Thread: Trick Questions

Recently, my seniors took an interview of me. They asked me a puzzle which is as follows:
You to express 24 with the help of four zeros(0000). You can use any mathematical symbol.

Keep Smiling
Malay

Originally Posted by malaygoel

Recently, my seniors took an interview of me. They asked me a puzzle which is as follows:
You to express 24 with the help of four zeros(0000). You can use any mathematical symbol.

Keep Smiling
Malay

No other limitations?

Hello, Malay!

Express 24 with the help of four zeros (0000). You can use any mathematical symbols.

Answer hidden . . . drag your cursor across the asterisks.

* (0! + 0! + 0! + 0!)! *

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

An oldie . . . Express 64 with two 4's.

* 4^(sqrt{sqrt{sqrt{4!}}} *

Edit: corrected error ... sorry!

Originally Posted by Glaysher

No other limitations?

Originally Posted by Soroban

Hello, Malay!



Answer hidden . . . drag your cursor across the asterisks.

* (0! + 0! + 0! + 0!)! *

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

An oldie . . . Express 64 with two 4's.

So needed line 'without using any other numbers'. Thought it sounded too easy.

Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker

Let X be a non-empty set and let ~ be a relation on X. Why is it that we say need to check reflexisve property if we can show it is it true from symettry and transitivity? Observe, if x~y then y~x (symettric) but then, x~x (transitive). Therefore it is reflexsive!?!?

Either nobody liked it or nobody got it.
That reasoning is wrong. Because in order to be reflexsive a relation much have the propery that x~x for all x. Now, transitive and reflexsice need not to apply to all elements.

why cant you math freaks have a conversation without it turning into a bunch of numbers & signs that regular people cant understand?

Originally Posted by j.c.

why cant you math freaks have a conversation without it turning into a bunch of numbers & signs that regular people cant understand?

.. sorry, but what does the frequency of someones bowel movements have
to do with the price of bacon?

RonL

Symmetry and Transitivity alone do not imply reflexivity. The empty relation in fact vacuously satisfies symmetry and transitivity.

Originally Posted by j.c.

why cant you math freaks have a conversation without it turning into a bunch of numbers & signs that regular people cant understand?

Becuase we are obsessed with it.

Originally Posted by BubbleBrain

Symmetry and Transitivity alone do not imply reflexivity. The empty relation in fact vacuously satisfies symmetry and transitivity.

I already posted a solution in white you need to move mouse over it. Basically, for reflexsivity to exist it must use all the elements but a combination of symettry and transitivity do not.

If I ever become an abstract math professor I would include such a question on an exam. I think it is nice problem, would you not agree? (but you probably got that immediately, but still nice).

Here's a probability question:

Quick's school football team=x
Other school football team=y

if x and y are playing against eachother, and the lead ref is biased, then the percentage of penalties against x is 120% (more penalties called then penalties) and y is 5%

by the end of the game, what is the probability Quick will be frustrated

Originally Posted by Quick

Here's a probability question:

Quick's school football team=x
Other school football team=y

if x and y are playing against eachother, and the lead ref is biased, then the percentage of penalties against x is 120% (more penalties called then penalties) and y is 5%

by the end of the game, what is the probability Quick will be frustrated

I thought these were suposed to be trick questions rather than probability questions, that is what I meant in my last post.
maybe you should make a different thread named after whatever it is you are talking about.
see rule #8

Originally Posted by j.c.

I thought these were suposed to be trick questions rather than probability questions, that is what I meant in my last post.
maybe you should make a different thread named after whatever it is you are talking about.
see rule #8

1) I created this thread and I know it's purposes

2) My question was completely rhetorical (did you read through it?)

3) I have 740+ posts, I think I know the rules.

Originally Posted by Soroban

Hello, Malay!



Answer hidden . . . drag your cursor across the asterisks.

* (0! + 0! + 0! + 0!)! *

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

An oldie . . . Express 64 with two 4's.

* (sqrt{sqrt{sqrt{4!}}} *

I dont get the Express 64 question. How do you solve it? When you square root 4! three times dont you get 1.48?

I came up with another one.

Who was the first person born?

Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker

I came up with another one.

Who was the first person born?

In Judeo-Christian theology that would be Cain, I believe. At least I think he was born before Abel.

I don't know who that would be in, say, the Hindu religion.

Other than that, my bet's with the chicken.

-Dan