Location: He was responsible for the term “Gordie Howe hat trick”, where a player scored a goal, added an , NB Joined: 02.05.2013
Dec 1 @ 11:24 AM ET
I added the bracket, you multiply first - Streit2ThePoint
correct
also
Thomas Anderson2 months ago (edited)
The correct answer is that there is not sufficient information in the problem.
The "correct" answer is arrived at after a series of unverifiable assumptions, like:
a) the symbol depicting two horse shoes is equivalent to the sum of two symbols depicting one horse shoe
b) the symbol depicting one boot is equivalent to half of the value of the symbol depicting two boots
Since the problem doesn't provide a means to verify the above assumptions, there is no correct answer. The problem is flawed.
In algebraic form, the problem translates to:
X + X + X = 30
X + W + W = 18
W - M = 2
N + X * V = ?
Exactly how do you arrive at V = W/2 and N = M/2 ?
How do you show that the following reasoning is incorrect?
Assumptions:
W = sqr V
M= sqr N
Therefore:
X = 10
W = 4
M = 2
V = 16
N = 4
N + X * V = 4 + 10 * 16 = 164
Conclusion: the answer you arrive at depends on the assumptions you make and there is no way to test your assumptions.
Edit: replaced letters and corrected the calculations.
Location: it's disgusting how good you are at hockeybuzz. Joined: 09.20.2013
Dec 1 @ 11:27 AM ET
correct
also
Thomas Anderson2 months ago (edited)
The correct answer is that there is not sufficient information in the problem.
The "correct" answer is arrived at after a series of unverifiable assumptions, like:
a) the symbol depicting two horse shoes is equivalent to the sum of two symbols depicting one horse shoe
b) the symbol depicting one boot is equivalent to half of the value of the symbol depicting two boots
Since the problem doesn't provide a means to verify the above assumptions, there is no correct answer. The problem is flawed.
In algebraic form, the problem translates to:
X + X + X = 30
X + W + W = 18
W - M = 2
N + X * V = ?
Exactly how do you arrive at V = W/2 and N = M/2 ?
How do you show that the following reasoning is incorrect?
Assumptions:
W = sqr V
M= sqr N
Therefore:
X = 10
W = 4
M = 2
V = 16
N = 4
N + X * V = 4 + 10 * 16 = 164
Conclusion: the answer you arrive at depends on the assumptions you make and there is no way to test your assumptions.
Edit: replaced letters and corrected the calculations.
Location: He was responsible for the term “Gordie Howe hat trick”, where a player scored a goal, added an , NB Joined: 02.05.2013
Dec 1 @ 11:36 AM ET
Damn it you're right. I missed that it's only one horseshoe. - BINGO!
The correct answer is that there is not sufficient information in the problem.
The "correct" answer is arrived at after a series of unverifiable assumptions, like:
a) the symbol depicting two horse shoes is equivalent to the sum of two symbols depicting one horse shoe
b) the symbol depicting one boot is equivalent to half of the value of the symbol depicting two boots
Since the problem doesn't provide a means to verify the above assumptions, there is no correct answer. The problem is flawed.
Location: i love how not saying dumb things on the internet was never an option. Joined: 09.29.2005
Dec 1 @ 11:39 AM ET
i wonder if it feels better to post something thought provoking that initiated all this conversation or to post something stupid and/or incorrect and get called bad names for 2 or 3 posts.
Location: He was responsible for the term “Gordie Howe hat trick”, where a player scored a goal, added an , NB Joined: 02.05.2013
Dec 1 @ 2:01 PM ET
- D0PPELGANGER
The correct answer is that there is not sufficient information in the problem.
The "correct" answer is arrived at after a series of unverifiable assumptions, like:
a) the symbol depicting two horse shoes is equivalent to the sum of two symbols depicting one horse shoe
b) the symbol depicting one boot is equivalent to half of the value of the symbol depicting two boots
Since the problem doesn't provide a means to verify the above assumptions, there is no correct answer. The problem is flawed.
