• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ultimate math trick question?

I find this kind of riddle very annoying, because it uses certain conventions and then pretends that it did not.

Once you have spoken of a persons age as "four years old," I think you are committed to speaking in the convention of "years old," in which a person is a certain age in years between one birthday and the next. In fact, at least in this culture, we tend to ridicule children or to consider them cutely childish, if they slice it any finer. When a child says "I'm four years and three months old," the statement is almost always belittled.

Thus, as far as I can see, the incompleteness consists merely of the fact that staggered birthdays can result in a variation for a period of time. If my sister turned three after I turned four, there is a period during which she was half my age, or two, and a period during which she was three, and during some of her age in years, I will be one year older, not two. If she turned two after I turned four, there will be a period during which I was four and she was one, as well as a period during which I was four and she was two, and during some of her age, I will be three years older, not two.

But if you don't mean the puzzle to use the standard meaning of "years old," then you should not begin with it.
 
bruto said:
I find this kind of riddle very annoying, because it uses certain conventions and then pretends that it did not.

Once you have spoken of a persons age as "four years old," I think you are committed to speaking in the convention of "years old," in which a person is a certain age in years between one birthday and the next. In fact, at least in this culture, we tend to ridicule children or to consider them cutely childish, if they slice it any finer. When a child says "I'm four years and three months old," the statement is almost always belittled.

Thus, as far as I can see, the incompleteness consists merely of the fact that staggered birthdays can result in a variation for a period of time. If my sister turned three after I turned four, there is a period during which she was half my age, or two, and a period during which she was three, and during some of her age in years, I will be one year older, not two. If she turned two after I turned four, there will be a period during which I was four and she was one, as well as a period during which I was four and she was two, and during some of her age, I will be three years older, not two.

But if you don't mean the puzzle to use the standard meaning of "years old," then you should not begin with it.
Click to expand...

Yes. If the question were to be written with the same degree of accuracy as the answer is expected to have, then the child is exactly four years old (or whatever) because otherwise they'd have mentioned months and days as important information.
 
bruto said:
I find this kind of riddle very annoying, because it uses certain conventions and then pretends that it did not.

Once you have spoken of a persons age as "four years old," I think you are committed to speaking in the convention of "years old," in which a person is a certain age in years between one birthday and the next. In fact, at least in this culture, we tend to ridicule children or to consider them cutely childish, if they slice it any finer. When a child says "I'm four years and three months old," the statement is almost always belittled.

Thus, as far as I can see, the incompleteness consists merely of the fact that staggered birthdays can result in a variation for a period of time. If my sister turned three after I turned four, there is a period during which she was half my age, or two, and a period during which she was three, and during some of her age in years, I will be one year older, not two. If she turned two after I turned four, there will be a period during which I was four and she was one, as well as a period during which I was four and she was two, and during some of her age, I will be three years older, not two.

But if you don't mean the puzzle to use the standard meaning of "years old," then you should not begin with it.
Click to expand...
I see what you are saying as to why it annoys you, however it is your inconsistency that makes it annoying.

For example, "When a child says "I'm four years and three months old," the statement is almost always belittled. " You are exactly correct here. 4 years 3 months is commonly referred to as 4.

But then you state that, " If she turned two after I turned four, there will be a period during which I was four and she was one, as well as a period during which I was four and she was two, and during some of her age, I will be three years older, not two." This is the part that does not follow. While the years convention is true, your age in relation to hers never really varies. You are always the same number of years older than her.(and days) That always remains fixed. So you have tricked yourself.
 
Last edited:
Red Baron Farms said:
I see what you are saying as to why it annoys you, however it is your inconsistency that makes it annoying.

For example, "When a child says "I'm four years and three months old," the statement is almost always belittled. " You are exactly correct here. 4 years 3 months is commonly referred to as 4.

But then you state that, " If she turned two after I turned four, there will be a period during which I was four and she was one, as well as a period during which I was four and she was two, and during some of her age, I will be three years older, not two." This is the part that does not follow. While the years convention is true, your age in relation to hers never really varies. You are always the same number of years older than her.(and days) That always remains fixed. So you have tricked yourself.
Click to expand...


No.

the question lacks the precision expected of the answer.
 
Red Baron Farms said:
I see what you are saying as to why it annoys you, however it is your inconsistency that makes it annoying.

For example, "When a child says "I'm four years and three months old," the statement is almost always belittled. " You are exactly correct here. 4 years 3 months is commonly referred to as 4.

But then you state that, " If she turned two after I turned four, there will be a period during which I was four and she was one, as well as a period during which I was four and she was two, and during some of her age, I will be three years older, not two." This is the part that does not follow. While the years convention is true, your age in relation to hers never really varies. You are always the same number of years older than her.(and days) That always remains fixed. So you have tricked yourself.
Click to expand...
Bollocks. You are claiming that a 20 year old woman born on 29th february is only 5 years old in reality.

This is not how the real world works.
 
abaddon said:
Bollocks. You are claiming that a 20 year old woman born on 29th february is only 5 years old in reality.

This is not how the real world works.
Click to expand...
Bollocks you are telling lies, most likely on purpose. I never said such a thing at all, and in fact the side you argue for is the side making such silly claims as this and others equally silly like a person could be 1 year older one moment and 2 years older a day later, bullocks. They are always exactly the same amount older. AND a woman born on leap year will celebrate her birthdays on non-leap years on February 28th.
 
Red Baron Farms said:
Nope kid eager was right, 14 or 15......never 13 unless you cheat with leap years, black holes or other such nonsense, which I promised already wouldn't be part of the answer.
Click to expand...

Your answer computes ages in days over a ten year period. Your answer should include two leap years. Of course, if you compute ages in years in the usual fashion, the leap years are irrelevant to the answer. So which is it?
 
Red Baron Farms said:
I get that, which is why I have always agreed that 14 is correct, just incomplete.

It bears understanding that the problem did NOT say she was 2 though. This is the clue that signals how the puzzle is to be solved. If it had said, "When I was 4 years old, my sister was 2. Now my sister is 12 years old. How old am I?", then the answer would be either "14" or "13,14,or 15". The wording was changed to make it a puzzle. This is the type of puzzle that the smarter you are for some reason the less likely to get the right answer. We almost automatically insert 2 so strongly it is as if that is what is actually stated in the problem.So when we think deeper and consider the possibility that 4 actually is 4 + up to 364 days and 12 actually is 12 + up to 364 days, we forget that 2 is not actually stated, and we make the incorrect assumption we can state 2 + up to 364 here too.

Some will pick 24 as they double 12. Some will pick 14. Some will pick 13,14,15 not realizing, except for this falling exactly on a leap year 13 doesn't work as 1/2 was used rather than saying 2...which means it is limited to 2+ up to 182 days and the option where the sisters birthday falls prior to, allowing a 13, would mean the original criteria she would have had a chance to be 1. 1 is not half by either way of interpreting the problem so the set of options for that is thrown out. Leaving only 14 and 15, instead of 13, 14 and 15.
Click to expand...

Called it on page 1:

theprestige said:
Oh, I get it: The "trick" is that the question is pointlessly pedantic.
Click to expand...
 
Red Baron Farms said:
Bollocks you are telling lies, most likely on purpose. I never said such a thing at all, and in fact the side you argue for is the side making such silly claims as this and others equally silly like a person could be 1 year older one moment and 2 years older a day later, bullocks. They are always exactly the same amount older. AND a woman born on leap year will celebrate her birthdays on non-leap years on February 28th.
Click to expand...

Red Baron Farms said:
She could be born February 29th and you born on March 1st two years earlier. when you reach 4, she would be 1/2 your age but with a birthday prior to yours in February instead of March. Since leap day babies celebrate their birthdays on February 28th in non-leap years, 10 years later for 1 day you might be 13 while she was 12. It’s cheating a bit, certainly pedantic, but it could be conceived as such. This is different than understanding 4 years means 4 years + up to 364 days in common usage of the term, and half means exactly that, half.
Click to expand...

Those were not your words? You did not concede that you were "quibbling and pedantic and cheating"? No?
 
Red Baron Farms said:
I get that, which is why I have always agreed that 14 is correct, just incomplete.
Click to expand...
It would have gotten very interesting if someone had answered 15. You would have been forced to say that they are correct. But that would be in addition to already saying I was correct with 14. A bizarre situation because the person is both 14 and 15. But they can't be, as they would have to be one or the other. So an incorrect answer is said to be correct.

At that moment, the puzzle collapses upon itself. Claiming "correct but incomplete" does not save you from stating that an incorrect answer is correct.

You cannot run a puzzle or game that way.
 
Dr.Sid said:
So do we know what this guy wants to hear already ? Do we even care ?
Click to expand...

"When I was four, my sister was half my age."

"She was two. I know."

"Yes! And now she's twelve, so how-"

"Oh my god. I already don't care anymore."

"Actually I'm fifteen, you see, because-"

"No, what you are is too old for this nonsense. Now go away and let mommy drink in peace."
 
Red Baron Farms said:
Kid Eager won sorry guys. On this day he was the smartest.
Click to expand...
I have nothing but respect for Kid Eager. He actually bothered to dance your little math dance, and he deserves credit for that.

However, being willing to do arithmetic story problems is not the same as being smart. I think I figured that out by the time my sister was 12.
 
theprestige said:
I have nothing but respect for Kid Eager. He actually bothered to dance your little math dance, and he deserves credit for that.

However, being willing to do arithmetic story problems is not the same as being smart. I think I figured that out by the time my sister was 12.
Click to expand...
Kid Eager also said that 15 would be an answer if you are a smartarse. That was a moment of condescension. A way of both giving the desired answer and saying it's a turd.
 
theprestige said:
I have nothing but respect for Kid Eager. He actually bothered to dance your little math dance, and he deserves credit for that.

However, being willing to do arithmetic story problems is not the same as being smart. I think I figured that out by the time my sister was 12.
Click to expand...

OK I LOLd.
 
William Parcher said:
Kid Eager also said that 15 would be an answer if you are a smartarse. That was a moment of condescension. A way of both giving the desired answer and saying it's a turd.
Click to expand...
And Kid Eager had that right, since he got the question right, by thinking it through. So he was a bit condescending. That's just fine. But from those incapable of "doing the dance", it comes across as sour grapes rather than smugness.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom