Moderators: jestingrabbit, Moderators General, Prelates
peri_renna wrote:Clarification: if I ask Random a nonsensical question, will I still get an answer?
Also: Are their actual names "True", "False", and "Random", as in if I asked True what the first letter of their names were, I'd get "T", "F", and "R" as an answer?
Also mk. 2: Are metaquestions permitted?
GreedyAlgorithm wrote:peri_renna wrote:Clarification: if I ask Random a nonsensical question, will I still get an answer?
Also: Are their actual names "True", "False", and "Random", as in if I asked True what the first letter of their names were, I'd get "T", "F", and "R" as an answer?
Also mk. 2: Are metaquestions permitted?
Their only answers are "ja" and "da", and at least one always answers truthfully, and the actual question should be well formed, so I'd say there's an unwritten "by asking them three true/false questions". I'd also guess questions like "Will you answer with your word for 'false' or (make it known to me which of you is which and give me a billion dollars)?" are disallowed, because then you could ask all three that question and walk away with the answer and a billion dollars.
peri_renna wrote:1. Suppose I don't know who is who. I ask the first one, "Would the one of your companions who isn't Random answer in the affirmative if I asked if that one [points] is Random?" It's an awful question, but it makes sense if I ask someone who isn't Random - and if I'm asking Random, then it's ambiguous. Would Random still randomly say "ja" or "da"? If so, would it be legal?
2. If I asked True "Does your name start with T?", would the answer be in the affirmative (that is to say, "ja" if "ja" is yes, and "da" if "da" is yes)? What if I asked True "Does False's name start with F?" or "Does Random's name start with R?"
3. Can I ask otherwise-valid metaquestions (i.e. questions about questions), like "If I asked if you were True, would you answer in the affirmative?"
Torn Apart By Dingos wrote:3. Can I ask otherwise-valid metaquestions (i.e. questions about questions), like "If I asked if you were True, would you answer in the affirmative?"
I see no reason why not. It's not needed though. The solution I know about only uses pure logic questions.
djooleek wrote:Just to make sure I'm doing this right, do True, False and Random all speak the same language? As in if da means yes for True does it also mean yes for False and Random?
Jack Saladin wrote:etc., lock'd
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:At least he has the decency to REMOVE THE GAP BETWEEN HIS QUOTES....
Sungura wrote:I don't really miss him. At all. He was pretty grouchy.
hint wrote:Lining up the gods in a row, we see there are six ways the gods could be arranged (True first, False second, Random third, etc.). Also, da could mean yes and ja could mean no, or vice versa. So all in all, there are twelve possibilities. Your three questions can only divide these twelve possibilities into eight groups. As such, by the Pigeonhole Principle, one such group must contain two possibilities. If you receive this set of three answers to your questions, then you won't be able to tell which of these two possibilities you're in, but you'll still have to be able to tell which god is which. As such, you must not be able to tell which of da and ja means yes. Specifically, this means that your solution to the riddle has to have a case where you figure out the identities of the gods but do not know which of da and ja means yes.
Solution wrote:Capitalizing on the last puzzle's solution, I offer this one.
I first introduce the "randomfinder" question, which goes as follows: I ask the person in the middle:
"Is the 'exclusive or' of the truth-values of the following two statements true? 'Ja' means yes. The person to your right is more likely to answer truthfully than the person on your left."
If the gods insist on playing politics with "your" right versus "my" right, then I'll either use something like North and South or just stand behind them, facing in the same way as them. But to clarify, the word "your" refers to the god's left and right.
Now, suppose the middle god is not R. Then, "ja" translates to "the random dude is on my left," whereas "da" translates to "the random dude is on my right." That's why I call this question the randomfinder question: It finds R. (If you don't believe me, say so and I'll go through the truth tables for you. But I'll assume for now that you can confirm this on your own.)
Now, of course, the middle person could be R himself, so we don't yet know who R is. One more question will give me that.
In the meantime, let's select someone on this grounds: If the middle god said "ja", select the god to his right. If he said "da," select the god to his left. We already know that if the middle god was not R, then this god you've selected is also not R. But we also know that if the middle god was R, then this guy is also not R -- because R is the middle god.
So, the god you've selected is either T or F, but definitely not R.
To save me from phrasing another question, we'll assume that you can move the gods' order as you wish. Move the god that you just selected to the center.
So ends question 1.
Since the god in the center is not R, ask him the randomfinder question.
Congratulations, you just found R.
So, that was question 2.
Question 3: ask the god in the middle, "does 'ja' mean 'yes'?"
Suppose he's a liar -- then he'll be forced to answer 'da,' so that he answers falsely regardless of whether 'ja' or 'da' means yes.
Suppose he's a truth-teller -- then he'll be forced to answer 'ja', so that he answers correctly regardless of whether 'ja' or 'da' means yes.
Congrats: You have just discovered which one R is, and which one the middle is. The last falls into place by the pigeonhole principle, obviously.
Looking back at Cauchy's hint, he makes a great point: At least in some of these cases, you do not actually get to learn whether "ja" or "da" maps to "yes" or "no."
THE OPERATORS OF BOOLANIA
There are three omniscient gods sitting in a chamber: AND, OR, and XOR. They all answer the truth, but they all apply their namesake operations in one of the following ways:
•BACKWARD: The operator is applied to ALL of the questions that have been asked THUS FAR.
•UNIVERSAL: The operator is applied to ALL of the questions (you have to pick your questions beforehand).
•SELFLESS: The operator is applied to ALL of the questions NOT asked to them (you pick your questions beforehand).
For each of the 3 cases, determine with proof the minimum number of questions that will allow you to identify which god is which.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: (Standard; rules that are generally assumed unless otherwise noted.) The gods only answer yes/no questions. Each god answers in the single word of their language as appropriate to the question; i.e. each god always gives one of only two possible responses, one affirmative and one negative (e.g. they would always answer "Yes" rather than "That would be true"). Each question asked must be addressed to a single specific god; asking one question to all the gods would constitute three questions. Asking a single god multiple questions is permissible. The question you choose to ask and the god you choose to address may be dynamically chosen based on the answers to previous questions.
Note 2: (Specific) Because of possible time conflicts, you must determine your questions ahead of time, rather than based on previous answers. However, you are still allowed to choose who you ask each of your three questions to dynamically. Scoping is also dynamic; e.g. the pronoun "you" in a question will always refer to the person to whom you are currently asking a question, not a predetermined person. No time related questions (e.g., "if the answer to my second question was 'no', then X otherwise Y") are permissible, as this could lead to paradoxes within the space-time continuum.
THE GODS OF GIBBERLAND
There are three omniscient gods sitting in a chamber: GibberKnight, GibberKnave, and GibberKnexus, the gods of the knights, knaves, and knexuses of Gibberland. Knights always answer the truth, knaves always lie, and knexuses always answer the XOR of what the knight and knave would answer.
Unfortunately, the language spoken in Gibberland is so unintelligible that not only do you not know which words correspond to "yes" and "no", but you don't even know what the two words that represent them are! All you know is that there is only one word for each.
With only three questions, determine which god is which.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: What follows are standard rules that are generally assumed unless otherwise noted. The gods only answer yes/no questions. Each god answers in the single word of their language as appropriate to the question; i.e. each god always gives one of only two possible responses, one affirmative and one negative (e.g. they would always answer "Yes" rather than "That would be true"). Each question asked must be addressed to a single specific god; asking one question to all the gods would constitute three questions. Asking a single god multiple questions is permissible. The question you choose to ask and the god you choose to address may be dynamically chosen based on the answers to previous questions. No self-referential questions (e.g. "is this question true iff ...").
Note 2: Because of possible loop conflicts, you may not ask any questions regarding how a knexus would answer.
PAST, PRESENT, FUTURE
There are three omniscient gods sitting in a chamber: Past, Present and Future. They are all truthful, but with the following caveat: Present answers the question currently being asked, Past answers the last question asked in their chamber, and Future answers the next question which will be asked in their chamber. Despite their manipulation of which question to answer, each still answers immediately as if answering the question currently being asked.
Furthermore, the gods answer in a language in which "yes" and "no" are replaced by "da" and "ya", but you do not know which is which. You only know that their answers are consistent amongst themselves.
With three questions, determine which god is which.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: (standard) Because of possible time conflicts, you must determine your questions ahead of time, rather than based on previous answers. You are, however, allowed to choose who you ask each of your three questions to dynamically, and scoping is also dynamic (e.g. the pronoun "you" in a question will always refer to the person you choose to ask the question to, not a predetermined person). No self-referential questions (e.g. "is this question true iff ..."). No time related questions (e.g., "if the answer to my second question was 'no', then... otherwise ...") are permissible, as this could lead to paradoxes within the space-time continuum). Finally, note that if you ask Past your first question or Future your last question, the answer will give you no additional information because you do not know what the last or next questions are!
Note 2: (specific) Because of possible time conflicts, you must determine your questions ahead of time, rather than based on previous answers. However, you are still allowed to choose who you ask each of your three questions to dynamically. Scoping is also dynamic; e.g. the pronoun "you" in a question will always refer to the person to whom you are currently asking a question, not a predetermined person). No time related questions (e.g., "if the answer to my second question was 'no', then X otherwise Y") are permissible, as this could lead to paradoxes within the space-time continuum). Finally, note that if you ask Past your first question or Future you last question, the answer will give you no additional information because you do not know what the last or next questions are!!
Patashu wrote:THE OPERATORS OF BOOLANIA
There are three omniscient gods sitting in a chamber: AND, OR, and XOR. They all answer the truth, but they all apply their namesake operations in one of the following ways:
•UNIVERSAL: The operator is applied to ALL of the questions (you have to pick your questions beforehand).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 2: (Specific) Because of possible time conflicts, you must determine your questions ahead of time, rather than based on previous answers. However, you are still allowed to choose who you ask each of your three questions to dynamically. Scoping is also dynamic; e.g. the pronoun "you" in a question will always refer to the person to whom you are currently asking a question, not a predetermined person. No time related questions (e.g., "if the answer to my second question was 'no', then X otherwise Y") are permissible, as this could lead to paradoxes within the space-time continuum.
Cosmologicon wrote:Patashu wrote:THE OPERATORS OF BOOLANIA
There are three omniscient gods sitting in a chamber: AND, OR, and XOR. They all answer the truth, but they all apply their namesake operations in one of the following ways:
•UNIVERSAL: The operator is applied to ALL of the questions (you have to pick your questions beforehand).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 2: (Specific) Because of possible time conflicts, you must determine your questions ahead of time, rather than based on previous answers. However, you are still allowed to choose who you ask each of your three questions to dynamically. Scoping is also dynamic; e.g. the pronoun "you" in a question will always refer to the person to whom you are currently asking a question, not a predetermined person. No time related questions (e.g., "if the answer to my second question was 'no', then X otherwise Y") are permissible, as this could lead to paradoxes within the space-time continuum.
It seems to me like this dynamic scoping under universal application leads to ruptures in the spacetime continuum just as easily. As a simple example, suppose there are only two gods, AND and OR, and I ask only two identical questions: "Are you the AND god?" and "Are you the AND god?". If the answer to my first question is yes, I ask the same god the second question. If it's no, I ask the other god the second question. Now, what happens if I start with the OR god?
(I realize that I don't know which god is the OR god, and I don't know which response is yes. So I can't actually do this strategy and guarantee that it leads to a paradox: I'm just showing that there is some strategy that does.)
I had this down to knowing that the first two questions must tell me who the random god is using logic similar to the princess question and that the third question must be does da mean yes, before looking at Drosties solution to figure out the exact wording of that first question. however english being my worst subject I still have no clue what that question means or why it works. Im not sure what "is the "exclusive or" of the truth-values of the following two statements true" means". could somebody clarify that for me.
Exclusive or:Im not sure what "is the "exclusive or" of the truth-values of the following two statements true" means". could somebody clarify that for me.
TF
T|FT
F|TFze_heineken wrote:i would then suppose god 1 as true, god 2 is false, god 3 is random
you could interchange the conversations depending on what happens when you ask on of them.
ze_heineken wrote:stuff
I was imaginging that there was no point choosing who to direct the second question to, based on the answer to the first question.
But as shown in the solution, that is exactly what you do (have to?) do.
torn apart by dingos wrote:
but you may ask two (or three) of your questions to the same god
ze_heineken wrote:I ask one of them Is my name karl?(my name IS karl) i suppose he would say ja. I would ask another question where i know that is true(ex. im a boy). Then i ask the one who keeps saying da a question where i know it is not true, if he says ja, then i would suppose he is trying to tell me lies. I would then suppose that ja is the answer for yes. Then i ask the last god, I ask him questions where I know every answer is true and if he keeps answering da or ja, i would suppose he is random.
Example
Me: Is my name karl?
god 1: ja
me:am i a boy?
god 1: ja
me am i human?
god 1: ja
me: Is my name karl?
god 2: da
me: am i a boy?
god 2: da
me: am i human?
god 2: da
me: is my name karl?
god 3: da
me: am i a boy?
god 3: ja
me:am i human?
god 3: da
i would then suppose god 1 as true, god 2 is false, god 3 is random
you could interchange the conversations depending on what happens when you ask on of them.
Shark3226 wrote:ze_heineken wrote:I ask one of them Is my name karl?(my name IS karl) i suppose he would say ja. I would ask another question where i know that is true(ex. im a boy). Then i ask the one who keeps saying da a question where i know it is not true, if he says ja, then i would suppose he is trying to tell me lies. I would then suppose that ja is the answer for yes. Then i ask the last god, I ask him questions where I know every answer is true and if he keeps answering da or ja, i would suppose he is random.
Example
Me: Is my name karl?
god 1: ja
me:am i a boy?
god 1: ja
me am i human?
god 1: ja
me: Is my name karl?
god 2: da
me: am i a boy?
god 2: da
me: am i human?
god 2: da
me: is my name karl?
god 3: da
me: am i a boy?
god 3: ja
me:am i human?
god 3: da
i would then suppose god 1 as true, god 2 is false, god 3 is random
you could interchange the conversations depending on what happens when you ask on of them.
This would be an excellent way of determining the answer if you were able to ask nine questions.
CorruptUser wrote:That's how the robots will takeover. Sentient spambots.
In the future, man will be required by law to enlarge his penis and use vicodin, and on occasion, donate $5000 to a Nigerian.
Keand64 wrote:Shark3226 wrote:This would be an excellent way of determining the answer if you were able to ask nine questions.
Not really - the random god could just as easily choose to answer all da's or all ja's
addams wrote:This forum has some very well educated people typing away in loops with Sourmilk. He is a lucky Sourmilk.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.