Riddles and puzzles.

[Dan]

HolyCow: firetruck

Ok, Beware the talking cat, yours is the "offical" puzzle. Here's my attempt

Spoiler! :

Split it into a 20, 10, 5, 3 and 2.

1: 3 on SIDE A - 2 on SIDE B
2: 2 on SIDE A
3: 3 on SIDE A
4: 5+2 on SIDE A - 3 on SIDE B
5: 5 on SIDE A
6: 10+3 on SIDE A - 5+2 on SIDE B
7: 5+2 on SIDE A
8: 5+3 on SIDE A
9: 10+2 on SIDE A - 3 on SIDE B
10: 10 on SIDE A
...

And so on. I got the first ten; the rest of the pattern is easy to figure out since you use the base numbers I listed and sub out the 20 and 10 to get the 10's, 20's and 30's.

[Dan]

Ah, almost forgot, my puzzle.

A man falls 200 feet down a mineshaft, but is physically unhurt. How is this possible?

[Beware the talking cat]

And Dan does not get the prize, because you only get 4 pieces. He used five.

MUAHAHAHAHAHAH.

[TheGiftedMonkey]

Ah, almost forgot, my puzzle.

A man falls 200 feet down a mineshaft, but is physically unhurt. How is this possible?

He hasn't hit the bottom yet.

[Dan]

He hasn't hit the bottom yet.

Too easy I see.

Only four pieces...hmmm. I'll have to think about it, but I had wanted to avoid arithmetic puzzle because those aren't exactly fun. I have enough math as it is.

[Umiman]

HC:
While your theory works, it relies too heavily on

Spoiler! :

the assumption that the first person is speaking the truth. Indeed, if Rex was lying, that entire thing would have fallen down the drain.

[Beware the talking cat]

Since I don't want to force people to think too hard, it works in several ways:

Spoiler! :

The most pure(actually measures everything) is:
1 3 9 27

Then looking at it another way, since we are only dealing with whole numbers, if it is less than 2 pounds and greater than 0 pounds, it must be one pound, and if it is more than two pounds and less than 4 pounds, it must be three pounds, we get several (but finite)answers along the lines of
1 4 10 25
2 4 14 20
2 4 12 22
2 4 10 24
2 4 8 26
2 5 13 20
2 5 12 21

I say Dan gets close enough(hm maybe he just hasn't hit the bottom yet).

[HolyCow]

Umi: If Rex was lying, the number of lies/truths wouldn't tally.

Spoiler! :

1. Rex: "Neither Earl nor I did it."
Assuming this is a lie, it's either Earl or Rex who did it. 1st lie.

2. Jack: "It was Rex or Abe."
True, since the culprit is either Earl or Rex. 1st truth.

3. Abe: "Both Rex and Jack are lying."
Since Rex is lying while Jack is speaking the truth, Abe is lying. 2nd lie.

4. Dan: "Abe's statement is not true; one of them is lying and the other is speaking the truth."
Going by above logic, Dan is speaking the truth. 2nd truth.

5. Earl: "What Dan said is wrong."
If Dan is speaking the truth, and Earl says he's not, then Earl is lying. 3rd lie.

Since there are 3 lies and 2 truths here, the numbers don't tally and as such cannot be used. Hence, the only other way of pinpointing the culprit would to be to assume Rex is telling the truth.

[Umiman]

HC: Yeah, that's the problem.

Spoiler! :

I don't know how to structure this to make it into an example of how it would not work if the first person was lying, so your logic is clear in this situation.

Like I said, if] the first person was lying, it would never work.

[Dan]

Spoiler! :

The most pure(actually measures everything) is:
1 3 9 27

Then looking at it another way, since we are only dealing with whole numbers, if it is less than 2 pounds and greater than 0 pounds, it must be one pound, and if it is more than two pounds and less than 4 pounds, it must be three pounds, we get several (but finite)answers along the lines of
1 4 10 25
2 4 14 20
2 4 12 22
2 4 10 24
2 4 8 26
2 5 13 20
2 5 12 21

I say Dan gets close enough(hm maybe he just hasn't hit the bottom yet).

I see. I never thought of using two different weight systems for one measurement.

So I guess you would weight like this?

Spoiler! :

1: check =1
2:
check >1
check <1(side a) 4(side b)
3:
check =1(side a) 4(side b)


And so on.

Hmmm, I guess it's TGM's turn since he got my mine shaft one that I posted prematurly.

[HolyCow]

HC: Yeah, that's the problem.

Spoiler! :

I don't know how to structure this to make it into an example of how it would not work if the first person was lying, so your logic is clear in this situation.

Like I said, if] the first person was lying, it would never work.

Yea, I understand. But since there's an easy way to solve this, why would you chose the hard way instead?

Most of these puzzles can be solved using simple logic

[Beware the talking cat]

For 1 3 9 27 it's


(where what is being measured is on the right)
1. 1:0
2. 3:1
3. 3:0
4. 3+1:0
5. 9:3+1
6. 9:3
7. 9+1:3
8. 9:1
9. 9:0
10 9+1:0

for the 2, xxxxx it's

1. <2
2. 2: 0
3. 4<3<2
4. 4:0
6. 4+2:0

etc etc etc.
hurrah

[Umiman]

HC: Psh, why is there a hard mode in games?

Besides, the purpose of logic is to defeat or explain assumptions... well, in theory anyway.

Homemade riddle:

I sound like chocolate
covered in a thin, sugar shell;
But the sounds I make
isn't as sweet.

What am I?

[Beware the talking cat]

You are Eminem, the rapper who burns peoples' ears off.

[Umiman]

You and an acquaintance, "Pat", are walking down the street when you meet an older couple with a bag of money. The older couple makes the following offer: We wish to give the two of you $100,000 if you can decide how it should be decided between the two of you in the next 3 minutes. You say, "So, Pat, what do you say? How about fifty thousand dollars each". To your dismay, Pat answers, "Gee, I'm really sorry, but my mother needs an expensive operation. So, I'll take eighty thousand dollars and you can have twenty thousand. I won't settle for anything less!"

What do you do? Insist on an even split and get nothing or take the $20,000 and be happy?