| Author | Message | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
Is "e.g. including 16.645% by weight" not part of the puzzle? is there even a puzzle? | ||
| Katy (Katy2)
|
And is the 0,035 difference relevant? Is this some sort of advertising? Either direct or inferred? | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
By David Burn (Woubit) on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 08:58 am: Is "e.g. including 16.645% by weight" not part of the puzzle? no it isn't - another careful reading is recommended  is there even a puzzle? I hope so By Katy (Katy2) on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 08:59 am: And is the 0,035 difference relevant? well, yes... Is this some sort of advertising? Either direct or inferred? no | ||
| Amol D. (Amol)
|
16.465% does not come under the catagory "At least 16.5%". Is it still an example of "At least 16.5%" then ? Is this relevant ? | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
By Amol D. (Amol) on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 09:32 am: 16.465% does not come under the catagory "At least 16.5%". At last someone who sees this!! Is it still an example of "At least 16.5%" then ? strictly no Is this relevant ? yes, it is the puzzle! Whyever does the text say this? It is not a typing mistake. Bonus points for finding out what this miserable text is. | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
I am confused: are there two unconnected statements here? | ||
| Katy (Katy2)
|
Is the 16,465 a subset of the 16,5? | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
By David Burn (Woubit) on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 10:31 am: I am confused: are there two unconnected statements here? No. The text gives 16.465 % as an example of "at least 16.5 %", for reasons to be explored. By Katy (Katy2) on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 10:56 am: Is the 16,465 a subset of the 16,5? I'm not certain what you mean, but probably no. | ||
| Amol D. (Amol)
|
negative weights involved ? removal of something ? antigravity relevant ? | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
By Amol D. (Amol) on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 12:47 pm: negative weights involved ? removal of something ? antigravity relevant ? no to all, but excellent ideas | ||
| Amol D. (Amol)
|
Do we have to understand the meaning of `including' better ? Does this somehow mean the `additional' inclusion of 16.465% ? Would the puzzle work if we replace 16.5% by 31.34% and 16.465% by 25.5% ? Is `rounding off' relevant ? | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
By Amol D. (Amol) on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 01:05 pm: Do we have to understand the meaning of `including' better ? no Does this somehow mean the `additional' inclusion of 16.465% ? no Would the puzzle work if we replace 16.5% by 31.34% and 16.465% by 25.5% ? no Is `rounding off' relevant ? somewhere in the right forest, anyhow | ||
| Amol D. (Amol)
|
Is the accuracy of the numbers relevant (e.g. upto 2 or 3 decimal places) ? Would the puzzle work if we replace 16.5% by 26.5% and 16.465% by 26.465% ? Would the puzzle work if we replace 16.5% by 26.5% and keep 16.465% unchanged ? Would the puzzle work if we replace 16.465% by 26.465% and keep 16.5% unchanged ? | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
By Amol D. (Amol) on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 01:40 pm: Is the accuracy of the numbers relevant yes (e.g. upto 2 or 3 decimal places but not quite like this) ? Would the puzzle work if we replace 16.5% by 26.5% and 16.465% by 26.465% ? yes Would the puzzle work if we replace 16.5% by 26.5% and keep 16.465% unchanged ? no Would the puzzle work if we replace 16.465% by 26.465% and keep 16.5% unchanged ? no | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
hello? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
Hello I have forgotten what this is about. Here is a piece of text that says, in effect, "at least 8, which includes 7", but "at least 8" doesn't include 7 - is this right? But I am a bit confused as to what is text and what is puzzle statement. Could you provide a short explanation for silly woubits, please? | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
Well, well. The text says "at least 16.5 % by weight (e. g. including 16.465 % by weight)" which the mathematically minded would agree is incorrect. There is a (lateral) reason why it says so. It is not a simple printing mistake. It can be assumed that two adult people of some gender or another are involved. The answers to Amol of August 27 might provide a bit of insight in the problem. | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
Has someone been mistranslating again? | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
By David Burn (Woubit) on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 11:52 am: Has someone been mistranslating again? no, but OTRT | ||
| tinypoem (Tinypoem)
|
is that fullstop denotes a thousand separator and comma denotes a decimal place? (i believe some languages are like that?) | ||
| Birgitta Ericsson (Brid)
|
By tinypoem (Tinypoem) on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 05:07 pm: is that fullstop denotes a thousand separator and comma denotes a decimal place? (i believe some languages are like that?) a correct notion, but the numbers here mean exactly what they look like in the corrected version of yesterday. Hello, by the way. Have we met before? | ||
| David Burn (Woubit)
|
Does this text appear in a book? on a label? in a set of instructions? in a newspaper? in a magazine? And hello tinypoem I don't think we've met before, but I am familiar with a number of other small pieces of poetry. |
