Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => General Topics => Topic started by: suckmymuscle on March 13, 2011, 03:52:25 PM
-
A couple months ago I posted the following problem as a challenge to Ross Erstling to prove he has an IQ of 160:
"A certain gear system consists of 5 concentric, superposed discs: A, B, C, D and E, which are mounted on a solid platform, taken as a stationary reference. The discs have different sizes and spin at different speeds. All the discs spin at constant rates, some clockwise, some anticlockwise. Each disc has a red dot on its surface, and initially all these red dots are not lined up. At a given moment, all the discs start to spin simultaneously, each at its own speed, without any contact between them. It takes 7 minutes for disc A, 13 minutes for disc B, 17 minutes for disc C, 19 minutes for disc D and 23 minutes for disc E to complete a full 360-degree spin. After a certain time, all the red dots were aligned, disc A being in the same position that it was 2 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc B being in the same position that it was 3 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc C being in the same position that it was 4 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc D being in the same position that it was 7 minutes after the discs started to spin, and disc E being the same position that it was 9 minutes after the discs started to spin. How much time elapsed from the moment the discs started to spin until the discs reached that configuration for the first time?"
Since he couldn't solve it, here is the solution by yours truly:
The problem is a tricky one, as most of the information given is irrelevant. The speed and direction of rotation of each disk is irrelevant as well as the fact that each dot is in a different position at the start of the movement, as this would only allow us to determine their relative positions in relation to one another if they had the same starting position as well as speed and turned in the same direction, clockwise or counter-clockwise. The only relevant information given are the amount of time each disk takes to turn - which absolutely makes the speed of rotation of the disks irrelevant. The fact that the time the disks take to spin is also given makes the information that some turn clockwise and others counter-clockwise irrelevant as well, since irrespective they will always be in the same position in the disk compared to the starting point! The final relevant information is that they all start spinning at the same time. We also know that at least 9 minutes have transpired since the disks started spinning, as this information is given. Taking into account all this, the solution is as follows: 9 minutes have transpired from the time the disks started spinning until the red dots on their surfaces were aligned. Explanation: since you know that at least 9 minutes have transpired since the disks started spinning, and since you can manipulate the speed and direction of rotations of the disks as you like and that they have different starting positions, you can align them whenever you want by manipulating the speed and direction of their rotation in the time alloted. This can be done to the intermediary disks, but since they all start spinning at the same moment, the size of the tiniest disk is relevant The only thing you need is to observe that the time it takes the largest disk to be at the minimum time alloted(9 minutes) coinceades with two minutes after the tiniest disk takes to complete a full 360 degree turn, which is 7 minutes. Two minutes after the smallest disks takes a full turn, it is once again at the point it was 2 minutes after it started spinning and that adds up to 9 minutes. Problem solved.
So there you have it, guys. Chalk one up for the gorilla expert! Have a pleasant day. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
A couple months ago I posted the following problem as a challenge to Ross Erstling to prove he has an IQ of 160:
"A certain gear system consists of 5 concentric, superposed discs: A, B, C, D and E, which are mounted on a solid platform, taken as a stationary reference. The discs have different sizes and spin at different speeds. All the discs spin at constant rates, some clockwise, some anticlockwise. Each disc has a red dot on its surface, and initially all these red dots are not lined up. At a given moment, all the discs start to spin simultaneously, each at its own speed, without any contact between them. It takes 7 minutes for disc A, 13 minutes for disc B, 17 minutes for disc C, 19 minutes for disc D and 23 minutes for disc E to complete a full 360-degree spin. After a certain time, all the red dots were aligned, disc A being in the same position that it was 2 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc B being in the same position that it was 3 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc C being in the same position that it was 4 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc D being in the same position that it was 7 minutes after the discs started to spin, and disc E being the same position that it was 9 minutes after the discs started to spin. How much time elapsed from the moment the discs started to spin until the discs reached that configuration for the first time?"
Since he couldn't solve it, here is the solution by yours truly:
The problem is a tricky one, as most of the information given is irrelevant. The speed and direction of rotation of each disk is irrelevant as well as the fact that each dot is in a different position at the start of the movement, as this would only allow us to determine their relative positions in relation to one another if they had the same starting position as well as speed and turned in the same direction, clockwise or counter-clockwise. The only relevant information given are the amount of time each disk takes to turn - which absolutely makes the speed of rotation of the disks irrelevant. The fact that the time the disks take to spin is also given makes the information that some turn clockwise and others counter-clockwise irrelevant as well, since irrespective they will always be in the same position in the disk compared to the starting point! The final relevant information is that they all start spinning at the same time. We also know that at least 9 minutes have transpired since the disks started spinning, as this information is given. Taking into account all this, the solution is as follows: 9 minutes have transpired since the disks started spinning. Explanation: since you know that at least 9 minutes have transpired since the disks started spinning, and since you can manipulate the speed and direction of rotations of the disks as you like and that they have different starting positions, you can align them whenever you want by manipulating the speed and direction of their rotation in the time alloted. This can be done to the intermediary disks, but since they all start spinning at the same moment, the size of the tiniest disk is relevant The only thing you need is to observe that the time it takes the largest disk to be at the minimum time alloted(9 minutes) coinceades with two minutes after the tiniest disk takes to complete a full 360 degree turn. Problem solved.
So there you have it, guys. Chalk one up for the expert on gorillas! Have a pleasant day. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
You're so full of shit, you make True Adonis seem reasonable.
-
You're so full of shit, you make True Adonis seem reasonable.
Do you want to question the solution? I assure you it is correct.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Do you want to question the solution? I assure you it is correct.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I'm sure it is too since you just copy/pasted it off a website. ::)
-
I'm sure it is too since you just copy/pasted it off a website.
If you can find the solution online and post it here, I will delete my account and never post here again. Happy hunting! :D
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
140 is considered genius. When you get to IQ's like 160, those people seem to have no skills. Things like bathing, brushing teeth, social behavior, etc. etc. are non-existent. Unless that is..if they have handlers.
BE/ACT/STAY POSITIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
If you can find the solution online and post it here, I will delete my account and never post here again. Happy hunting! :D
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Yes, I'm going to search all over the internet for an answer, find it, and have you go nowhere. ::)
Or I could ask you to prove it is correct.........
-
Yes, I'm going to search all over the internet for an answer, find it, and have you go nowhere.
I promise you I will delete my account if you find it and prove it wasn't created by you or an acquaintance using my answer with slightly altered words to make it seem original. The way to do that is to prove the answer was written before I posted mine here. You have my word, and nothing to lose except time.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Or I could ask you to prove it is correct.........
You are kidding, right? I could understand this if I had only given the answer, but I gave a whole step-by-step explanation for the answer. It's not my fault that you are too stupid to understand the explanation.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
You are kidding, right? I could understand this if I had only given the answer, but I gave a whole step-by-step explanation for the answer. It's not my fault that you are too stupid to understand the explanation.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I'm busy Googling.....don't bother me.
-
Someone pointed out months ago where suckmymuscle ripped this from.
-
Thank God we have the solution, I'd been losing sleep over this ever since it was posted weeks ago.
-
Someone pointed out months ago where suckmymuscle ripped this from.
Really? Find it online, prove it was posted there before I posted my answer here, and I am gone forever! :)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Really? Find it online, prove it was posted there before I posted my answer here, and I am gone forever! :)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Getbig's search system blows and I'm nowhere near interested enough to waste my time. But rest assured, no one on here thinks you're smarter than all the MIT professors you claim couldn't solve it.
-
You're so full of shit, you make True Adonis seem reasonable.
LOL QFT!
-
Getbig's search system blows and I'm nowhere near interested enough to waste my time. But rest assured, no one on here thinks you're smarter than all the MIT professors you claim couldn't solve it.
LOL, the answer is nowhere to be found on Getbig before I posted my solution here...
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
THREAD SAVED
-
LMAO. What a pompous asshole this guy is.
My I.q. has been tested as high too actually. But i'm not enough of a ccunt to go around bragging about it.
"I have a high i.q. I'm so intelligent...." Fuck off with that bullshit you stupid bitch.
-
THREAD SAVED
I like em' young, bro, but keep them over 18 please. :D
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
You do not need an IQ of anything near 160 to calculate this as the key was that you were not given a starting position other than they are not aligned. By doing 5 test calculations on the rotations you are free to determine your starting points, too many people pay attention to the BS which is there for a reason.
Have you tried the science section on Sporcle - im sure you will be occupied endlessly ::)
-
Isn't this one of the Sigma Society tests?
-
You do not need an IQ of anything near 160 to calculate this as the key was that you were not given a starting position other than they are not aligned. By doing 5 test calculations on the rotations you are free to determine your starting points, too many people pay attention to the BS which is there for a reason.
Have you tried the science section on Sporcle - im sure you will be occupied endlessly
This problem was given to a sample of physics and math professors at M.I.T to determine the norm for the "Sigma Test" by Hindemburg Melão Junior, and only 1% was able to solve. The average IQ of M.I.T math and physics professors is 145, so this means that an IQ of 162+ is required to solve it. So an IQ of 160 is an underestimate of what is required to solve this.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
steriods
-
Isn't this one of the Sigma Society tests?
Yes, I took it from the level VII section - and the answer is not online, you can check that -, which is used to determine IQs between 157 and 176. This problem theoretically requires an IQ of 160 to be solved, but in reality requires 162+.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Where do you continually come up with 162+? It says nothing of the sort on their website.
Oh and while we're at it........how did that whole Delta thing work out for you?
LMAO.........trolls..... .at least Adonis is consistant. ;)
I'm more interested in the training of Delta Force members. Those guys are he elite of the elite, of the armed forces. Do you have any information about their training?
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I became liutenant-colonel of the elite Delta Force reserve division years ago, but I had to step down a couple years ago when, during a tactical unarmed combat training session, I ripped the rotator cuff muscle of a recruit while teaching him how to give an overhand armlock. I was 330 lbs and apparently too strong for the special forces. There was another reason why I was put in the reserve, though. They couldn't have dismissed me on the accusation that I lacked stamina due to my size, since I could climb cliffs with one hand despite my size, so they argued instead that my size was so overwhelming that it compromised the stealth of any unit I was a part of.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Has this beast of a man ever posted any pictures? 330lbs and able to climb cliffs with one hand, that's gotta be some sort of benchmark in the evolution of man... not to mention 160+IQ, part of elite forces, broke the spine of a german shepherd etc.
Lets take a look at this elite specimen. C'mon sucky, what ya got to hide?
-
What is it with this whole IQ booolshit? Not like that is gonna get you a new car, better friends ("Heeey, I have a IQ 162+")
or Women, "What's the smallest bird in the world.. answer Bee Hummingbird.... Now why don't you give me your number."
if you are a genius then fine, but this "Nannie-Nannie, Boo-Boo, I'm smarter than You-Hoo"
shows a real lack of tact, because, nobody goes around talking about how high, or how low their IQ is.
-
Has this beast of a man ever posted any pictures? 330lbs and able to climb cliffs with one hand, that's gotta be some sort of benchmark in the evolution of man... not to mention 160+IQ, part of elite forces, broke the spine of a german shepherd etc.
Lets take a look at this elite specimen. C'mon sucky, what ya got to hide?
He's just like that guy pumpster or fatpanda.
Some bitch ass punk. Some lying little fagggot. Some dirty pussy who talks out his ass and lives in a fantasy world with delusions of granduer.
I would teabag that mother fucker and piss in his eyes if I met him on the street.
-
Where do you continually come up with 162+? It says nothing of the sort on their website.
The norm was published by Hindemburg Melão at the website back in 2005 when I first tried the Sigma Test, but now it is no longer available at their website. I know the test's ceiling is 202 and 25 correct answers equals IQ 165.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
He's just like that guy pumpster or fatpanda.
Some bitch ass punk. Some lying little fagggot. Some dirty pussy who talks out his ass and lives in a fantasy world with delusions of granduer.
I would teabag that mother fucker and piss in his eyes if I met him on the street.
Ha ha...your retarded rage amuses me. And you wouldn't do anything to me except say "yes, Sir" if we met. Even now that I am of steroids, I am still a lean 240 lbs at 1.94 meter tall(6'4 1/2).
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
The norm was published by Hindemburg Melão at the website back in 2005 when I first tried the Sigma Test, but now it is no longer available at their website. I know the test's ceiling is 202 and 25 correct answers equals IQ 165.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I've had several i.q. tests.
Once I scored 142. Once I was 119. Once I scored 132.
Seems like these tests are inconsistent anyway.
SuckMyMuscle is just desperately trying to keep his fragile ego from crashing in on itself.
-
Ha ha...your retarded rage amuses me. And you wouldn't do anything to me except say "yes, Sir" if we met. Even now that I am of steroids, I am still a lean 240 lbs at 1.94 meter tall(6'4 1/2).
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Bullshit.
Post a picture then to prove it. If you have a great physique then why wouldn't you post a picture?
Because you're fucking lying. That's why.
-
Where do you continually come up with 162+? It says nothing of the sort on their website.
Oh and while we're at it........how did that whole Delta thing work out for you?
LMAO.........trolls..... .at least Adonis is consistant. ;)
He's the best gimmick on Getbig.
But that still doesn't change the fact that every person on this site has a tested IQ over 130.
-
He's the best gimmick on Getbig.
But that still doesn't change the fact that every person on this site has a tested IQ over 130.
I am no gimmick. You on the other hand. Lol...
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
The norm was published by Hindemburg Melão at the website back in 2005 when I first tried the Sigma Test, but now it is no longer available at their website. I know the test's ceiling is 202 and 25 correct answers equals IQ 165.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
It only list a number of right answers for each level.....says nothing about any IQ in correlation with specific questions in those levels....in other words, a person could get that question wrong, yet answer the rest of the questions in that level right and continue on to the next several levels giving him/her a much higher IQ, yet still answering this particular question wrong.
So what's the big fuckin deal here? And I do believe you yourself said the answer to this question was to be published in some Mensa journal shortly after you posted it.
Oh wait.........
This brutish-looking guido claims an IQ of 160, which would put him far above your average M.I.T professor(IQ 143) and in the same league as Darwin, Kepler, Kant and Maxwell in intelligence. Well, this is Ross' chance to prove it!!!!!! This problem was published in the Mensa journal and so far over 3,000 Mensans(average IQ 136) have unsuccessfully tried to solve it. This problem was presented to a group consisting of 200 M.I.T and CalTech physics and math professors(average IQ 143) and none could solve the problem. Estimates that 99.997% of the general population cannot solve it.
The problem has been solved by me and by two others I am aware of. Here is the problem:
A certain gear system consists of five concentric, superimposed discs: A, B, C, D and E, which are mounted on a solid platform, taken as a stationary reference. The discs have different sizes and spin at different speeds. All the discs spin at constant speed, some clockwise and some counter-clockwise. Each disc has a red dot on it's surface, and initially all these dots are not lined up. At a given moment, all the discs start spinning simultaneously, each at their own speed, without any contact between them. It takes 7 minutes for disc A, 13 minutes for disc B, 17 minutes for disc C, 19 minutes for disc D and 23 minutes for disc E to complete a full 360 degree spin. After a certain time, all discs were aligned, disc A being in the same position it was 2 minutes after it started spinning, disc B being in the same position it was 3 minutes after it started spinning, disc C being in the same position it was 4 minutes after it started spinning, disc D being in the same position it was 7 minutes after it started to spin and disc E being in the same position it was 9 minutes after it started to spin. How much time elapsed from the moment the discs started to spin until the discs reached that configuration for the first time?
Out of 200 M.I.T math professors none was able to solve this problem, but since Ross has an IQ over a full standard deviation above your typical MIT professor, he should be able to solve it. An IQ of 160 or higher is required to solve this problem. If Ross doesen't publish his answer I will publish it in 5 days.
If there are other Getbiggers out there who can solve this problem, I am asking you not to publish it because I don't want Ross to have any excuses for why he diidn't solve it.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
P.S - Ross, don't even try Googling for the answer becuse it is not there. Only three people in the World have solved this problem so far.
Because the guy who designed the question(Nikos Lygeros) told me that the answer is correct and the people who publish the Mensa journal accepted my solution. You are right, though, that just telling you the answer would be meaningless since you lack the mental capacity to confirm for yourself that the answer is correct. You will know it because the answer will be published next month in the Mensa journal and you will have read it here first. From me.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
So lets just assume you picked up a Mensa journal and copy/pasted the answer....... :)
-
Bullshit.
Post a picture then to prove it. If you have a great physique then why wouldn't you post a picture?
Because you're fucking lying. That's why.
Are you saying SMM is not a IQ 270 300lbs 3%bf Ex-super-Marine-Delta-Force-Warrior that breaks german shepherds spines like other people pencils?
-
IQ means nothing... anyone that talks about their IQ is an asshole. End of thread.
-
It only list a number of right answers for each level.....says nothing about any IQ in correlation with specific questions in those levels....in other words, a person could get that question wrong, yet answer the rest of the questions in that level right and continue on to the next several levels giving him/her a much higher IQ, yet still answering this particular question wrong.
So what's the big fuckin deal here? And I do believe you yourself said the answer to this question was to be published in some Mensa journal shortly after you posted it.
Oh wait.........
So lets just assume you picked up a Mensa journal and copy/pasted the answer....... :)
Solutions to problems proposed at the Mensa journal are posted there. The solution to this problem has never been published. The solutions are open to the public and you can check it. :)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Solutions to problems proposed at the Mensa journal are posted there. The solution to this problem has never been published. The solutions are open to the public and you can check it. :)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
So you lied ???
-
So you lied ???
Aout what? I cannot state for sure whether Mensa will publish the answer to a problem or not. I don't publish the Mensa journal.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Aout what? I cannot state for sure whether Mensa will publish the answer to a problem or not. I don't publish the Mensa journal.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
You said it would be published next month.....back in October.
-
You said it would be published next month.....back in October.
I have no control over what Mensa publishes or not.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
WISDOM>intelligence
-
I have no control over what Mensa publishes or not.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
You made the post, not me...liar.
And now you expect us to believe you solved this puzzle? LMAO!! ;D
-
You made the post, not me...liar.
And now you expect us to believe you solved this puzzle? LMAO!! ;D
The answer is nowhere to be found, not online or on the archives of the Mensa journal. Yes, I have solved the problem. I know you don't like it but it's simply a fact. Accept it. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
The answer is nowhere to be found, not online or on the archives of the Mensa journal. Yes, I have solved the problem. I know you don't like it but it's simply a fact. Accept it. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Prove you solved it.
-
The answer is nowhere to be found, not online or on the archives of the Mensa journal. Yes, I have solved the problem. I know you don't like it but it's simply a fact. Accept it. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
why did it take you so long to find the answer online and post it solve it and post the answer here?
-
Prove you solved it.
It's very simple: the answer is not online and very few people, even among M.I.T professors, can solve it. Odds are massively stacked in favor of me having solved it. :)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
why did it take you so long to find the answer online and post it solve it and post the answer here?
Find the answer online, prove it was posted before I posted my answer, and I will delete my account and never post on Getbig again. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
I'm busy Googlingdoing research.....don't bother me.
-
Find the answer online, prove it was posted before I posted my answer, and I will delete my account and never post on Getbig again. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
okay, let's asssume the answer isn't online. why did it take you 4 months to figure it out and post the answer here?
-
What is it with this whole IQ booolshit?
Translation = (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4ify7vDXrDs/TS8qjyI_hUI/AAAAAAAAG4s/lCQ8-CApjxk/s1600/race-and-iq.jpeg)
;D
and SMM, you should be able to answer > 40 of these questions correctly http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/titan.html (http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/titan.html)
-
Translation = (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4ify7vDXrDs/TS8qjyI_hUI/AAAAAAAAG4s/lCQ8-CApjxk/s1600/race-and-iq.jpeg)
;D
and SMM, you should be able to answer > 40 of these questions correctly http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/titan.html (http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/titan.html)
Hoeflin's tests require too much specific knowledge of mathematics, very good visuo-spatial skills, which don't correlate with general intelligence to a high degree and a rich English vocabulary. Because of this, the test gives inflated results by as much as 40 points to those know a lot of math and have sharp eyes. I don't know more math than basic college level(calculus II, III) and English is not my first language, so I would flunk Hoeflin's tests.
SUKCMYMUSCLE
-
Wow. FatPanda was a piker compared to this douche nozzle. Smart like streetcar.
-
Wow. FatPanda was a piker compared to this douche nozzle. Smart like streetcar.
x2
-
It's funny that the two above posters, who hate my guts, have pictures of apes on their avatars just like me. How ironic.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_do_monkeys_or_apes_at_the_zoo_throw_their_feces
-
Bump for MensaBob to reply! He said I couldn't solve it and I proved him wrong. Classic owning.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
You do not need an IQ of anything near 160 to calculate this as the key was that you were not given a starting position other than they are not aligned. By doing 5 test calculations on the rotations you are free to determine your starting points, too many people pay attention to the BS which is there for a reason.
Have you tried the science section on Sporcle - im sure you will be occupied endlessly
Lmao, no, the problem does require an IQ of 162+ to be solved. Most doctorates in physics and math cannot solve this.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Lmao, no, the problem does require an IQ of 162+ to be solved. Most doctorates in physics and math cannot solve this.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
LOL So if i can solve a math problem that 100 people with IQ's of 160+ cannot solve, that means I have a higher IQ too according to your flawed logic. ::) Sorry bro doesn't work like that, but if it makes you feel better boasting on a bbing board about the fact that you have a 162+ IQ, enjoy!
THREAD OVER.
-
i would answer but i have beans to fart and places to go
-
-
okay, let's asssume the answer isn't online. why did it take you 4 months to figure it out and post the answer here?
I had solved this problem a long time ago but had forgotten the solution. I posed the challenge confident that Erstling wouldn't be able to solve it, and even though I knew people would demand the answer from me, I didn't care. I got called on it repeatedly by MensaBob and since he wouldn't let it go, I decided to own him and finally sat down to solve it. MensaBob has been very quiet since the day I posted this. The reason why it took so long is that I hoped people would forget about it. All I really wanted was to show the whole board what an imbecile Ross Erstling is, not to show everyone how smart I am. The problem is pretty hard and it pushed me. According to statistics, only 1 in 20,000 people has the brain power to solve this(IQ 162+)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
According to statistics, only 1 in 20,000 people has the brain power to solve this(IQ 162+)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Your earlier posts said only 3 people in the world solved this, you of course being one of them. ::)
-
Your earlier posts said only 3 people in the world solved this, you of course being one of them.
2 or 3 people have solved it, but 300,000 have the intelligence for it. The reason why only 3 people have solved it is because only a few hundred people took interest in the test, and out of those only 3 had an IQ 162+. Simple as that.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Where do you continually come up with 162+? It says nothing of the sort on their website.
Oh and while we're at it........how did that whole Delta thing work out for you?
LMAO.........trolls..... .at least Adonis is consistant. ;)
Haha, that's classic suckmymuscle bullshit.. ;D
-
Haha, that's classic suckmymuscle bullshit.. ;D
Funny how so few see it....Adonis is much better at it though, SMM needs to work on his trolling abilities.
-
Funny how so few see it....Adonis is much better at it though, SMM needs to work on his trolling abilities.
I think you should stop being such a callous and spiteful bitch and give me props for having solved the problem.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
I think you should stop being such a callous and spiteful bitch and give me props for having solved the problem.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
So you saying you knew the solution..However, you forgot the solution...Which in turn you took 4 months to solve said solution once again for the second time...
I'm calling Major league bullshit on that..
-
So you saying you knew the solution..However, you forgot the solution...Which in turn you took 4 months to solve said solution once again for the second time...
I'm calling Major league bullshit on that..
Oh, now you did it!!!!!!!!!!
Prove he didn't solve it and he will delete his account!!! Find the answer, posted BEFORE his answer and he will delete his account!!!
Epic dropping drool and food crumbs in his keyboard for 4 months trying to find the answer online.
-
You can self-suck yourself into a coma you insipid turd....no one thinks you solved it.
You are a gimmick and we all know it....that is all
-
So many spiteful, jealous people. The bottom line is that I solved it. Deal with it.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
So many spiteful, jealous people. The bottom line is that I solved it. Deal with it.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Lighten up, Francis!! ::)
-
Awesome bodybuilding related thread!
-
Epic dropping drool and food crumbs in his keyboard for 4 months trying to find the answer online.
You truly are a sore loser. You know the answer isn't online and you won't admit it because you don't want to give me credit. It is very simple.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
You truly are a sore loser. You know the answer isn't online and you won't admit it because you don't want to give me credit. It is very simple.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Lighten up, Francis.
-
Lighten up, Francis.
Stop trolling, Beavis!
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
I'm trying to solve this problem right now. I'm glad I didn't read suckmymuscle's solution first...
-
I wish I could remember some programming right now, cause this could take a while lol...
edit -
i got 477,857 minutes. suckmymuscle, have you had your answer confirmed by anyone?
-
I'm trying to solve this problem right now. I'm glad I didn't read suckmymuscle's solution first...
There is only one way to solve this problem. Let us see if you arrive at the same solution as yours truly.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
A couple months ago I posted the following problem as a challenge to Ross Erstling to prove he has an IQ of 160:
"A certain gear system consists of 5 concentric, superposed discs: A, B, C, D and E, which are mounted on a solid platform, taken as a stationary reference. The discs have different sizes and spin at different speeds. All the discs spin at constant rates, some clockwise, some anticlockwise. Each disc has a red dot on its surface, and initially all these red dots are not lined up. At a given moment, all the discs start to spin simultaneously, each at its own speed, without any contact between them. It takes 7 minutes for disc A, 13 minutes for disc B, 17 minutes for disc C, 19 minutes for disc D and 23 minutes for disc E to complete a full 360-degree spin. After a certain time, all the red dots were aligned, disc A being in the same position that it was 2 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc B being in the same position that it was 3 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc C being in the same position that it was 4 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc D being in the same position that it was 7 minutes after the discs started to spin, and disc E being the same position that it was 9 minutes after the discs started to spin. How much time elapsed from the moment the discs started to spin until the discs reached that configuration for the first time?"
The solution is as follows: 9 minutes have transpired from the time the disks started spinning until the red dots on their surfaces were aligned. Explanation: since you know that at least 9 minutes have transpired since the disks started spinning, and since you can manipulate the speed and direction of rotations of the disks as you like and that they have different starting positions, you can align them whenever you want by manipulating the speed and direction of their rotation in the time alloted. This can be done to the intermediary disks, but since they all start spinning at the same moment, the size of the tiniest disk is relevant The only thing you need is to observe that the time it takes the largest disk to be at the minimum time alloted(9 minutes) coinceades with two minutes after the tiniest disk takes to complete a full 360 degree turn, which is 7 minutes. Two minutes after the smallest disks takes a full turn, it is once again at the point it was 2 minutes after it started spinning and that adds up to 9 minutes. Problem solved.
So there you have it, guys. Chalk one up for the gorilla expert! Have a pleasant day. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I believe suckmymuscle's answer is original, but also incorrect. I found his explanation rather confusing, but anyway it's pretty easy to demonstrate the problem with his answer of 9 minutes. I tried to make a graphic of this (which would make my explanation very easy to understand) but I don't know how to use my graphics software very well, so I'll just have to explain it in words. For the remainder of my explanation, I'll refer to the time that all the dots were aligned -- which is the answer to this problem -- as "the answer time."
It's true that at least 9 minutes have had to pass, since we know from the prompt that disc E traveled at for least 9 minutes before reaching alignment, at the minimum. You need only look at the behavior of any disc other than A or E to see that the answer CANNOT be 9 minutes. For the simplest example, let's look at disc D.
Here's what we know about disc D from the prompt:
1. It takes 19 minutes for disc D to complete one revolution.
2. Disc D was 7 minutes away from it's starting position at the answer time.
Clearly, given suckmymuscle's answer of 9 minutes, Disc D does not have time to complete one revolution in his solution, since 9 < 19. This shows that the dot on disc D couldn't have hit the same position twice, so suckmymuscle's answer is wrong.
To elaborate -- given suckmymuscle's answer, Disc D simply would have traveled for 9 minutes along it's path, and ended up completing about 1/2 of a revolution (9/19 of a revolution, to be exact). The prompt clearly states that, at the answer time, disc D will be 7 minutes away from the position it started at. In other words, it will have completed 7/19s, or roughly 1/3 of a revolution from its starting point. This fact is obviously incompatible with suckmymuscle's answer, as 7/19 does not equal 9/19.
If that didn't make sense, I'll try to say it even more simply. The prompt clearly tells us that disc D, at the time of the answer, will be about 1/3 of a circle away from its starting point. Suckmymuscle's answer positions disc D at about 1/2 a circle away from its starting point.
Okay, now on to my solution, which I believe is correct:
This problem really isn't that hard. We're looking for a time ("the answer time") so the answer has to be a number of minutes. How do we find it?
Well, the prompt gives us two vital pieces of information for each disc, which will help us solve the problem. The prompt tells us both HOW LONG A FULL REVOLUTION takes for each disc, and HOW FAR AWAY THE DISC IS FROM ITS STARTING POINT at the time of the answer. It's helpful to make a little table of this information (the first number is the revolution, the second number is the displacement):
A - 7, 2
B - 13, 3
C - 17, 4
D - 19, 7
E - 23, 9
So, looking at disc A, you see that a possible answer to this question is 2 minutes. After all, once two minutes have elapsed, disc A will be 2 minutes away from its starting point. The prompt tells us that when disc A is lined up with all the other dots, it will be 2 minutes away from its starting point.
So is 2 minutes the answer? Well, no, because disc B won't be in the correct position until AT LEAST 3 minutes -- the prompt also tells us this. So is three the right answer? Well no, for one thing, 3 minutes in disc A will no longer be in the same position, and Discs C-E haven't even been to the right position even once. Going on in this fashion, you will see that the first reasonable answer to test is 9 minutes.
After 9 minutes, all of the discs will have at least had the chance to get into the right position once. But this is also obviously incorrect, as we have already shown with our disc D example -- after 9 minutes, disc D will have passed the alignment position and be partially through its next revolution.
Now we need to put the final piece of the puzzle into play -- the revolution speed. See, if disc A is in the correct position after 2 minutes, it will also be in that same position at 9 minutes, 16 minutes, 23 minutes, 30 minutes and so on. This is because, as the prompt tells us, disc A completes a full revolution every seven minutes. So, if A is in the correct position after 2 minutes, then seven minutes later it will be in that same position. And seven minutes after that. And seven minutes after that, and so on to eternity.
So now we have a whole host of possible answers, 2 (we know this is wrong), 9 (we also know this is wrong), 16, 23, 30, 37, 44, 51, etc. Those are all the times that disc A will be in the correct position -- multiples of 7, plus 2.
You can do this for all the other discs. Disc B, for example, will be in the correct position after 3 minutes, 16 minutes, 29 minutes and so on (multiples of 13, plus 3).
Once you generate a huge list of all the times that each disc will be in the correct spot, all that's left is for you to find the lowest time that they all share. If there is a time when all the discs are in the correct position, then that time is when they are all aligned, and that is the answer!
This would, obviously, require you to multiply a huge amount of numbers (I started doing it by hand hoping it would, by chance, be a small number) and I would have given up right there if I didn't know a little bit about programming from college.
In the end, this simple program:
main() {
int answer = 0;
int counter = 10;
while(answer == 0) {
counter++;
if ((counter-2)%7 + (counter-3)%13 + (counter-4)%17 + (counter-7)%19 + (counter-9)%23 == 0) {
answer = counter;
}
}
printf("%i", answer);
}
when put through a C compiler, will solve the problem for you... the answer turns out to be 477,857 minutes.
Usually I don't do these sort of problems, because I'm not that great at them, but this one really was pretty easy for me. There's no way a room full of 200 MIT professors, or whatever, couldn't have solved this. I don't know anything about IQ tests, but there's no way you need an "IQ of 160+" (LOL) to solve this problem. It took me about 20-30 minutes to figure out how to solve it, and another half hour or so to remember how to code.
Hopefully my answer is easier to understand than his!
-
Clearly, given suckmymuscle's answer of 9 minutes, Disc D does not have time to complete one revolution in his solution, since 9 < 19. This shows that the dot on disc D couldn't have hit the same position twice, so suckmymuscle's answer is wrong.
You misread it. No where does it state that one full 360 turn has been completed. Read it carefully. It states that the dot was at the same position it was 9 minutes after the disks started spinning. 2 minutes after disk 1 has completed one full 360 turn, will equal 9 minutes elapsed from the beggining of the movement, and we know that all disks started spinning simultaneously, therefore 9 minutes since the movement started will correspond to the same position disk 1 was 2 minutes after it started spinning and 9 minutes after disk E started spinning. My answer is correct.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
You misread it. No where does it state that one full 360 turn has been completed. Read it carefully. It states that the dot was at the same position it was 9 minutes after the disks started spinning. 2 minutes after disk 1 has completed one full 360 turn, will equal 9 minutes elapsed from the beggining of the movement, and we know that all disks started spinning simultaneously, therefore 9 minutes since the movement started will correspond to the same position disk 1 was 2 minutes after it started spinning and 9 minutes after disk E started spinning. My answer is correct.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I didn't misread it. I know it didn't complete one full 360 turn. After 9 minutes, disc D will have progressed... 9 minutes away from its starting point. The prompt clearly says disc D needs to be 7 minutes away from its starting point to be aligned.
It's true that disc A and disc D will be 2 and 9 minutes (ie the correct distance) away from their respective starting points after 9 minutes, but none of the other three discs will be. I simply said disc D hadn't progressed through a full revolution in order to demonstrate that there's no way it could have somehow passed the alignment distance (which it does after 7 minutes) and made it back in time by the 9 minute mark.
-
I didn't misread it. I know it didn't complete one full 360 turn. After 9 minutes, disc D will have progressed... 9 minutes away from its starting point. The prompt clearly says disc D needs to be 7 minutes away from its starting point to be aligned.
It's true that disc A and disc D will be 2 and 9 minutes (ie the correct distance) away from their respective starting points after 9 minutes, but none of the other three discs will be.
Cephiseus, read the problem carefully. It states that the disks turn at different speeds and directions and that they are not aligned. This makes their alignnment a matter of adjusting the speed and direction to whatever you want. Because only disk 1 will complete a full revolution, then the amount of minutes that transpired since the movement began will only be relevant for the disk that made a total revolution, the smallest one, and it only has to correspond to the time that transpired for the disk that took the longest to reach it's final position. My answer is correct.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Cephiseus, read the problem carefully. It states that the disks turn at different speeds and directions and that they are not aligned. This makes their alignnment a matter of adjusting the speed and direction to whatever you want. Because only disk 1 will complete a full revolution, then the amount of minutes that transpired since the movement began will only be relevant for the disk that made a total revolution, the smallest one, and it only has to correspond to the time that transpired for the disk that took the longest to reach it's final position. My answer is correct.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Hes right.
If you read the prompt, it says when the dots are aligned,
disc D being in the same position that it was 7 minutes after the discs started to spin
Therefore your answer cant be correct.
-
Cephiseus, read the problem carefully. It states that the disks turn at different speeds and directions and that they are not aligned. This makes their alignnment a matter of adjusting the speed and direction to whatever you want. Because only disk 1 will complete a full revolution, then the amount of minutes that transpired since the movement began will only be relevant for the disk that made a total revolution, the smallest one, and it only has to correspond to the time that transpired for the disk that took the longest to reach it's final position. My answer is correct.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I think you are getting confused somehow. For one thing, while the direction that the discs move is irrelevant, the speed is clearly fixed and not "whatever you want". The prompt explicitly states the speed that each disc moves (A completes a revolution in 7 minutes, B in thirteen minutes, C in 17 minutes, and so on).
After a certain time, all the red dots were aligned ... disc D being in the same position that it was 7 minutes after the discs started to spin
Take a look at this part of the prompt. The ellipsis does not change the meaning. This clearly states that, at the time the red dots are aligned, disc D will be in the same position it was 7 minutes after it first started to move. You say the answer is 9 minutes. After 9 minutes, disc D will be nine minutes away from the position it was at when it first started to move, not 7.
-
I think you are getting confused somehow. For one thing, while the direction that the discs move is irrelevant, the speed is clearly fixed and not "whatever you want". The prompt explicitly states the speed that each disc moves (A completes a revolution in 7 minutes, B in thirteen minutes, C in 17 minutes, and so on).
Cephiseus, you do not know the size or the direction that the disks spin, so the amount of time the disks take to complete a full revolution has nothing to do with it's speed. The problem especifically says the disks spin at different speeds.
Take a look at this part of the prompt. The ellipsis does not change the meaning. This clearly states that, at the time the red dots are aligned, disc D will be in the same position it was 7 minutes after it first started to move. You say the answer is 9 minutes. After 9 minutes, disc D will be nine minutes away from the position it was at when it first started to move, not 7.
The disks have different sizes, directions of turn, the dots are not aligned and spinning rates so 7 minutes for disk D can and will correspond to 9 minutes for disk E. Imagine that they turn at the same speed - they don't, but I am giving this example to you to make it more clear. The dots are not aligned, so even if they turned at the same speed and direction, the dot of disk D could be aligned after seven minutes with the position of dot in disk E was after 9 minutes. I don't know how to make this any simpler.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Hes right.
If you read the prompt, it says when the dots are aligned,
Therefore your answer cant be correct.
Lol, no. This has nothing to do with anything. Absolutely irrelevant. I am correct in my answer.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Cephiseus, you do not know the size or the direction that the disks spin, so the amount of time the disks take to complete a full revolution has nothing to do with it's speed. The problem especifically says the disks spin at different speeds.
The disks have different sizes, directions of turn, the dots are not aligned and spinning rates so 7 minutes for disk D can and will correspond to 9 minutes for disk E. Imagine that they turn at the same speed - they don't, but I am giving this example to you to make it more clear. The dots are not aligned, so even if they turned at the same speed and direction, the dot of disk D could be aligned after seven minutes with the position of dot in disk E was after 9 minutes. I don't know how to make this any simpler.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Time per revolution is speed! Maybe not in terms of distance, but in terms of degrees per second. Anyway, that's not needed to understand why you are wrong. DISC D COULD NOT BE ALIGNED AT NINE MINUTES.
It is in the alignment position at 7 minutes, and then at every full revolution (ie every 19 minutes) after that. These are the only times it could possibly be aligned with the other dots. It is not aligned at minute 9. That is impossible -- the prompt clearly implies all of this.
-
Time per revolution is speed! Maybe not in terms of distance, but in terms of degrees per second. Anyway, that's not needed to understand why you are wrong. DISC D COULD NOT BE ALIGNED AT NINE MINUTES.
It is aligned at 7 minutes, and then at every full revolution (ie every 19 minutes) after that. These are the only times it is aligned with the other dots. It is not aligned at minute 9. That is impossible -- the prompt clearly implies all of this.
Sigh...
Ok, I am beating a dead horse, so I will explain this to you one last time. If you don't understand, I will let it go and let you think you're right:
What matters here is the position where the dot will be and not the time that elapsed. Since at the beggining of the movement the dots were not aligned and since they move at different speeds and directions, then the position that the dot for disk D will be after 7 minutes can align with the position that the dot on disk E will be after 9 minutes since there is no fixed starting point or stable speed and direction of movement.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Dude, I can't even be bothered to read any of your nonsensical mishmash. I never thought you were a troll, but your "explanation" along with every reply you've made to me has been so obtuse I'm starting to think you really are one. Are you just doing this all for some laughs, because no one seems smart enough to see through your bs? The truth is, I think, no one besides me cared enough to actually examine your answer. If they did, I'm sure plenty of others would see how absurd it seems.
The prompt clearly says that WHEN THE DOTS ARE ALIGNED (according to you, after 9 minutes) Disc D will be SEVEN MINUTES away from it's starting position. After 9 minutes, disc D will be 9 MINUTES AWAY FROM ITS STARTING POSITION, NOT SEVEN.
-
Dude, I can't even be bothered to read any of your nonsensical mishmash. I never thought you we're a troll, but your "explanation" along with every reply you've made to me has been so obtuse I'm starting to think you really are one. Are you just doing this all for some laughs, because no one seems smart enough to see through your bs? The truth is, I think, no one besides me cared enough to actually examine your answer. If they did, I'm sure plenty of others would see how absurd it seems.
The prompt clearly says that WHEN THE DOTS ARE ALIGNED (according to you, after 9 minutes) Disc D will be SEVEN MINUTES away from it's starting position. After 9 minutes, disc D will be 9 MINUTES AWAY FROM ITS STARTING POSITION, NOT SEVEN.
Sigh...the starting positions are not the same, nor are the speed of revolution or the direction of revolution. Why can't you understand this? You are making the a priori assumption that they are all aligned at the start and that they turn at the same speed, which they don't. These are not variables that aloow you calculate the postion the dots will be after a given amount of time.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
I have just re-checked my answer and I am completely right and Cephiseus is wrong. And the really sad thing is that he doesen't even understand why he's wrong. LOL!
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
You are making the a priori assumption that they are all aligned at the start and that they turn at the same speed, which they don't. These are not variables that aloow you calculate the postion the dots will be after a given amount of time.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I didn't assume this. Can you show where I did?
My answer is clear and should be easy for most people to follow. Yours, on the other hand, is written in an obscure style and only properly accounts for discs A and E.
I've plainly showed a flaw in your solution several times, and each time you came back with some nonsensical post about "a priori" assumptions (as if the term "a priori" has any place in a discussion about a completely hypothetical logic problem... I suppose perhaps there was a possibility of me building and consulting a physical model of the rings? LOL), or ring sizes, or speeds, or directions, or starting positions... none of which contain even the shadow of a substantial defense.
At this point, it's up to getbig to judge. I've clearly explained myself and shown you to be wrong, and anyone who reads these posts should come to the same conclusion. If there are any further questions, I'll be happy to answer them.
You have a reputation for being a fraud, a charlatan, an annoying know-it-all. Given the extent and consistency of style in your posting history, and the happenings of this thread, I too believe you genuinely deserve these titles.
-
rocket science.
-
I didn't assume this. Can you show where I did?
My answer is clear and should be easy for most people to follow. Yours, on the other hand, is written in an obscure style and only properly accounts for discs A and E.
I've plainly showed a flaw in your solution several times, and each time you came back with some nonsensical post about "a priori" assumptions (as if the term "a priori" has any place in a discussion about a completely hypothetical logic problem... I suppose perhaps there was a possibility of me building and consulting a physical model of the rings? LOL), or ring sizes, or speeds, or directions, or starting positions... none of which contain even the shadow of a substantial defense.
At this point, it's up to getbig to judge. I've clearly explained myself and shown you to be wrong, and anyone who reads these posts should come to the same conclusion. If there are any further questions, I'll be happy to answer them.
You have a reputation for being a fraud, a charlatan, an annoying know-it-all. Given the extent and consistency of style in your posting history, and the happenings of this thread, I too believe you genuinely deserve these titles.
Why the aggressive attacks, Cephiseus? If you are right then there is no need to get all riled up. The problem is that you are not right. Let me try to explain this to you from a different angle to see if you realize:
Do you really think that the test designer would have made it such that 477,857 minutes have transpired since the disks started moving? That is close to half a million minutes, dudes. That is much more than a month. From a common sense pespective, your answer is impossible.
You are also not taking into consideration that the disks turn in different directions, have different speeds and sizes so two minutes after disk D was in the position it was at seven minutes, it can again be in the position that corresponds to where disk E will be at 9 minutes. This is perfecftly logical as their starting positions, speeds of revolution are all different. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Look SMM, if youre right, and were wrong, it should be simple for you to go find the answer on another website and post it here, correct?
Because basic logic states that disc D must be 7 min from where it started to be aligned, so 9 minutes CANNOT be the right answer, as disc D will be 9 min from where it started, not 7.
-
Look SMM, if youre right, and were wrong, it should be simple for you to go find the answer on another website and post it here, correct?
The answer is not online.
Because basic logic states that disc D must be 7 min from where it started to be aligned, so 9 minutes CANNOT be the right answer, as disc D will be 9 min from where it started, not 7.
Because the disks turn at different speeds and directions, it can be once again at the same position it was after 7 minutes at 9 minutes relative to itself and disk E, which corresponds to the position disk A was at 2 minutes after it started spinning, disk B 3 minutes after it started spinning and disk E 9 minutes after it started spinning. Why can't you guys understand this? :)
SUCkMYMUSCLE
-
Francis being PWNED harshly here. :-\
-
Why is this posted in this section? Outed!!
-
The answer is not online.
Because the disks turn at different speeds and directions, it can be once again at the same position it was after 7 minutes at 9 minutes relative to itself and disk E, which corresponds to the position disk A was at 2 minutes after it started spinning, disk B 3 minutes after it started spinning and disk E 9 minutes after it started spinning. Why can't you guys understand this? :)
SUCkMYMUSCLE
No it cant.
according to this:
19 minutes for disc D to make 1 360* revolution
So it has to take at LEAST 19 minutes for the disc to make one revolution.
And since it has to be 7 minutes away from the starting point, that means it has to go more than 1 revolution to be lined up, which cant happen with less than 19 minutes.
I dont know what the right answer is, but yours is wrong.
Your answer of 9 minutes puts this disc 9 minutes away from its starting point, when the prompt CLEARLY STATES that for disc D to be lined up, it has to be 7 minutes away from its starting point.
This in and of itself renders your answer incorrect. The only way that could work, is if the disc spun so fast that it made a full revolution + some in that time, which it doesnt, as seen by the prompt stating it takes 19 min for disc D to go one full revolution.
Accept it SMM, you fucked up.
-
No it cant.
according to this:So it has to take at LEAST 19 minutes for the disc to make one revolution.
Nowhere does it state the disk has to complete one full revolution.
And since it has to be 7 minutes away from the starting point, that means it has to go more than 1 revolution to be lined up, which cant happen with less than 19 minutes.
How is the fact that it must be at least 7 minutes away fom the starting point means it has to complete one full revolution? It doesen't.
I dont know what the right answer is, but yours is wrong.
My answer is 100% correct.
Your answer of 9 minutes puts this disc 9 minutes away from its starting point, when the prompt CLEARLY STATES that for disc D to be lined up, it has to be 7 minutes away from its starting point.
The starting point are disimilar as well as the direction that they turn, hence the disk can align with the ot on disk E in the position that the red dot was at seven minutes on disk D. This is what you fail to understand.
This in and of itself renders your answer incorrect. The only way that could work, is if the disc spun so fast that it made a full revolution + some in that time, which it doesnt, as seen by the prompt stating it takes 19 min for disc D to go one full revolution.
And it can do exaty that, since the speed of revolution is disimlar for alll the disks. :)
Accept it SMM, you fucked up.
No I haven't
-
lol, no surprise that SMM fucked up.
-
lol, no surprise that SMM fucked up.
No, I haven't. It's not my fault you guys are too stupid to understand this no matter how many times I explain this to you. The dot on disk D can be again in the same position it was after 7 minutes two minutes latter(9 minutes) because the disks spin at different speeds and directions, so there is no corelation between the amount of time that transpired and the positions the dot will be relative to the position on the other disk.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Where do you continually come up with 162+? It says nothing of the sort on their website.
Oh and while we're at it........how did that whole Delta thing work out for you?
LMAO.........trolls..... .at least Adonis is consistant. ;)
1. Delta Force don't have UNARMED training exercises, all their training is LIVE
2. Delta doesn't have a reserve division, hahahah
nice try though
-
I looked at this problem and immediately thought of the "least common multiple" concept, so I tried it that way. Don't know if my answer is correct...
Ok, let's state the facts first...
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___________________
*Premises*
Starting Positions:
Unknown
Directions of movement:
Either clockwise or counterclockwise (i.e. it doesn't matter)
Starting Time [minutes]:
0
Time for Disks to complete 360° turn [minutes || seconds]: (360° time)
Disk A = 7 || 420
Disk B = 13 || 780
Disk C = 17 || 1020
Disk D = 19 || 1140
Disk E = 23 || 1380
Angular velocity (no acceleration involved/constant velocity) [°/second]:
Disk A = 6/7
Disk B = 6/13
Disk C = 6/17
Disk D = 6/19
Disk E = 6/23
Time that elapsed from the start of each disk rotation until the position of the red dot alignment was reached [minutes || seconds]: (first alignment Time)
Disk A = 2 || 120
Disk B = 3 || 180
Disk C = 4 || 240
Disk D = 7 || 420
Disk E = 9 || 540
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___________________
*Solution*
We now know from the premises where the alignment point of every disk is, in regards to time. It doesn't matter whether the disks are spinning CW or CCW, because ultimately each disk reaches the alignment point, due to the fact that the direction of movement is constant (i.e. it doesn't alter from CW to CCW or vice versa) and velocity ≠ 0.
We also know when each disk reaches the alignment point again, for the second time, third time, fourth time etc. We can put it mathematically like this:
Alignment[*i*] := (first alignment time) + (360° time) x (i) Dimension=[minutes]
whereas i is the i-th time the aligned position is reached again and i is element of the natural numbers:
i (element of) { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ...}
In the concrete case of Disk A, the formula can be written as follows:
a[*i*] := 2 + 7 x i
That means for the first alignment point, which we can calculate by setting i = 1, we get:
a[1] = 2 + 7 x 1 = 9 [minutes]
some more examples:
a[2] = 2 + 7 x 2 = 16 [minutes]
a[4] = 2 + 7 x 4 = 30 [minutes] etc.
that means after 9 minutes since the disks have started to spin, disk A reaches it's alignment position for the 1st time again, after 30 minutes for the 4th time again.
If we make this formula for every disk, we get this:
(http://i51.tinypic.com/20kx0dh.jpg)
This mathematica program defines the above function for each disk, a[i_] for Disk A, b[i_] for Disk B etc.
Then it makes a list with all solutions of this functions by inserting many numbers from the set of natural numbers for i and saves these results in a list. In the program you see, mathematica has calculated these functions for i between 1 and 1'000'000.
The list for Disk A for the first 30 integers looks like this:
{9, 16, 23, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 65, 72, 79, 86, 93, 100, 107, 114, 121, 128, 135, 142, 149, 156, 163, 170, 177, 184, 191, 198, 205, 212}
Now that we have a list of times that represent the reaching of each disk's alignment point, we can look what times all these disks have in common, e.g. if the same number occurs in all the lists of each disk, then it's the time all of the red dots are at the same position.
Example:
a[2] = 16 [minutes]
b[1] = 16 [minutes]
when a reaches the alignment positions for the second time again, b reaches the alignment position for the first time again. If this problem consisted of these two discs only, the solution would be 16 minutes. Now we have to find the times when every Disk (from a to e) function reaches the same solution time.
This is how to do it: The lists can be viewed as normal sets of numbers, and we're basically looking for an intersection of all these lists/sets of numbers, i.e. the numbers these lists have in common.
These are the times when all the discs reach the same positions (Dimension = [minutes]):
{477857, 1153896, 1829935, 2505974, 3182013, 3858052, 4534091, 5210130, 5886169, 6562208}
The first time they reach this position is 477857 minutes, that's 331 days 20 hours 17 minutes .
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___________________
And that's my take on this whole problem... i did it quite intuitively, don't know if it's correct...
@suckmymuscle: *the nine minute solution*
Here's how the disks are situated after 9 minutes (in my opinion):
Disk A : Uses the first 2 minutes to reach the alignment position, then reaches it again after another 7 minutes have elapsed. So that means that Disk A is at its alignment position after 9 minutes.
Disk E : Uses the whole 9 minutes to reach its alignment position for the first time. So after 9 minutes, Disk E is at its alignment position, just like Disk A.
Disk B : Uses the first 3 minutes to reach the alignment position for the first time. It reaches the alignment position again after another 13 minutes have elapsed. So after 9 minutes in total, Disk B is about 190° away from it's alignment position.
Same problem with Disk C & D.
Because B,C & D are not at their alignment positions after 9 minutes, 9 minutes can't be the solution to this problem.
-
lol poor suckmymuscle... is it becoming clear now?
-
I looked at this problem and immediately thought of the "least common multiple" concept, so I tried it that way. Don't know if my answer is correct...
Ok, let's state the facts first...
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___________________
*Premises*
Starting Positions:
Unknown
Directions of movement:
Either clockwise or counterclockwise (i.e. it doesn't matter)
Starting Time [minutes]:
0
Time for Disks to complete 360° turn [minutes || seconds]: (360° time)
Disk A = 7 || 420
Disk B = 13 || 780
Disk C = 17 || 1020
Disk D = 19 || 1140
Disk E = 23 || 1380
Angular velocity (no acceleration involved/constant velocity) [°/second]:
Disk A = 6/7
Disk B = 6/13
Disk C = 6/17
Disk D = 6/19
Disk E = 6/23
Time that elapsed from the start of each disk rotation until the position of the red dot alignment was reached [minutes || seconds]: (first alignment Time)
Disk A = 2 || 120
Disk B = 3 || 180
Disk C = 4 || 240
Disk D = 7 || 420
Disk E = 9 || 540
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___________________
*Solution*
We now know from the premises where the alignment point of every disk is, in regards to time. It doesn't matter whether the disks are spinning CW or CCW, because ultimately each disk reaches the alignment point, due to the fact that the direction of movement is constant (i.e. it doesn't alter from CW to CCW or vice versa) and velocity ≠ 0.
We also know when each disk reaches the alignment point again, for the second time, third time, fourth time etc. We can put it mathematically like this:
Alignment[*i*] := (first alignment time) + (360° time) x (i) Dimension=[minutes]
whereas i is the i-th time the aligned position is reached again and i is element of the natural numbers:
i (element of) { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ...}
In the concrete case of Disk A, the formula can be written as follows:
a[*i*] := 2 + 7 x i
That means for the first alignment point, which we can calculate by setting i = 1, we get:
a[1] = 2 + 7 x 1 = 9 [minutes]
some more examples:
a[2] = 2 + 7 x 2 = 16 [minutes]
a[4] = 2 + 7 x 4 = 30 [minutes] etc.
that means after 9 minutes since the disks have started to spin, disk A reaches it's alignment position for the 1st time again, after 30 minutes for the 4th time again.
If we make this formula for every disk, we get this:
(http://i51.tinypic.com/20kx0dh.jpg)
This mathematica program defines the above function for each disk, a[i_] for Disk A, b[i_] for Disk B etc.
Then it makes a list with all solutions of this functions by inserting many numbers from the set of natural numbers for i and saves these results in a list. In the program you see, mathematica has calculated these functions for i between 1 and 1'000'000.
The list for Disk A for the first 30 integers looks like this:
{9, 16, 23, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 65, 72, 79, 86, 93, 100, 107, 114, 121, 128, 135, 142, 149, 156, 163, 170, 177, 184, 191, 198, 205, 212}
Now that we have a list of times that represent the reaching of each disk's alignment point, we can look what times all these disks have in common, e.g. if the same number occurs in all the lists of each disk, then it's the time all of the red dots are at the same position.
Example:
a[2] = 16 [minutes]
b[1] = 16 [minutes]
when a reaches the alignment positions for the second time again, b reaches the alignment position for the first time again. If this problem consisted of these two discs only, the solution would be 16 minutes. Now we have to find the times when every Disk (from a to e) function reaches the same solution time.
This is how to do it: The lists can be viewed as normal sets of numbers, and we're basically looking for an intersection of all these lists/sets of numbers, i.e. the numbers these lists have in common.
These are the times when all the discs reach the same positions (Dimension = [minutes]):
{477857, 1153896, 1829935, 2505974, 3182013, 3858052, 4534091, 5210130, 5886169, 6562208}
The first time they reach this position is 477857 minutes, that's 331 days 20 hours 17 minutes .
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___________________
And that's my take on this whole problem... i did it quite intuitively, don't know if it's correct...
@suckmymuscle: *the nine minute solution*
Here's how the disks are situated after 9 minutes (in my opinion):
Disk A : Uses the first 2 minutes to reach the alignment position, then reaches it again after another 7 minutes have elapsed. So that means that Disk A is at its alignment position after 9 minutes.
Disk E : Uses the whole 9 minutes to reach its alignment position for the first time. So after 9 minutes, Disk E is at its alignment position, just like Disk A.
Disk B : Uses the first 3 minutes to reach the alignment position for the first time. It reaches the alignment position again after another 13 minutes have elapsed. So after 9 minutes in total, Disk B is about 190° away from it's alignment position.
Same problem with Disk C & D.
Because B,C & D are not at their alignment positions after 9 minutes, 9 minutes can't be the solution to this problem.
holy crap, thanks for doing that. Was an awesome read.
-
Yep, nine minutes is definitely wrong. Only a delusional person who thinks they are a genius delta force op (wait, delta force proved to be too much of a bunch of pussies for him) would still cling to this.
-
Nowhere does it state the disk has to complete one full revolution.
How is the fact that it must be at least 7 minutes away fom the starting point means it has to complete one full revolution? It doesen't.
My answer is 100% correct.
The starting point are disimilar as well as the direction that they turn, hence the disk can align with the ot on disk E in the position that the red dot was at seven minutes on disk D.
It doesnt matter which way it turns, how fast it turns, any of that, because it takes 7 minutes away from the STARTING POSITION (whichever direction or speed) to be aligned. Rendering your 9 min answer incorrect.
Not that it matters, you will never admit youre wrong, and you cant prove that youre right. So its simple reading comprehension vs. your overinflated sense of IQ.
-
LMAO @ LJ88 actually taking the time........I'd rather just tell Francis he's wrong and watch him melt. :)
-
;D
-
I looked at this problem and immediately thought of the "least common multiple" concept, so I tried it that way. Don't know if my answer is correct...
Ok, let's state the facts first...
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___________________
*Premises*
Starting Positions:
Unknown
Directions of movement:
Either clockwise or counterclockwise (i.e. it doesn't matter)
Starting Time [minutes]:
0
Time for Disks to complete 360° turn [minutes || seconds]: (360° time)
Disk A = 7 || 420
Disk B = 13 || 780
Disk C = 17 || 1020
Disk D = 19 || 1140
Disk E = 23 || 1380
Angular velocity (no acceleration involved/constant velocity) [°/second]:
Disk A = 6/7
Disk B = 6/13
Disk C = 6/17
Disk D = 6/19
Disk E = 6/23
Time that elapsed from the start of each disk rotation until the position of the red dot alignment was reached [minutes || seconds]: (first alignment Time)
Disk A = 2 || 120
Disk B = 3 || 180
Disk C = 4 || 240
Disk D = 7 || 420
Disk E = 9 || 540
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___________________
*Solution*
We now know from the premises where the alignment point of every disk is, in regards to time. It doesn't matter whether the disks are spinning CW or CCW, because ultimately each disk reaches the alignment point, due to the fact that the direction of movement is constant (i.e. it doesn't alter from CW to CCW or vice versa) and velocity ≠ 0.
We also know when each disk reaches the alignment point again, for the second time, third time, fourth time etc. We can put it mathematically like this:
Alignment[*i*] := (first alignment time) + (360° time) x (i) Dimension=[minutes]
whereas i is the i-th time the aligned position is reached again and i is element of the natural numbers:
i (element of) { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ...}
In the concrete case of Disk A, the formula can be written as follows:
a[*i*] := 2 + 7 x i
That means for the first alignment point, which we can calculate by setting i = 1, we get:
a[1] = 2 + 7 x 1 = 9 [minutes]
some more examples:
a[2] = 2 + 7 x 2 = 16 [minutes]
a[4] = 2 + 7 x 4 = 30 [minutes] etc.
that means after 9 minutes since the disks have started to spin, disk A reaches it's alignment position for the 1st time again, after 30 minutes for the 4th time again.
If we make this formula for every disk, we get this:
(http://i51.tinypic.com/20kx0dh.jpg)
This mathematica program defines the above function for each disk, a[i_] for Disk A, b[i_] for Disk B etc.
Then it makes a list with all solutions of this functions by inserting many numbers from the set of natural numbers for i and saves these results in a list. In the program you see, mathematica has calculated these functions for i between 1 and 1'000'000.
The list for Disk A for the first 30 integers looks like this:
{9, 16, 23, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 65, 72, 79, 86, 93, 100, 107, 114, 121, 128, 135, 142, 149, 156, 163, 170, 177, 184, 191, 198, 205, 212}
Now that we have a list of times that represent the reaching of each disk's alignment point, we can look what times all these disks have in common, e.g. if the same number occurs in all the lists of each disk, then it's the time all of the red dots are at the same position.
Example:
a[2] = 16 [minutes]
b[1] = 16 [minutes]
when a reaches the alignment positions for the second time again, b reaches the alignment position for the first time again. If this problem consisted of these two discs only, the solution would be 16 minutes. Now we have to find the times when every Disk (from a to e) function reaches the same solution time.
This is how to do it: The lists can be viewed as normal sets of numbers, and we're basically looking for an intersection of all these lists/sets of numbers, i.e. the numbers these lists have in common.
These are the times when all the discs reach the same positions (Dimension = [minutes]):
{477857, 1153896, 1829935, 2505974, 3182013, 3858052, 4534091, 5210130, 5886169, 6562208}
The first time they reach this position is 477857 minutes, that's 331 days 20 hours 17 minutes .
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___________________
And that's my take on this whole problem... i did it quite intuitively, don't know if it's correct...
@suckmymuscle: *the nine minute solution*
Here's how the disks are situated after 9 minutes (in my opinion):
Disk A : Uses the first 2 minutes to reach the alignment position, then reaches it again after another 7 minutes have elapsed. So that means that Disk A is at its alignment position after 9 minutes.
Disk E : Uses the whole 9 minutes to reach its alignment position for the first time. So after 9 minutes, Disk E is at its alignment position, just like Disk A.
Disk B : Uses the first 3 minutes to reach the alignment position for the first time. It reaches the alignment position again after another 13 minutes have elapsed. So after 9 minutes in total, Disk B is about 190° away from it's alignment position.
Same problem with Disk C & D.
Because B,C & D are not at their alignment positions after 9 minutes, 9 minutes can't be the solution to this problem.
Your solution is incorrect, although you did a much better job than Cephiseus.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
wow, you guys just don't get it. :)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Your solution is incorrect, although you did a much better job than Cephiseus.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
ROFLMAO, please point out where exactly he fucked up.
-
lol our solutions are identical... as are our dissections of your faulty answer.
anyone with an IQ of 160+ should be able to see this. ::)
-
lol our solutions are identical... as are our dissections of your faulty answer.
anyone with an IQ of 160+ should be able to see this. ::)
Maybe he's so smart he's retarded......what are those guys called?? You know like rainman smart?
-
i think rainman was autistic or had "savant syndrome" or something... i dunno though never seen the movie.
-
lol our solutions are identical... as are our dissections of your faulty answer.
anyone with an IQ of 160+ should be able to see this.
Let me clarify. You are both wrong, but the methods he used to arrive at his conclusion and his rationale was better than yours. This is what I mean when I say he did better than you. But your answer is incorrect.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Cephiseus, let me ask you a question: do you really think it took more than a month for the red dots to be aligned for the first time? LMAO! ;D
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
lol poor suckmymuscle... is it becoming clear now?
I now realized that we came to the same conclusion via two different approaches (we did use the same premises, though :)). Something tells me that our solution is "correct".
holy crap, thanks for doing that. Was an awesome read.
No problem man! ;D
LMAO @ LJ88 actually taking the time........I'd rather just tell Francis he's wrong and watch him melt. :)
When you discredit a man's theory, that he so heavily believes in, mathematically... it crushes something deep inside... it's the maximum domination :D
Here is a similar problem:
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Word-Problems-2062/Third-Grade-Word-Problem.htm (http://en.allexperts.com/q/Word-Problems-2062/Third-Grade-Word-Problem.htm)
It's actually fairly easy... I can't picture MIT professors struggling with this problem. Can you picture a mechanical engineering professor struggling with a 5 disk rotation problem? I can't. These guys are able to design space shuttles, motors, ships etc., all of them very complex mechanical systems, where there are not only 5 disks, but 1000, plus there is friction, thermodynamics, electricity etc. involved, yet they fail to answer this question?
Maybe if they had to answer on the spot.. and couldn't use any calculators or computers... then it will become tricky... but with permission to use numerical methods on calculators or computers... it's no big deal. What I and cephissus did was basically modeling the 5 discs with mathematical code. The computer then started to spin these disks mathematically and checked at what times all of the disks were in the aligned position. That's all... no real magic behind it...
-
When you discredit a man's theory, that he so heavily believes in, mathematically... it crushes something deep inside... it's the maximum domination :D
Here is a similar problem:
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Word-Problems-2062/Third-Grade-Word-Problem.htm (http://en.allexperts.com/q/Word-Problems-2062/Third-Grade-Word-Problem.htm)
It's actually fairly easy... I can't picture MIT professors struggling with this problem. Can you picture a mechanical engineering professor struggling with a 5 disk rotation problem? I can't. These guys are able to design space shuttles, motors, ships etc., all of them very complex mechanical systems, where there are not only 5 disks, but 1000, plus there is friction, thermodynamics, electricity etc. involved, yet they fail to answer this question?
Maybe if they had to answer on the spot.. and couldn't use any calculators or computers... then it will become tricky... but with permission to use numerical methods on calculators or computers... it's no big deal. What I and cephissus did was basically modeling the 5 discs with mathematical code. The computer then started to spin these disks mathematically and checked at what times all of the disks were in the aligned position. That's all... no real magic behind it...
I understand this, but no matter how hard you try or what evidence you produce, Francis will always say you are wrong. ;)
-
Guys, your solution would be corect - I made the same mistake - if the red dots in the disks were aligned at first, but they aren't. The question is not when the red dots will be aligned again after they start spinning at their own velocities and directions, but when they will be aligned for the first time. Your solution is incorrect.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Yeah I don't think suckmymuscle even understands that these sort of problems are usually distributed in a setting where you have access to a computer...
-
Yeah I don't think suckmymuscle even understands that these sort of problems are usually distributed in a setting where you have access to a computer...
SMM lives in some third world country so he doesn't have access to much of what we take for granted, but he tries hard.
-
Yeah I don't think suckmymuscle even understands that these sort of problems are usually distributed in a setting where you have access to a computer...
This is not a problem that can be solved with computer algorithms if you don't start with the right axioms for the solution. Postulating that it is a matter of simple alignment would be correct if they were all in the same position at the start of the movement and the test designer asked you when the dots would be aligned again for the first time. But the questions makes it clear that the dots were not aligned. Hence, your answer is incorrect. Do you really think it took over a year for the dots to be aligned for the first time? :D Honest question.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Guys, your solution would be corect - I made the same mistake - if the red dots in the disks were aligned at first, but they aren't. The question is not when the red dots will be aligned again after they start spinning at their own velocities and directions, but when they will be aligned for the first time. Your solution is incorrect.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
It doesnt matter if theyre not aligned...
7 minutes is 7 minute.. 9 minutes is 9 minutes.
Disc D is aligned when it is 7 minutes from the point it STARTED AT. Its right there in the prompt.
Your answer of 9 minutes means disc D would have moved...... wait for it..... 9 minutes from its starting point. Doesnt matter where it started. Which way it spins, etc,
Why cant you grasp that?
-
Cephiseus, let me ask you a question: do you really think it took more than a month for the red dots to be aligned for the first time? LMAO! ;D
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I've constructed equations for each disk, as you can see here:
(http://i51.tinypic.com/20kx0dh.jpg)
So where is my mistake? These equations in the beginning are based on the premises that i posted, and that you agree with, at least I think so. What you don't agree with is the solution. But where exactly am I wrong, in your opinion?
It's basically a simulation.. i let these disks spin mathematically... the computer has not used logic or reason... it's pure brute force. Trial and error... looking out for the correct time... nothing more. The only thing that can be wrong.. are my functions of motion for each disk... and unless you can disprove these functions... my solution is correct.
Btw, it is indeed possible that this system of disks needs almost a year to get to the aligned position... because there are 5 disks involved... that turn with different velocities... and those are only dots that have to be aligned, not big surfaces. So the probability of the alignment is not very big.
-
:D
-
LOL
I'm certain suckmymuscle isn't even trolling... he genuinely believes 9 minutes is the correct answer.
A person enjoys making dishonest posts (ie trolling) only when, in doing so, they can get others to say something stupid. After he has accomplished this, the troll always has to go show his friends and laugh, or eventually expose his victim in front of a crowd. The end goal is always to make someone else look stupid -- either to the troll, his friends, or even to the victim himself. People often take this approach when they don't know the answer, but are sure that the person they are trolling doesn't either. Otherwise, if they did know the answer, they would usually just come straight out and own them.
If suckmymuscle didn't believe his own answer (ie was trolling), he wouldn't be getting any enjoyment out of this since we are doing nothing but shoving the correct answer in his face over and over again, making him look more pathetic with every passing post. He would either know that our answer is correct, or he wouldn't be sure. And if he wasn't sure, he wouldn't troll, since there's so much evidence in our favor that even a person of modest intelligence thinks, at this point, that we're right.
Maybe his resolve is weakening by now, and he's just clinging to his false answer in hopes that he can scare us off by pure bluster, and somehow everyone will forget this ever happened. Unfortunately, I have a feeling he won't, they won't and...
he won't recover.
-
After a certain time, all the red dots were aligned, disc A being in the same position that it was 2 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc B being in the same position that it was 3 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc C being in the same position that it was 4 minutes after the discs started to spin, disc D being in the same position that it was 7 minutes after the discs started to spin, and disc E being the same position that it was 9 minutes after the discs started to spin
After a certain time, all the red dots were aligned.
Conclusion: There was an alignment.
Disc A being in the same position that it was 2 minutes after the discs started to spin.
Conclusion: So when the aligned position happened, Disk A was in the same position that it was 2 minutes after start. THAT'S THE ONLY POINT, WHERE DISK A CAN ALIGN, LIES!
Here's the most important conclusion:
NOW WE KNOW THE ALIGNMENT POINTS!
Disk A = 2 min after start
Disk B = 3 min after start
Disk C = 4 min after start
Disk D = 7 min after start
Disk E = 9 min after start
Another conclusion: These discs can only reach their alignment position after they completed a full 360° turn. There is no way in hell that Disk B can reach it's alignment position, which it reaches after 3 min of spinning, again in under 6 min, because the angular velocity of Disk B is 360/13 [°/min] ~27.7° per minute...
But the questions makes it clear that the dots were not aligned. Hence, your answer is incorrect. Do you really think it took over a year for the dots to be aligned for the first time
They were not in full alignment, meaning not all the dots were in line, nevertheless each disk reached, at their corresponding times, their individual alignment position, the only position, where alignment with the other disks is possible. And these times were measured AFTER the mechanism started to move.. these disks just surpassed their alignment points after 2,3,4,5,7,9 minutes, doesn't mean that every point was in line then.
This is not a problem that can be solved with computer algorithms if you don't start with the right axioms for the solution.
It can be solved by algorithms... so many mathematical theses have been proven by numerical methods... google calculates much harder linear algebraic problems with its page ranking system almost instantly...etc.
Why do you think that a computer cannot simulate 5 disks, with velocities and fixed alignment points?
You constantly emphasize the FIRST alignment that happened, and that cephissus and I did not calculate the FIRST alignment... so would you agree that I calculated the time, the second alignment happened, correctly? Because the third alignment, if we can trust my computer's and cephissus computer's calculations, happened 1'153'896 minutes after start... that just shows how small the probability is of this event happening frequently e.g. each day or even month.
-
The 2 above posters are FAR more intelligent than I...
And even I can figure out that SMM answer is blatantly impossible.
SMM is not the kind of guy to admit hes wrong until the last minutes. Im not sure if he ever will, but if he does, itll be at the last possible minute just to try and save face. :-\
-
It doesnt matter if theyre not aligned...
7 minutes is 7 minute.. 9 minutes is 9 minutes.
Disc D is aligned when it is 7 minutes from the point it STARTED AT. Its right there in the prompt.
Your answer of 9 minutes means disc D would have moved...... wait for it..... 9 minutes from its starting point. Doesnt matter where it started. Which way it spins, etc,
Why cant you grasp that?
Shockwave, I like you because of the truce thread, so I am going to be polite to you.
What you fail to grasp is that this is true only for the first spin. The disk will be at the point where it aligns with disk E again two minutes after it has completed a full spin. Why? Because the positions where they align have tnothing to do with the time each disk takes to spin as all dots are not aligned at the beggining. I don't know how I can make this any simpler.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
LOl, at the two dumbasses who think it took over a year for the dots to align for the first time.
Your answer would be correct if the dots were aligned at first and the test maker asked you when they aligned again for the first time. But the dots were not aligned. The fact that the speed is constant and that they give you the time it takes for each disk to spin would allow you to calculate the moment when the disks aligned if the dots were at the same position at the start and they all spinned in the same direction, but they don't. If it makes you guys feel better, I made the same mistake the first time I tried to solve this.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
The 2 above posters are FAR more intelligent than I...
And even I can figure out that SMM answer is blatantly impossible.
SMM is not the kind of guy to admit hes wrong until the last minutes. Im not sure if he ever will, but if he does, itll be at the last possible minute just to try and save face. :-\
I would give them props and admit that I was wrong, but I find their answer extremely implausible as well as simply simplistic as it ignores that the time of alignement of dots is only valid for the first spin.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Let's make it visual.. so that you see how i started and what my axioms were:
(http://i52.tinypic.com/zydmvs.jpg)
This is the beginning. If we assume that all disks are transparent and that you only see their "red point" (although i use other colors for each disk), we can draw that picture from our premises. I've randomly put some disks to rotate clockwise, other disks rotate counterclockwise, but the most important part here is that this was a random process, i did not set these points up to fit my solution.
I've also chosen the alignment point randomly... It could've been on 90° or 187°, but i put it at 0° for the sake of simplicity.
The starting positions of each point was calculated by their constant angular velocity and the time they arrive at the green alignment point, which all these disks have in common, as given by the premises.
For example, Disk A was at the green point 2 minutes after start. So if you decide randomly that Disk A spins clockwise, you can go back 102° in the CCW direction from the green point, to find out where A was at the start (time = 0 minutes). Same applies to the other Disks... choose the spinning direction randomly and then you do some backtracing as shown above.
(http://i53.tinypic.com/2nurcpe.jpg)
After nine minutes... this is where the dots are... Only A and E have reached the green alignment point at 9 minutes spinning time.
The alignment point was chosen randomly, so was the spinning direction. The starting points were calculated with the premises. I see no mistakes.
-
Let's make it visual.. so that you see how i started and what my axioms were:
(http://i52.tinypic.com/zydmvs.jpg)
This is the beginning. If we assume that all disks are transparent and that you only see their "red point" (although i use other colors for each disk), we can draw that picture from our premises. I've randomly put some disks to rotate clockwise, other disks rotate counterclockwise, but the most important part here is that this was a random process, i did not set these points up to fit my solution.
I've also chosen the alignment point randomly... It could've been on 90° or 187°, but i put it at 0° for the sake of simplicity.
The starting positions of each point was calculated by their constant angular velocity and the time they arrive at the green alignment point, which all these disks have in common, as given by the premises.
For example, Disk A was at the green point 2 minutes after start. So if you decide randomly that Disk A spins clockwise, you can go back 102° in the CCW direction from the green point, to find out where A was at the start (time = 0 minutes). Same applies to the other Disks... choose the spinning direction randomly and then you do some backtracing as shown above.
(http://i53.tinypic.com/2nurcpe.jpg)
After nine minutes... this is where the dots are... Only A and E have reached the green alignment point at 9 minutes spinning time.
The alignment point was chosen randomly, so was the spinning direction. The starting points were calculated with the premises. I see no mistakes.
Again wow, awesome! What's your university background? You have obviously done this before. This is one of the more solid pwnings I've ever seen on this board and that's saying a lot.
-
Again wow, awesome! What's your university background? You have obviously done this before. This is one of the more solid pwnings I've ever seen on this board and that's saying a lot.
I'm almost done with my electrical engineering bachelor. Been studying it here in Zurich at the swiss federal institute of technology, you know.. where einstein studied and made his phd :)
For me, this is not about owning anyone... I'm just interested in the correct solution, owning is just a byproduct of it :D
I'd really love to see suckmymuscle's visual explanation of this 5 disk system, it shouldn't be too hard to put the first 9 minutes into pictures... maybe there is truth to his solution after all.. although i highly doubt it... I just don't see how 9 minutes is the correct answer.
-
I'm almost done with my electrical engineering bachelor. Been studying it here in Zurich at the swiss federal institute of technology, you know.. where einstein studied and made his phd :)
For me, this is not about owning anyone... I'm just interested in the correct solution, owning is just a byproduct of it :D
I'd really love to see suckmymuscle's visual explanation of this 5 disk system, it shouldn't be too hard to put the first 9 minutes into pictures... maybe there is truth to his solution after all.. although i highly doubt it... I just don't see how 9 minutes is the correct answer.
Aha! I sort of guessed you were some type of engineer. Electrical huh? Enjoying it so far? I'm thinking about studying that myself... I have about 6 months left till I have to make that decision and it's either between ordinary mechanical or electrical engineering for me.
Any pros/cons?
-
Aha! I sort of guessed you were some type of engineer. Electrical huh? Enjoying it so far? I'm thinking about studying that myself... I have about 6 months left till I have to make that decision and it's either between ordinary mechanical or electrical engineering for me.
Any pros/cons?
Well, what interests you more? I was always drawn to electricity, always liked gaming consoles, computers, audio technology, especially tube guitar amps etc., always wanted to know how these things function. So it was a no brainer for me. Mechanical engineering does contain big portions of electricity and vice versa, but if you're really more into cars, motors, mechanical systems in general, thermodynamics etc. you'd have to opt for mechanical engineering. Both is good, anyway.
If you appreciate pure theory and a broader perspective of things, you should definitely choose physics.
The problem with these studies is that they are all somewhat hard, and you have to really like what you do to succeed. Don't choose something you don't really really like. The good thing about hard studies is that everybody wants you after you're done with them... at least here in switzerland they value engineers and accept them in leadership positions even in financial institutions or assurances etc. Every firm needs logical thinkers, too many people in this world only learn by heart, they haven't really learned to use their brains.
-
Well, what interests you more? I was always drawn to electricity, always liked gaming consoles, computers, audio technology, especially tube guitar amps etc., always wanted to know how these things function. So it was a no brainer for me. Mechanical engineering does contain big portions of electricity and vice versa, but if you're really more into cars, motors, mechanical systems in general, thermodynamics etc. you'd have to opt for mechanical engineering. Both is good, anyway.
If you appreciate pure theory and a broader perspective of things, you should definitely choose physics.
The problem with these studies is that they are all somewhat hard, and you have to really like what you do to succeed. Don't choose something you don't really really like. The good thing about hard studies is that everybody wants you after you're done with them... at least here in switzerland they value engineers and accept them even in financial institutions or assurances etc. Every firm needs logical thinkers, too many people in this world only learn by heart, they haven't really learned to use their brains.
When put that way, I'd say I'm more drawn to mechanical engineering.
Yeah, I've heard that too about engineers being very sought after in a big variety of situations and not just technical ones. Apparently a lot of executives have an engineering background. The pay is not even close to shabby either with very promising prospects..
There's just so many positives about engineering and that is what makes me want to study it besides my interest in mechanical stuff. It's definitely worth a couple of years of hell in school as you said.
Alright, I'll stop yapping.. good luck with your bachelors degree and we'll see what kind of bullshit response suckmyanus has got in store for you.
-
Yeah I don't think suckmymuscle even understands that these sort of problems are usually distributed in a setting where you have access to a computer...
Here is where you go wrong. I am well aware of Wolfram's "Mathematica" and have used it since 2002. But this question cannot be solved with computer algorithms. The test designer, Hindemburg Melão, especifically created the questions of this test so that they can't be solved by computers. And distributed in a set where computers are used? Oh, really? This question is from the "Sigma Test", and online intelligence test where the questions were especifically created to minimize the help you get from extraneous sources. Also, the solutions to Melão's questions are a lot more elegant than what you got. Over a year to reach the configuration for the first time? I don't think so. My answer is a lot more elegant than yours. Given the difference in speed of rotation and direction, the red dot on disk one can be again at the position that corresponds to where the red dot reached the alignement point for the first time after nine minutes.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Here is where you go wrong. I am well aware of Wolfram's "Mathematica" and have used it since 2002. But this question cannot be solved with computer algorithms. The test designer, Hindemburg Melão, especifically created the questions of this test so that they can't be solved by computers. And distributed in a set where computers are used? Oh, really? This question is from the "Sigma Test", and online intelligence test where the questions were especifically created to minimize the help you get from extraneous sources. Also, the solutions to Melão's questions are a lot more elegant than what you got. Over a year to reach the configuration for the first time? I don't think so. My answer is a lot more elegant than yours. Given the difference in speed of rotation and direction, the red dot on disk one can be again at the position that corresponds to where the red dot reached the alignement point for the first time after nine minutes.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
LOL, what the fuck is this supposed to mean !?!?! Hahahaha, it's not a beauty contest, face it you got owned
oh and Wolfram rocks!
-
Here is where you go wrong. I am well aware of Wolfram's "Mathematica" and have used it since 2002. But this question cannot be solved with computer algorithms. The test designer, Hindemburg Melão, especifically created the questions of this test so that they can't be solved by computers. And distributed in a set where computers are used? Oh, really? This question is from the "Sigma Test", and online intelligence test where the questions were especifically created to minimize the help you get from extraneous sources. Also, the solutions to Melão's questions are a lot more elegant than what you got. Over a year to reach the configuration for the first time? I don't think so. My answer is a lot more elegant than yours. Given the difference in speed of rotation and direction, the red dot on disk one can be again at the position that corresponds to where the red dot reached the alignement point for the first time after nine minutes.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
To have any credibility left you really do need to address the in-your-face pwning lumberjack88 delivered.
-
::)
Yes this:
The problem is a tricky one, as most of the information given is irrelevant. The speed and direction of rotation of each disk is irrelevant as well as the fact that each dot is in a different position at the start of the movement, as this would only allow us to determine their relative positions in relation to one another if they had the same starting position as well as speed and turned in the same direction, clockwise or counter-clockwise. The only relevant information given are the amount of time each disk takes to turn - which absolutely makes the speed of rotation of the disks irrelevant. The fact that the time the disks take to spin is also given makes the information that some turn clockwise and others counter-clockwise irrelevant as well, since irrespective they will always be in the same position in the disk compared to the starting point! The final relevant information is that they all start spinning at the same time. We also know that at least 9 minutes have transpired since the disks started spinning, as this information is given. Taking into account all this, the solution is as follows: 9 minutes have transpired from the time the disks started spinning until the red dots on their surfaces were aligned. Explanation: since you know that at least 9 minutes have transpired since the disks started spinning, and since you can manipulate the speed and direction of rotations of the disks as you like and that they have different starting positions, you can align them whenever you want by manipulating the speed and direction of their rotation in the time alloted. This can be done to the intermediary disks, but since they all start spinning at the same moment, the size of the tiniest disk is relevant The only thing you need is to observe that the time it takes the largest disk to be at the minimum time alloted(9 minutes) coinceades with two minutes after the tiniest disk takes to complete a full 360 degree turn, which is 7 minutes. Two minutes after the smallest disks takes a full turn, it is once again at the point it was 2 minutes after it started spinning and that adds up to 9 minutes. Problem solved.
Is clearly more elegant than this:
main() {
int answer = 0;
int counter = 10;
while(answer == 0) {
counter++;
if ((counter-2)%7 + (counter-3)%13 + (counter-4)%17 + (counter-7)%19 + (counter-9)%23 == 0)
answer = counter;
}
printf("%i", answer);
}
when put through a C compiler, will solve the problem for you... the answer turns out to be 477,857 minutes.
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
LOL!!!! SMM being de-fucking-stroyed. ;D
WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYY too much effort though LJ88.........although if that's your thing, you're doing it quite well.
(http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/drummingcraig/VoteForPedro.png)
-
Yes, I am getting destroyed by the brilliant conclusion that it took over a year for the dots to be aligned for the first time. LOL! ;D
And the direction the disks spin change the relative position of the dots in relation to the places where they will be aligned on the other disks. It is not merely a matter of making the computer align the dots simply taking into account the amount of time they tak to spin on themselves and adding to that th amount of time each red dot takes ater each spin to reach the alignement position. It is not that simple. The test designer especifically made them spin asynchronously so that the solution couldn't be found so easily. Your answer is wrong.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
To have any credibility left you really do need to address the in-your-face pwning lumberjack88 delivered.
There isn't any. His solution is wrong.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
There isn't any. His solution is wrong.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I'm not claiming that my solution is right, but the vast majority on here agrees with my solution and constantly tells you that 9 minutes doesn't make any sense.
You on the other hand claim to know that your solution is correct. So the burden of proof lies with you. And yet you only provided some sentences, that nobody on here seems to agree with. If your answer was really that correct and enlightening at least SOME people should have an "AHA! experience"... but NOBODY IN THIS WHOLE THREAD thinks your answer is logical.
Why don't you provide a visual explanation of your solution, so I can give you the kudos you supposedly deserve?
Because, again, right now, nobody agrees with your solution. And if the answer is correct, it SHOULD enlighten SOME people on here.
We're not talking about Quantum Mechanics solutions, this is just a normal logical problem that you can explain with showing where these points were at time=0, time=6, and according to you, time=9 they're all aligned.... the burden of proof lies with you. I've provided more than enough counterexamples.
-
bump... sucky where are you?
-
I'm almost done with my electrical engineering bachelor. Been studying it here in Zurich at the swiss federal institute of technology, you know.. where einstein studied and made his phd :)
For me, this is not about owning anyone... I'm just interested in the correct solution, owning is just a byproduct of it :D
I'd really love to see suckmymuscle's visual explanation of this 5 disk system, it shouldn't be too hard to put the first 9 minutes into pictures... maybe there is truth to his solution after all.. although i highly doubt it... I just don't see how 9 minutes is the correct answer.
Stop being selfish, and give us what we want! ;D
-
Bump for sucky getting pwned as usual.
-
LOL!!!! SMM being de-fucking-stroyed. ;D
WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYY too much effort though LJ88.........although if that's your thing, you're doing it quite well.
(http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/drummingcraig/VoteForPedro.png)
How was this picture never picked up on?! He must have shit a breeze block and broke into a cold sweat before locking his door and turning the lights off ;D