[TommyP] A Round Sum Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Lateral Puzzles » Solved Lateral Thinking Puzzles » Solved Puzzles - November 2009 » [TommyP] A Round Sum « Previous Next »

Author Message
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 548
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Sunday, November 15, 2009 - 12:46 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Working. Destroyed, probably unintentionally. Worth more.
Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member
Username: Galfisk

Post Number: 483
Registered: 9-2009
Posted on Sunday, November 15, 2009 - 1:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is this a sequence of events? Is there an object involved? That worked before, was destroyed, and now doesn't work but is worth more? Is it worth more because it doesn't work? Because how it was destroyed? Is it an historical artifact? A work of art? Was it a machine? Device? Famous person(s) involved? Is it unique? Is that why it's worth more? Was it unique before it was destroyed?
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 549
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Sunday, November 15, 2009 - 2:19 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Galfisk:
Is this a sequence of events? Yes Is there an object involved? Yes That worked before, was destroyed, and now doesn't work but is worth more? Exactly Is it worth more because it doesn't work? Because how it was destroyed? This Is it an historical artifact? A work of art? Was it a machine? Device? This Famous person(s) involved? Yes Is it unique? Noish Is that why it's worth more? Was it unique before it was destroyed?
Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member
Username: Galfisk

Post Number: 491
Registered: 9-2009
Posted on Sunday, November 15, 2009 - 3:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was it destroyed by the famous person? Is that why it's worth more? Is it a guitar smashed by a rock star? If not, OTRT?
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 552
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Sunday, November 15, 2009 - 3:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Galfisk:
Was it destroyed by the famous person? Yes Is that why it's worth more? Yes Is it a guitar smashed by a rock star? No If not, OTRT? No, apart from the famous person deduction
Associate (Associate)
New member
Username: Associate

Post Number: 3
Registered: 11-2009
Posted on Monday, November 16, 2009 - 1:04 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is the "unintentionally" ruling done by the inventor?
A peer speaking?
Is this a true story?
Era/time period relevant?
Religious reasons for destruction?
Ethical reasons?
Orders from an authoritative party?
Orders from a government?
Is the production of the device prohibited?
Is this device scientific? Artistic? Musical? Metaphorical? (i.e. a thought) tangible?
Is the device destructive if properly working?
If so, what can it possibly destroy?
Was it expensive and/or time consuming to make?
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 558
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Monday, November 16, 2009 - 10:09 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Associate:
Is the "unintentionally" ruling done by the inventor? No, I did it and many with me. The "probably" was a bit tongue-in-cheek, it was practically impossible for it to be intentional. Even if he had wanted to do it, which he subconsciously may have wanted deep down. I hope that clears things up...
A peer speaking? Someone did speak it out as well
Is this a true story? Yes, though it's not much of a "story", it happened a few days ago.
Era/time period relevant? Yes, see above
Religious reasons for destruction? No, it was unintentional
Ethical reasons?
Orders from an authoritative party?
Orders from a government?
Is the production of the device prohibited? Not at all
Is this device scientific? I would say technical Artistic? Musical? Metaphorical? (i.e. a thought) tangible? This
Is the device destructive if properly working? Not intentionally, but may show to be so
If so, what can it possibly destroy? People, possibly, beware of being mislead and a small risk of FA
Was it expensive and/or time consuming to make? Not extremely so, no
Associate (Associate)
New member
Username: Associate

Post Number: 13
Registered: 11-2009
Posted on Tuesday, November 17, 2009 - 3:29 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is it valuable due to a discovery? (i.e. rare metal used as power conducter)or any other discovery?
Did he take it apart, and plan to re asseble it?
Was he tweaking/improving it?
Testing?
Working on another invention, and unintentionally doing something to the wrong invention, destroying it?
Is the invention's concept made by the inventor who destroyed it?
Was he sad/angry he destroyed it?
Did he know it was worth more?
Was the construction of the object a show for the public, and was valuable because it showed a screw-up of a well known inventor?
Is it valuable due to the manner of which it was destroyed?
Result of insanity/seizure? (he could have been out of his mind and smashed it, not realizing it was him days later)
Yojimbo (Yojimbo)
New member
Username: Yojimbo

Post Number: 83
Registered: 11-2009
Posted on Tuesday, November 17, 2009 - 6:45 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

was the now-worthless "technical" item used for:
art?
information technology?
hobby/pastime (amazing fishing reel...?)
transportation?
domestic purpose (iMop, iVacuum-cleaner, iPersonal-android, etc...)?
sport?
science: aeronautics,biology, botany, cosmology, etc.
fine dining?
was it destroyed while it was being used for its primary purpose?
was the device unique, or (one of a pair/a few/several/many/lots and lots?) manufactured?
was the device destroyed by the person who made it?
was the person who made the device famous for having made it?
for having made other inventions/devices/innovations?
event (of destruction of the device) captured by media? text/audio/video?
was the media-capture, if any, intended to capture destruction of the device, or other significant event?
was the destruction an unintended result of an event at which there was media capture (or otherwise...)?
has the destruction of the device by the famous person, thus rendering it more valuable (or FA, from "worth more" as I think I read it; can't see the thread now that I'm previewing/spell-cheking my post...?), become the most significant part of the event in most of the minds which are aware of it? is that the meme of it, so to speak? is that Q too vague...?
is/was this a "viral" phenomenon; internet post? video post? forum post? LTPF relevant?
Yojimbo (Yojimbo)
New member
Username: Yojimbo

Post Number: 84
Registered: 11-2009
Posted on Tuesday, November 17, 2009 - 6:46 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

forgot to ask: solid-state or moving parts, or both?
is this post too short?
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 567
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Tuesday, November 17, 2009 - 9:09 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Associate:
Is it valuable due to a discovery? (i.e. rare metal used as power conducter)or any other discovery? No. Why it became more valuable is already established by Galfisk, and it's not that valuable now. Probably a few times more than before.

Did he take it apart, and plan to re asseble it?
Was he tweaking/improving it?
Testing?
Working on another invention, and unintentionally doing something to the wrong invention, destroying it? No to all of these

Is the invention's concept made by the inventor who destroyed it? No and FA
Was he sad/angry he destroyed it? No
Did he know it was worth more? I don't think he gave it a thought
Was the construction of the object a show for the public, and was valuable because it showed a screw-up of a well known inventor? No
Is it valuable due to the manner of which it was destroyed? Possibly, but more because of who destroyed the device
Result of insanity/seizure? (he could have been out of his mind and smashed it, not realizing it was him days later) No

Yojimbo:
was the now-worthless "technical" item used for:
art? FA
information technology? This
hobby/pastime (amazing fishing reel...?)
transportation?
domestic purpose (iMop, iVacuum-cleaner, iPersonal-android, etc...)?
sport?
science: aeronautics,biology, botany, cosmology, etc.
fine dining?
was it destroyed while it was being used for its primary purpose? No
was the device unique, or (one of a pair/a few/several/many/lots and lots? This) manufactured? It was mass-produced in a factory
was the device destroyed by the person who made it? No
was the person who made the device famous for having made it? No
for having made other inventions/devices/innovations? No
event (of destruction of the device) captured by media? text/audio/video? On TV
was the media-capture, if any, intended to capture destruction of the device No, or other significant event? This

was the destruction an unintended result of an event at which there was media capture (or otherwise...)? Yes, though it was more of a side-effect than a result of the event

has the destruction of the device by the famous person, thus rendering it more valuable (or FA, from "worth more" as I think I read it; can't see the thread now that I'm previewing/spell-cheking my post...?), become the most significant part of the event in most of the minds which are aware of it? No, not at all. This was a minor, unintentional "side-show". People will remember the main event.

is that the meme of it, so to speak? is that Q too vague...? The Q is OK, but no, many didn't even notice this mishap and most who did won't think about it a week later

is/was this a "viral" phenomenon; internet post? video post? forum post? LTPF relevant? No to all

solid-state This or moving parts, or both?
Yojimbo (Yojimbo)
New member
Username: Yojimbo

Post Number: 88
Registered: 11-2009
Posted on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 - 12:06 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

was the device hand-held? small enough to be?
a communicator (cell, "handy," iPhone, blackberry...)? navigation device?
camera? other media recorder?
data storage device?
was it destroyed physically? (as in, smashed/other - a tape erased by a strong magnet wouldn't fit that description, in my mind)
was it merely rendered useless for its intended purpose, or was the damage obvious?
would someone require special knowledge to be aware that the device had been destroyed, if they were watching it on TV? or would any idiot (me, for instance) be able to tell it had been destroyed?
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 570
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 - 7:37 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yojimbo:
was the device hand-held? Yes small enough to be?
a communicator (cell, This "handy," iPhone, blackberry...)? navigation device?
camera? other media recorder?
data storage device?

was it destroyed physically? Yes (as in, smashed This/other - a tape erased by a strong magnet wouldn't fit that description, in my mind)
was it merely rendered useless for its intended purpose, or was the damage obvious? Yes
would someone require special knowledge to be aware that the device had been destroyed, if they were watching it on TV? or would any idiot (me, for instance) be able to tell it had been destroyed? It would be obvious, you would also hear it was destroyed
Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member
Username: Galfisk

Post Number: 523
Registered: 9-2009
Posted on Thursday, November 19, 2009 - 2:54 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

So some celebrity destroyed (his? her?) cellphone, and it's worth more as "cellphone destroyed by [celebrity]" than simply as "cellphone"?
Do we need to find out: how it was accidentally destroyed? Who the celebrity was? At what event it happened? Something else?
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 580
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Thursday, November 19, 2009 - 4:34 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Galfisk:
So some celebrity destroyed (his? her?) cellphone, and it's worth more as "cellphone destroyed by [celebrity]" than simply as "cellphone"? Yes
Do we need to find out: how it was accidentally destroyed? Who the celebrity was? At what event it happened? Exactly the three things left to find out :-) Something else?
Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member
Username: Galfisk

Post Number: 534
Registered: 9-2009
Posted on Thursday, November 19, 2009 - 4:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Movie celebrity? Music? Political? Religious? Other?
Was the phone: dropped? Crushed? Opened or closed incorrectly? Subjected to a foreign substance? Was the display damaged? Exact damage relevant?
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 584
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Thursday, November 19, 2009 - 4:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Galfisk:
Movie celebrity? Music? Political? Religious? Other? This
Was the phone: dropped? Crushed? This Opened or closed incorrectly? Subjected to a foreign substance? Was the display damaged? Yes Exact damage relevant? No, it's enough that it was crushed
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 624
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Sunday, November 22, 2009 - 12:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

HINT: The event included "A Round Sum" of money, or at least a lot if it.
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 648
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Wednesday, November 25, 2009 - 1:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I will kill off this puzzle and spiol it since the lateral part of it is more or less done and finding the rest isn't that interesting compared to my two other puzzles, which I will concentrate on for now.
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 652
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Wednesday, November 25, 2009 - 3:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)



*************** SPOILER ***************
The more lateral thinking has already been done on this, so I will spoil the puzzle since finding out the rest is much less interesting than my two other puzzles:

Puzzle statement:
Working. Destroyed, probably unintentionally. Worth more.

We have already found out that it's a cell phone that somehow gets crushed by a celebrity, and because of that is worth more than when it was working.

The setting is a golf tournament just over a week ago, and the celebrity is Tiger Woods. A stray shot, instead of hitting a spectator, hit his cell phone and crushed it. With TV footage proving the autenticity of the accident, it's probably a better idea to sell the phone on eBay than to ask for damages paid. Which he may or may not get, since cell phones are often not allowed at golf tournaments.

Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 657
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Wednesday, November 25, 2009 - 4:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The "Round" in the puzzle statement was a hint to the golf ball. It was maybe also a comment on the $3 million Tiger Woods charged just for coming to the tournament. Just after he had passed the $1 billion in total earnings.
Peter365 (Peter365)
New member
Username: Peter365

Post Number: 2299
Registered: 1-2007
Posted on Thursday, November 26, 2009 - 10:15 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Nice puzzle Tommyp . I did see the incident referred to in the puzzle. On the somewhat controversial subject of Tiger's appearance fee my opinion is that while it's somewhat vulgar for one man to earn this much the presence of Tiger in the field created massive profits for the locality due to the increased attendance and media presence. It's really a win win situation for all involved. I think any golf tournament would want Tiger to be playing in it. Do you agree?
Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member
Username: Tommyp

Post Number: 683
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Thursday, November 26, 2009 - 2:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)


Yes, of course he's free to ask whatever he wants and the tournaments are free to pay what they wants. But "Appearance money" has a bad ring to it here in Sweden, people think that (since he anyway wins such a high percentage of "his" tournaments) he could have demanded the organizers to add $2 million to first price and $1 million to second in the tournaments he attends...

He's a nice guy anyway, and knows the Swedish translation of "Honey, take out the garbage"... :-)

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: