Basic algebra for horsezoos

This is one of these confusing moments in life, where I may look incredibly stupid, incredibly smart, or incredibly smug....

But dude, the above "riddle" is as easy to read as plain numbers. How did you read 48 for the "?" ? Is this a riddle? I am so unsure of things now.

(please don't ban me)
 
pferdefreund said:
This is one of these confusing moments in life, where I may look incredibly stupid, incredibly smart, or incredibly smug....

But dude, the above "riddle" is as easy to read as plain numbers. How did you read 48 for the "?" ? Is this a riddle? I am so unsure of things now.

(please don't ban me)
Click to expand...
What? ... I feel so stupid now.
 
I think the horse is 10. The horse shoe is 4. The boots are 2 so I'd be 2 + 10 × 4...... 48 I think I did 12 times 10 in my head lol oops
 
A pair of boots is 2. A single boot is 1. Right?

That's how I figured it.

But what if numerals are a distraction? What if it's analagous? That's what's got me hedging.
 
Secret Furry said:
I haven't had any coffee yet can I blame that on my stupidity :husky_nervous:
Click to expand...

Although Bluebeard would also have an argument, that one boot is one when two boots is 2.

This would be one of these internet-things where both sides can have a right to be "correct" and the designer just wants to eat popcorn. I am just noticing that now, tbh. My eyes initially roled over the symbols to quickly. - The argument for the "mathy" side would however be, that math doesn't work that way. A single boot as a symbol would not be defined by the given equations and thus the set of equations would be unresolvable.
Sneaky designer also pulled the same trick with the pair and then single horse shoe....
 
lol i figured it was

horse = 10 --------- 3 horse = 30 so 30/3=10

Horseshoe = 4 -------- 10(horse) + 4 + 4 = 18

Boots = 2 ----- 4 - 2 = 2

Final equation - 2+(10x4)=42

I didn't put too much thinking into it, I didn't think about PEMDAS. Its not 48, i think its 42 now.
 
same here, I just read-solved it while scrolling over it...

If we accept that math also has a graphical element, as the spirit of the riddle seems to aim for... what if the horses have different numbers of horse-shoes?

If the horse in the second equation lost a shoe, and the boot obviously has zero shoes...
 
AH, i see it now. Sly, they removed one of the boots on the final equation.

That means its a different symbol and can't be resolved or the answer is 41 assuming 1/2 of boots is boot thus 1.
 
XX either equals X x X or a completely different variable. XX = 2X is a separate equation and in this case 100% assumption.
 
41 if you notice it's one boot instead of two, and if you follow order of operations (pemdas). 44 is also sometimes accepted on admission exams, which is ridiculous. Something about 'teaching the controversy' ... lol

EDIT: ballsack! I didn't notice there was only one horseshoe too. 21. Or 22 if you live in bizarro land where order of operations is negotiable.
 
Last edited:
caikgoch said:
XX either equals X x X or a completely different variable. XX = 2X is a separate equation and in this case 100% assumption.
Click to expand...
What you say is absolutely logical and true. But I know similar puzzles in which the solution has always been achieved in the way I have shown.
 
Ingo69 said:
What you say is absolutely logical and true. But I know similar puzzles in which the solution has always been achieved in the way I have shown.
Click to expand...
Yes, and millions vote straight ticket because it's easier. Does that make it right? Or best?
 
My votes go to @CK4957 STD for the first to post the correct answer to the task as it was meant in my humble opinion, to @caikgoch for his earlier respectable argument where the riddle is ambiguous and hence can also be interpreted not to have a single number as solution and to @pferdefreund for making me laugh three times and the clever argument that the horses may have horse shoes on them, too. Hard to see at this resolution ... :)
 
Ingo69 said:
I assume that you are a mathematician who takes this topic very seriously. ;)
Click to expand...

Sometimes it is difficult - i once infuriated a (standardized) tester at school when i refused to do these "what's the next number" questions. My answer was "you can never know. For any number a logical 'law' could be found to explain it."
The resulting row drew in several teachers until a math teacher arrived, realized what was happening and suggested to just give me the tests for the next grade up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top