don't ask "not" questions - too easy to misinterpret.

Food and drink not relevant.

This:

Quote:

---

Did the train pass near a mountain? Good possibility.

---

I was trying to think of other possibilities, which conceivably could exist, but this is the best possibility. (And probably exactly why someone placed it in Switzerland.) So this is a Yes.

I was thinking about 'dying' of thirst, or hunger or things like that instead of losing his life... :o

If someone else have taken his place in the non smoking car, would (s)he have died?

I'm a little out of ideas... :(

Did someone kill him?

Did he kill himself?

Quote:

---

I was thinking about 'dying' of thirst, or hunger or things like that instead of losing his life... :o

---

In that case, he would have "lost his life." (I think. :p)

Quote:

---

If someone else have taken his place in the non smoking car, would (s)he have died?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Did someone kill him?
Did he kill himself?

---

He's not dead! Technically I should tell you to re-phrase, but since you've touched on the subject, and getting stuck, I'll be nice and say he would have killed himself.


Since you're running out of ideas... um, I noticed Adam's always on in the mornings (his time) and he hasn't been here over the weekend. Makes me wonder if he's only getting on at work. I could assume he'll be around Monday morning - we can see what questions he comes up with.

In the meantime, I'll try coming up with a hint that's not too much of a give-away. I'll also post a summary of questions so it's easy to go over them. Concentrate on questions on the same subject and see what they have in common, or sometimes more importantly, what they don't. I have noticed two areas that no one is asking much about, and areas that have been concentrated on too much - maybe that's what my hint should be around.

A man is returning from Switzerland by train. If he had been in a non-smoking car he would have died.


Summary thus far:

Does Switzerland has any significance? I don't think so. [revised: only significance may be what was stated in post #88]

Does the man smoke? Irrelevant.

Did the car crash? No.

Did the car explode? No.

Was the car attacked? No.

Was it winter? Summer then? Irrelevant.

Did the car had a break down in the middle of nowhere? No.

Is the non smoking car part of the train. Yes.

Is the man in a car by the train? No.

Did the non smoking car get detached from the train? No.

Did he initially intend to be in the non smoking car? Irrelevant.

Was the man in the machine room of the train? No.

Did the train pass near a mountain? Good possibility. [Also revised per post #88 to Yes.)

Did the train stop on its way (or slowed down drastically) for any reason? No.

Was the man in the train? Yes.

Was the man already dead when he started his voyage/trip? No.

Are the non smoking car and the train in which the man was separate entities? No.

Was the man in a car in the train? Yes.

Did anything unusual happen to the non smoking car? No.

Did the man get out of the train during this 'unusual' occurrence? No

Were there people in the non smoking car who died? No.

Was there something that wasn't in good condition in the non smoking car? No.

Did something relevant made him not go in the non smoking car? No

Did the smoke save him? No.

Was he in Switzerland for business? "Business" as in work, no.

Was he in Switzerland for pleasure? No.

Was the train full of people? Yes.

Did the train crash? Already establish that the train never crashed.

Was it sitting still? No. [And was already asked if it ever stopped.]

Were the smoking rooms in the front of the train? Were the smoking rooms in the back of the train? Irrelevant.

Was he traveling alone? I'd say yes.

Did anyone else died? No.

If he was in the non smoking car, would he have:
been stung by a bug?
a stroke?
a complication of health?
No.

If he was in the non smoking car, would he have:
been shot?
been poisoned?
had the head cut?
been injured?
been asphyxiated?
bled to death?
All possibilities.

Would he have not enough food (or any food at all)?
Would he have not enough to drink (or any drink at all)?
Food and drink not relevant.

If someone else have taken his place in the non smoking car, would (s)he have died? No.

Did someone kill him? Did he kill himself?
He's not dead! But he would have killed himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by morgaine300

A man is returning from Switzerland by train. If he had been in a non-smoking car he would have died.


Summary thus far:

Does Switzerland has any significance? I don't think so. [revised: only significance may be what was stated in post #88]

Does the man smoke? Irrelevent.

Did the car crash? No.

Did the car explode? No.

Was the car attacked? No.

Was it winter? Summer then? Irrelevant.

Did the car had a break down in the middle of nowhere? No.

Is the non smoking car part of the train. Yes.

Is the man in a car by the train? No.

Did the non smoking car get detached from the train? No.

Did he initially intend to be in the non smoking car? Irrelevant.

Was the man in the machine room of the train? No.

Did the train pass near a mountain? Good possibility. [Also revised per post #88 to Yes.)

Did the train stop on its way (or slowed down drastically) for any reason? No.

Was the man in the train? Yes.

Was the man already dead when he started his voyage/trip? No.

Are the non smoking car and the train in which the man was separate entities? No.

Was the man in a car in the train? Yes.

Did anything unusual happen to the non smoking car? No.

Did the man get out of the train during this 'unusual' occurrence? No

Were there people in the non smoking car who died? No.

Was there something that wasn't in good condition in the non smoking car? No.

Did something relevant made him not go in the non smoking car? No

Did the smoke save him? No.

Was he in Switzerland for business? "Business" as in work, no.

Was he in Switzerland for pleasure? No.

Was the train full of people? Yes.

Did the train crash? Already establish that the train never crashed.

Was it sitting still? No. [And was already asked if it ever stopped.]

Were the smoking rooms in the front of the train? Were the smoking rooms in the back of the train? Irrelevant.

Was he traveling alone? I'd say yes.

Did anyone else died? No.

If he was in the non smoking car, would he have:
been stung by a bug?
a stroke?
a complication of health?
No.

If he was in the non smoking car, would he have:
been shot?
been poisoned?
had the head cut?
been injured?
been asphyxiated?
bled to death?
All possibilities.

Would he have not enough food (or any food at all)?
Would he have not enough to drink (or any drink at all)?
Food and drink not relevant.

If someone else have taken his place in the non smoking car, would (s)he have died? No.

Did someone kill him? Did he kill himself?
He's not dead! But he would have killed himself.

---

Was he a smoker?
Did he know someone in the smokers car?
Did he do something in Switzerland ?
Was it against the Law?

Quote:

---

Was he a smoker?

---

Second question on the summary I just did. Irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Did he know someone in the smokers car?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Did he do something in Switzerland?

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Was it against the Law?

---

No.

Sorry for the last two questions, I don't know what got through my head :(

Does the man travel with a weapon?
Was there something in the non smoking car which the man could have used to kill himself if he was there?
Was there someone waiting for him in the non smoking car?
Does the train receive messages from the country such as through telephone/television/telegraph/etc ?

Quote:

---

Sorry for the last two questions, I don't know what got through my head :(

---

A brain fart. They're highly contagious too so stay away from me. :eek:

Quote:

---

Does the man travel with a weapon?

---

Possibly.

Quote:

---

Was there something in the non smoking car which the man could have used to kill himself if he was there?

---

Yes, but the man would be in there as well. (Tough to answer without being misleading. All the same stuff would be available either way.)

Quote:

---

Was there someone waiting for him in the non smoking car?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Does the train receive messages from the country such as through telephone/television/telegraph/etc ?

---

Irrelevant.

I'm going to drop a slight hint, just because no one is getting anything close to where they should be, and because it's convoluted and difficult, we need to be heading a better direction.

And that would be: get off the kick about the non-smoking car. What needs established has been: it didn't wreck, no one was in there who was dangerous, no one else would have died, etc.

Hmm, still nothing from Adam. I forgot it's Labor Day here. If he only posts at work, that would explain it.

Yep, you were right, I only post at work since I spend most of my time at work. I was off yesterday for Labor Day. I think I have gotten so far off track on this puzzle that I need time to think of where I need to be going with it.

I was thinking maybe he learned something too depressing that he would have killed himself if he learned it on his way from Switzerland...

I don't know... was the man following some treatment? I mean... was he on drugs?

EDIT: Some typos... ugh.

For some reason I have a feeling I am going to ask questions that have already been asked again. If I do so please forgive me.

Ok, so a quick conclusion in my head that you can answer yes or no to:

Nobody on the entire train died. Nothing was out of the ordinary.
Something would have caused this specific man to die if he would have been in the nonsmoking car.

Ok, a few more questions:

Did the man have medical problems?

Did something he did in Switzerland relavent to this?(sorry, this may have been asked)

Was there someone he didn't like in the nonsmoking room?

Was there something that could have caused him much harm in the nonsmoking room?