The Chicken From Minsk Thread

[mutley 4,498]

You said eat or sleep so it must be one of those two?  Me, I would sleep for 14 days then stay awake for another 14 days then eat?

[J G 927]

I think the answer is Die.  At the end of 14 days you have had your time.

[Aircraft Aviation 2]

Me, I would sleep for 14 days then stay awake for another 14 days then eat?

 

This... This is very close. But remember we don't have 28 days, only 14.

 

"You said eat or sleep so it must be one of those two?" - The answer is not definitely one or the other. But why?

 

Another hint - "It is impossible to eat whilst sleeping"

[J G 927]

Problem #4

 

To Eat or Sleep, That Is the Question! - A problem in logic from the gulag: let us assume that one can survive exactly two weeks without food or without sleep. What should you do, eat or sleep, at the end of the fourteenth day without sleep and food?

 

This was the first real hard one for me!

 

The above states that 'one can survive exactly two weeks without food or without sleep' This tells us nothing about how long you can survive without sleep and food.

 

From a medical view, if 2 weeks is as long as you can survive without, one of the two, then this tells us that the body would be further weakened by not having the other one as well. Therefore it would survive less that two weeks or 14 days without sleep and  food.

 

So the answer must be that you do nothing as you already have not survived, as 14 days is too long to survive without both.

 

This assumes that the 14 days are consecutive.

[mutley 4,498]

Must be both then, is an intravenous drip used? ...

[Jess-b 420]

Is the answer irrelevant as you can't eat when you sleep? So in Theory, your only ever lasting 7 full days without either?

[mutley 4,498]

EDIT: Eat or sleep on day one, and you will be alive on day 14?

[Aircraft Aviation 2]

 

Problem #4

 

To Eat or Sleep, That Is the Question! - A problem in logic from the gulag: let us assume that one can survive exactly two weeks without food or without sleep. What should you do, eat or sleep, at the end of the fourteenth day without sleep and food?

 

This was the first real hard one for me!

 

The above states that 'one can survive exactly two weeks without food or without sleep' This tells us nothing about how long you can survive without sleep and food.

 

From a medical view, if 2 weeks is as long as you can survive without, one of the two, then this tells us that the body would be further weakened by not having the other one as well. Therefore it would survive less that two weeks or 14 days without sleep and  food.

 

So the answer must be that you do nothing as you already have not survived, as 14 days is too long to survive without both.

 

This assumes that the 14 days are consecutive.

 

 

Hi John,

 

When the book says "without food or sleep", it means that you cannot survive for 14 days without having slept and eaten at least once during that period. Ie, within a 14 day period you must have eaten AND slept at least once (not slept and slept, and not eaten and eaten).

 

This is some good discussion! And again I'll add, this one had me stumped first time I read it.

[Aircraft Aviation 2]

EDIT: Eat or sleep on day one, and you will be alive on day 14?

 

Getting very close Joe, try combining that answer with what you wrote in your previous post (and I don't mean the intravenous drip one!!!).

[mutley 4,498]

OK sleep day 1, eat day 2 ?

[J G 927]

In that case the answer must be eat or sleep, as either will make you live longer.

[mutley 4,498]

OK sleep day 1, eat day 2 ?

Or day 13 so long as you eat and sleep on different days before the end of the 14th day. 

[J G 927]

Problem #4

 

To Eat or Sleep, That Is the Question! - A problem in logic from the gulag: .............

 

... It could be ...... Escape from the Gulag!

[Kasper 14]

Either as long as it is one of the two. You can survive without one OR the other

[Aircraft Aviation 2]

I think we're going off in slightly the wrong direction; I think Joe was getting very close to the book's answer. Note, I use the word "think" here, because I am not entirely sure that I agree with the book's response.

 

Here is the "answer" in its entirety:

 

"Because you cannot simultaneously sleep and eat, the time from your last sleep and last meal must differ. You must do the last thing you did two weeks before; if you slept and then ate before your ordeal, you must eat first afterward. (Considering the length of the food lines in the former Soviet Union, this could be a very real problem. Would you sleep first or eat first before going to the store?)"

 

The next problem will follow tomorrow (which thankfully has a much more conclusive answer than this one). Sorry if anyone had already gotten this answer, I just didn't want to drag on one particular question whilst missing out on what the rest of the book has to offer.

 

Jack

[allardjd 1,853]

Not sure I agree with their answer for a number of reasons, not least, sleeping takes longer than eating and if the eating deadline is an hour and a half away and the sleeping one is only an hour away, I'd eat first anyway and still have plenty of time to sleep.    If I sleep first, I'll very likely sleep through the eating deadline.

 

If this is what the universities in the former Soviet Union are/were spending their time on, perhaps it's no surprise why the Cold War ended as it did.  It's fun, but it's not science and isn't even particularly applicable to real life so far. 

 

John

[Kasper 14]

I do hope something got lost in translating from Cyrillic because OR and AND are very different beasts in Math. Also the use of exactly in combination with OR has significant meaning in math.

I'm sure I am being pendantic but that's how I see it

[J G 927]

I do hope something got lost in translating from Cyrillic because OR and AND are very different beasts in Math. Also the use of exactly in combination with OR has significant meaning in math.

I'm sure I am being pendantic but that's how I see it

 

That is what confused me at the outset, hence my post with the or and the and highlighted!

 

Having said that the logic of the answer, having had the question clarified seems good.

[Aircraft Aviation 2]

I think that getting it right relies upon very careful attention to the AND/OR statements.

[Aircraft Aviation 2]

Problem #5

 

The Knights and the Pages - Many years ago, three knights waited to cross the river Neva. Each knight had his own page, so there were six people. The boat they had could only carry two. However, the knights were ferocious killers and the pages were terrified. In fact, it was certain that any one of the pages would die of heart failure if he were not protected at every instant from the other knights by the presence of his own master. Was there any way to cross the river without losing a page?

[J G 927]

K=Knight, P=Page

 

Start; K1 P1 K2 P2 K3 P3 Start bank side

 

Trip 1 K1 +P1

Return1 P1

 

Result:  K2 P2 K3 P3 Start bank side

             K1 End Bank side

             P1 in boat

 

Trip 2  P1 + P2

Return P2

 

Result:  K2 K3 P3 Start bank side

             K1 P1 End Bank side

             P2 in boat

 

Trip 3 P2 + K2

Return P2

 

Result:  K3 P3 Start bank side

             K2 K1 P1 End Bank side

             P2 in boat

 

Trip 4 P2 + P3

 

Result:  K3 Start bank side

             K2 P2 K1 P1 End Bank side

             P3 in boat

 

Return P3

Trip 5 K3 + P3

 

Result:   K2 P2 K1 P1 K3 P3 End Bank side

        

 

Job Done!

[allardjd 1,853]

What prevents K2 and/or K3 from killing P1 when he returns to the Start Bank side? The page at that point cannot prevent one of the non-protective Knights getting into the boat and making filets of him.

 

It's not possible, unless a page in the boat is somehow safe from a Knight on the bank, on the same side. That's just word trickery, not logic.

 

John

[Quickmarch 488]

I may be missing something important here, but it appears that the solution is to send each page with his own knight (2/trip) boat always returns empty.

[Aircraft Aviation 2]

K=Knight, P=Page

 

Start; K1 P1 K2 P2 K3 P3 Start bank side

 

Trip 1 K1 +P1

Return1 P1

 

Result:  K2 P2 K3 P3 Start bank side

             K1 End Bank side

             P1 in boat

 

Trip 2  P1 + P2

Return P2

 

Result:  K2 K3 P3 Start bank side

             K1 P1 End Bank side

             P2 in boat

 

Trip 3 P2 + K2

Return P2

 

Result:  K3 P3 Start bank side

             K2 K1 P1 End Bank side

             P2 in boat

 

Trip 4 P2 + P3

 

Result:  K3 Start bank side

             K2 P2 K1 P1 End Bank side

             P3 in boat

 

Return P3

Trip 5 K3 + P3

 

Result:   K2 P2 K1 P1 K3 P3 End Bank side

        

 

Job Done!

 

Good attempt John.

 

One problem here is that when you move P1 back in the boat in your first step, you are moving him back to the side with the other knights without his own knight present (K1). Just because P1 is in the boat doesn't immunize him from the other knights when he's back on the starting bank side. A page can only ever be near the other knights when he is with his own master.

[hifly 925]

Once a page, always a page but once a knight is enough.  

 

These do remind me of Edward de Bonos' Lateral Thinking problems.