The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
My first is in biscuit but never in cake
My second's in awesome but not in great
My third is in mother but not seen in dad
My fourth is in sunny but never in sad
My fifth is a vowel found in water not creek
My sixth is found only in one day of the week
My seventh's two of three that you learn when you're young
My eighth's not in song but it's there when it's sung
My ninth's in eleven and twelve, not thirteen
My tenth is in island and river, not stream
My eleventh's in precious and secret and paste
My twelfth is in phantom and spectre and haste
My whole stalks the night in a quiet dreamlike state
With no memories the next day of being out late
My second's in awesome but not in great
My third is in mother but not seen in dad
My fourth is in sunny but never in sad
My fifth is a vowel found in water not creek
My sixth is found only in one day of the week
My seventh's two of three that you learn when you're young
My eighth's not in song but it's there when it's sung
My ninth's in eleven and twelve, not thirteen
My tenth is in island and river, not stream
My eleventh's in precious and secret and paste
My twelfth is in phantom and spectre and haste
My whole stalks the night in a quiet dreamlike state
With no memories the next day of being out late
Page:
Unbeliever wrote:
> Gangsta Hamsta wrote:
> Unbeliever wrote:
> How quickly using only these two hourglasses can the mentalist boil
> Top Score for the given 9 minutes?
>
>
> How quickly?
> For 9 mins?
> eh?
> confused!
>
> How quickly using only these two hourglasses can you boil Top Score?
If you've got to boil him for 9 mins, then thats how quickly you have to do it?
Do you mean "how can you time 9 mins using these hour glasses?"
> Gangsta Hamsta wrote:
> Unbeliever wrote:
> How quickly using only these two hourglasses can the mentalist boil
> Top Score for the given 9 minutes?
>
>
> How quickly?
> For 9 mins?
> eh?
> confused!
>
> How quickly using only these two hourglasses can you boil Top Score?
If you've got to boil him for 9 mins, then thats how quickly you have to do it?
Do you mean "how can you time 9 mins using these hour glasses?"
14 minutes?
VenomByte wrote:
> I have a similar problem...
>
> A man is imprisoned, waiting for execution. He is told that he will be
> killed some time in the next seven days, but he will not know which
> day he will be killed.
>
> The prisoner reasons that if he isn't dead on the morning of the
> seventh day, it's his last day so he'd have to be killed. However,
> that means that if he woke up on that morning he would know what day
> he was going to die. As he can't know, he reasons that he cannot be
> killed on the seventh day.
>
> Knowing that there is no way he can be killled on the seventh day, he
> applied the same reasoning to the sixth day. If he hasn't been killed
> by then, he won't be because he'd know about it. Therefore he's safe
> on the sixth day, too.
>
> Following this logic on, he then workds out that he can't be killed on
> the fith, fourth, third, second or first days either. So he can't be
> killed.
>
> At noon on the fourth day, he was killed. He wasn't expecting this.
> Where is the hole in his logic?
This is the backwards recursion thing then
ie he can be killed on the 4th day because he has no idea about future events?
With my lion question though, the number does not matter.
There is no difference between 4 sheep and 100 sheep.
> I have a similar problem...
>
> A man is imprisoned, waiting for execution. He is told that he will be
> killed some time in the next seven days, but he will not know which
> day he will be killed.
>
> The prisoner reasons that if he isn't dead on the morning of the
> seventh day, it's his last day so he'd have to be killed. However,
> that means that if he woke up on that morning he would know what day
> he was going to die. As he can't know, he reasons that he cannot be
> killed on the seventh day.
>
> Knowing that there is no way he can be killled on the seventh day, he
> applied the same reasoning to the sixth day. If he hasn't been killed
> by then, he won't be because he'd know about it. Therefore he's safe
> on the sixth day, too.
>
> Following this logic on, he then workds out that he can't be killed on
> the fith, fourth, third, second or first days either. So he can't be
> killed.
>
> At noon on the fourth day, he was killed. He wasn't expecting this.
> Where is the hole in his logic?
This is the backwards recursion thing then
ie he can be killed on the 4th day because he has no idea about future events?
With my lion question though, the number does not matter.
There is no difference between 4 sheep and 100 sheep.
jesus christ this is bein replyed to fast
Okay, big explanation coming up....
Gangsta Hamsta wrote:
> Unbeliever wrote:
> How quickly using only these two hourglasses can the mentalist boil
> Top Score for the given 9 minutes?
>
>
> How quickly?
> For 9 mins?
> eh?
> confused!
How quickly using only these two hourglasses can you boil Top Score?
> Unbeliever wrote:
> How quickly using only these two hourglasses can the mentalist boil
> Top Score for the given 9 minutes?
>
>
> How quickly?
> For 9 mins?
> eh?
> confused!
How quickly using only these two hourglasses can you boil Top Score?
VenomByte wrote:
> Rosalind wrote:
> When the host opens the other box you have in effect removed that
> box
> from play and the chance of my box containing the x-box, drops from
> 1/3 to 1/2.
>
> Wrong.
>
> You made your choice with the box in play, therefore your chances
> cannot change. Have alook at my comments on this prob a few posts ago.
Why can't your chances change?
> Rosalind wrote:
> When the host opens the other box you have in effect removed that
> box
> from play and the chance of my box containing the x-box, drops from
> 1/3 to 1/2.
>
> Wrong.
>
> You made your choice with the box in play, therefore your chances
> cannot change. Have alook at my comments on this prob a few posts ago.
Why can't your chances change?
Rosalind wrote:
>
> When the host opens the other box you have in effect removed that box
> from play and the chance of my box containing the x-box, drops from
> 1/3 to 1/2.
no, because for a start thats a raise from 1/3 to 1/2,
and secondly because the host knows where the poo is and where the x box is. You place a constraint on his choices by choosing a box. So given he will only open a box containing poo, the box you didn't choose now has a two thords chance of being the winner
>
> When the host opens the other box you have in effect removed that box
> from play and the chance of my box containing the x-box, drops from
> 1/3 to 1/2.
no, because for a start thats a raise from 1/3 to 1/2,
and secondly because the host knows where the poo is and where the x box is. You place a constraint on his choices by choosing a box. So given he will only open a box containing poo, the box you didn't choose now has a two thords chance of being the winner
Rosalind wrote:
> When the host opens the other box you have in effect removed that box
> from play and the chance of my box containing the x-box, drops from
> 1/3 to 1/2.
Wrong.
You made your choice with the box in play, therefore your chances cannot change. Have alook at my comments on this prob a few posts ago.
> When the host opens the other box you have in effect removed that box
> from play and the chance of my box containing the x-box, drops from
> 1/3 to 1/2.
Wrong.
You made your choice with the box in play, therefore your chances cannot change. Have alook at my comments on this prob a few posts ago.
Unbeliever wrote:
> How quickly using only these two hourglasses can the mentalist boil
> Top Score for the given 9 minutes?
How quickly?
For 9 mins?
eh?
confused!
> How quickly using only these two hourglasses can the mentalist boil
> Top Score for the given 9 minutes?
How quickly?
For 9 mins?
eh?
confused!
Page: