Unky, think of this. My question is if he WAS blind. It was answered yes. He is no longer blind.
|
Unky, think of this. My question is if he WAS blind. It was answered yes. He is no longer blind.
Not to mention that it was also established that his medical condition was indeed solved in Switzerland. There's definite relevance in this. (My brother argued this wasn't relevant, until I reminded him that your average person would never have reacted in this manner. It also provides a clue.)
He could see fine when he got on the train. He knew what car he was getting on. No, it doesn't matter whether he's a smoker or not, because it doesn't matter why he was in a smoking car. (Maybe all the non-smoking ones were filled, or he didn't care, or maybe he does smoke.)
Think a bit about the circumstances he was in. And maybe instead of how a cigarette could save him, what would make him want to kill himself?
(You sound frustrated. Frustration takes the fun away. You can always just look at the answer, or if you really don't want to, I can give more hints. But I suspect you may be in bed by now, so maybe the break will make you feel better. Whenever I'm really stuck on one of my computer games it makes me batty and ticks me off, so going to bed and getting away for a while help.)
No, I wasn't frustrated :)
I was just thinking aloud and I'm not finding the right questions to move forward. I forgot to add 'before' in one of my sentences that is 'he couldn't see in which car he was travelling before, and now, he can see'.
Hmm...
He is 'new' to seeing everything. Maybe he would have seen stressed people in the nonsmoking car? But this makes the cigarette irrelevant then.
Maybe the 'ugliness' in the world... the fact that people are not enjoying what they have (that is the sight which he didn't have before being cured) ?
I would think that the mental condition of the man is that he's happy to discover a new world, a world full of colours. Then, if he came to see how some people were taking that for granted, it will be as if he got cured pointlessly and that maybe, he would have been better if he was still blind?
Well, good, though it did sound like it.Quote:
No, I wasn't frustrated :)
Yes it would. Not to mention that the non-smoking car really has absolutely nothing to do with it. You know the cigarettes are relevant, and they wouldn't be in a non-smoking car. So it was never a problem with that car - it was lack of cigarettes. :)Quote:
He is 'new' to seeing everything. Maybe he would have seen stressed people in the nonsmoking car? But this makes the cigarette irrelevant then.
There's no reason to assume he was blind his whole life though. (Though I suppose having been even for a short time and getting it back would make you "see" things in a new way. I actually was very close to losing the sight in one of my eyes. It's just a bit on the spooky side.)Quote:
Maybe the 'ugliness' in the world... the fact that people are not enjoying what they have (that is the sight which he didn't have before being cured) ?
What a weird coincidence. I finally looked up that island of yours last night and was talking to my brother about it, and somehow we got off on the British/American English thing. I said I'd have to keep an eye out for which you did - and here you conveniently use the word 'colour' - thanks for your cooperation. :DQuote:
I would think that the mental condition of the man is that he's happy to discover a new world, a world full of colours.
Not at all. He should be happy to have his site. In these scenarios people do kill themselves over some weird stuff sometimes, but usually not for totally trivial reasons. People taking things for granted isn't necessarily trivial, but relative to someone wanting to take their life, it's very trivial.Quote:
Then, if he came to see how some people were taking that for granted, it will be as if he got cured pointlessly and that maybe, he would have been better if he was still blind.
As for being better if he was still blind... WAAAYYY off.
You're being too philosophical. The cigarettes -- and possible pipes, cigars, lighters, etc. my brother said marijuana LOL -- aren't representative of anything, they aren't an analogy. Take them literally.
Adam asked a series of questions about the cigarettes. Maybe go back and check that out. There's an important clue in there. There's also a question you asked back near the very start that has gone almost completely ignored and never brought up again.
(Why do I have a feeling you're going to shoot me when you find out the answer?)
Lol, I won't shoot anyone :p
Is it about the mountain? Well, I was thinking at the time that there might have been an rock slide and the car got crushed :o or maybe they passed through a tunnel where it was dark for a while, which now will mean that the man re-experienced 'blindness' for some time.
Oh whew! I did give fair warning.Quote:
Lol, I won't shoot anyone :p
Yes, yes, go with it!Quote:
Is it about the mountain? Well, I was thinking at the time that there might have been an rock slide and the car got crushed :o or maybe they passed through a tunnel where it was dark for a while, which now will mean that the man re-experienced 'blindness' for some time.
What?
Did they pass through a tunnel?
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown008
So the 'ex-blind' was 'blind' again... he could see nothing in the car... but hey, since there are cigarettes there is light!
So... the cigarettes saved him by making think that he wasn't becoming blind again?
It's strange though... I thought that trains lit up their lamps when passing through a tunnel... =/
Good Job Unky! I knew it wouldn't be long before you got it. Also remember it is just a puzzle, so it doesn't have to be 100% accurate as far as lighting up and what not.
Morgaine, we will try and find one for you so you can take a break and solve one yourself.
That's really it! Gosh! I wonder why I didn't directly ask if the train passed through a tunnel earlier... could've saved some time. Ok, just tell me if there is anew thread :)
I actually found one and Morgaine has already said she doesn't know it. I'll get it posted. I thought you two might need a break, but it looks like you are ready to play. :)
Ok, I'll be ready :)
What day is it when the day after tomorrow is yesterday and today will be as far from Sunday as today was from Sunday, when the day before yesterday was tomorrow?
Wednesday? O_o
No... try again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown008
Thursday?
Still no...Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown008
Is there actually a solution to this?
Sunday will be my final word then.
I don't see anything else. Wednesday was a mistake I did. I didn't really mean it at first and forgot Saturday >.<
The answer is indeed Sunday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown008
I've got dozens. Here's another one:
The leaky pipe.
A pipe sprung a leak on its underside so that it leaked 5 gallons of water per hour until the pipe was empty 4 hours later. The leak was not detected and the pipe was refilled but a second leak, of exactly the same size, occurred immediately. The pipe was now leaking at a rate of 10 gallons of water per hour but this time it took 3 hours to empty. Can you explain why?
The pipe was not full at first, and had 10 gallons of water less than its full capacity?
Maybe the second leak occurred further up the pipe, meaning that some way, the leak was above the surface of the water in the pipe?
The pipe was at full capacity again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown008
You're getting close with the second leak's location.
Well, if you want math in this, the second leak was halfway up from the first leak to the top of the pipe.
Unless we are taking a real example, where the rate of flow of water will depend on the height of the water surface above the leak.
Yes, the second leak was halfway up the pipe... so...Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown008
So, for the first hour, 10 gallons went away.
Then, the rate becomes 5 gal/hr
Since there are 10 gals remaining, it takes additional 2 hours for a total of 3 hours.
You've got it! Good job, Jerry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown008
My homework is right!
At a local school a teacher gave the children a few math problems for homework. The next day the teacher pulled Tom out and told him that he had all of his wrong.
His answers to the problems set were:
10+7=5
9+6=3
11+5=4
8+11=7
Tom was also right. How was this so?
It looks like time on a clock. For example, 10:00 plus 7 hours would be 5:00.
That's it! Good job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Looking
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmjoseph
Thanks. :) As Adam would say, can we have another one?
The Fire
The couple had just finished building their home and because the night would be very cold, they wanted to build a fire to keep warm. The wind outside was gusting at 40mph and they were soon very cozy and fell asleep. A few hours later they were both dead. What had gone wrong?
CLUES:
1. The home had not burned down.
2. The house had not blown down.
3. They had not suffocated.
4. They had not been burned to death.
Is this a lateral thinking puzzle where we have to ask yes or no questions?Quote:
Originally Posted by jmjoseph
The fire switched off and they froze to death
... as opposed to being burned to death?
Yes, these are from the Mensa book "Lateral Thinking & Logical Deduction". Ask all the questions that you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Looking
No Jerry, the fire did NOT go out.
Did they die of natural causes?
Were they murdered?
Did the fire somehow lead to their death?
Is it relevant that the house is newly built?
Were they old?
Was the house made of wood?
Did the house has wooden supports?
Could the fire have burned these supports and the house crumbled down?
Did they get killed by someone?
The fire did somehow lead to their death. The rest are "No" answers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Looking
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:09 AM. |