There's no point reasoning with this inbred. Its mind is too simplistic to see that he created a loophole where one of the twins is not required to give you any usable information whatsoever.
I ask a twin which path the other twin would say leads to paradise.
Then they'd just shrug off my question, because they can't read eachother's minds, and they aren't all-knowing.
This is dumb tho
Assert: prop(q) where q is path
If path exists then loc path
Assert n statements from twins is false
At least one false statement must be made by the twins >I need to negate their false statement >point me to the path towards hell >they must lie and point me to heaven
To be fair it does say "you will be sent to that path" implying that they will follow your instruction to point to a path when prompted.
>To be fair it does say "you will be sent to that path" implying that they will follow your instruction to point to a path when prompted.
It only implies that you will follow the path they give, if they give a path. Not that they will give a path. Why do you guys keep coping so hard?
8 months ago
Anonymous
If there is no path then gravity does not exist
If gravity does not exist, there is no energy
If energy does not exist, then I am in heaven or hell already
That's not stipulated in the phrasing of the problem
8 months ago
Anonymous
a lie and a refusal to answer are different things moron
8 months ago
Anonymous
see
Then I can turn around and go home, avoiding hell. Works for me.
Your problem is that your objective is getting into paradise, which is outside the feasibility region defined by the specified parameters. Redefine your objective to avoiding hell, and the solution becomes obvious.
8 months ago
Anonymous
'I don't know' is an answer, not just a refusal to answer, which may very well be a lie. This is moot because even a plain refusal to answer is consistent with OP's riddle, since saying nothing is perfectly consistent with "not telling the truth".
"Which path would you yourself not want to walk?"
The liar will point to the path he would want to walk, and the non-truth-teller will not point to the path he would rather not walk.
>Always telling false statements is the same thing as never saying true statements.
Not entirely. As has been pointed out, whilst someone who always tells false statements will never say true statements, neither will someone who makes no statements at all.
You can have irrelevant statements, false and irrelevant statements, no statements... OP is a moron. A false or "non-true" statement is only informative if you carefully set up the context.
8 months ago
Anonymous
OP is not a moron. OP is of course a homosexual, as is tradition, but in this case that homosexual rather cleverly demonstrated how framing this very simple problem in a way evocative of similar but more complex problems causes Anons, myself included, to mistakenly apply problem-solving techniques applicable to the more complex variants but not to the simple one presented.
8 months ago
Anonymous
What a ridiculous way to say "I'm too low-IQ for genuine reasoning".
8 months ago
Anonymous
Anon, the phenomenon at play here is the same as in the "chimps have better digit-position recall than humans" thread from a few days ago. I'm not particularly bothered by being less chimp-like than you.
I don't get it
The greentext statement is only true if you assume the law of excluded middle.
8 months ago
Anonymous
The phenomena at play here are simple idiocy on the part of OP, and automatonistic "problem solving" as a substitute for thought on the part of people who didn't notice that OP's riddle is unsolvable.
8 months ago
Anonymous
It's not unsolvable. If you ask "which path leads to hell?" you are guaranteed not to go down the path to hell.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>If you ask "which path leads to hell?" you are guaranteed not to go down the path to hell.
Only insofar as you are guaranteed not to go to hell if you simply turn back and leave.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Only insofar as you are guaranteed not to go to hell if you simply turn back and leave.
Yes, dumbass. See
see
[...]
Your problem is that your objective is getting into paradise, which is outside the feasibility region defined by the specified parameters. Redefine your objective to avoiding hell, and the solution becomes obvious.
8 months ago
Anonymous
You have serious mental problems. Get help.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Sorry to hear about the midwit IQ.
I don't get the law of excluded middle
Here we assert the base case is the same . Why would the law of excluded middle apply? Truth = not false
Lie = not True
A false lie is a true lie. I can't lie about what is not true if what is true is a lie.
From an intuitionisic perspective, the truth value of a statement is "I don't know" until such point as you either prove it (to yourself, in your own mind, with written proofs being only a tool for accomplishing this goal) to be true or prove that it results in a contradiction. So someone who never says anything true is someone who never says anything that you can prove. If the statements are probable by someone who is smarter than you, but you're too dumb to understand it, then (from an intuitionisic perspective) it is accurate to say the statements are not true, but inaccurate to say they are false.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>If the statements are provable
8 months ago
Anonymous
I am definitely too dumb lol
And no, all True values are always true until they are not True. This is called the universe of proof, which contains all information possible in the universe and the current universe is a subset of that universe.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't true lol. All it means is the value cannot be ascribed to the current set of information in a meaningful way. Also, your reasoning is in violation of normal logic because not true is equivalent to false.
8 months ago
Anonymous
What if the twin asks himself what path leads to heaven right after you ask your question?
Damn
8 months ago
Anonymous
I don't get the law of excluded middle
Here we assert the base case is the same . Why would the law of excluded middle apply? Truth = not false
Lie = not True
A false lie is a true lie. I can't lie about what is not true if what is true is a lie.
If someone does not make a statement then they can still lie by reacting to a statement with actions that are false.
Most of the universe is a set of True states. Also, you could argue neither of them need to speak thus they could never lie despite that being their constraint.
>ask the twin that always lies
He just tells me an unrelated factoid about diet and weightloss. >frick... that was pointless! >ask the twin that never tells the truth
He just stands there silent. >
> There are two paths in front of you, one leads to hell, the other to paradise
This implies there is no turning back, and later on it is mentioned that "you will be sent to that path [which the guardian points to]" > You see two identical twins
Implies the guardians are humanoids capable of pointing and talking which require reasoning > one never tells the truth
Whether you assume the law of excluded middle or not, one thing is certain: In the event that the guardian does anything at all in response to a question, it will not be the truth. He can point, tell an irrelevant factoid, say "I dunno" or stay silent; what he will not do is respond in the same manner that a truthful person in his position would. > the other always lies
We have a choice as to how to define a "lie". One possible definition is in the strongest sense: pointing to the wrong path based on the context of the question. In this sense of "lie", he would never respond with "I dunno" or stay silent, or do anything irrelevant to the question.
The more lax definition of "lie" is: anything but the truth. In this case the two guardians would be identical in behaviour as "always lying" is equivalent to "never telling the truth". > You can only ask one of them to point to a path, and you will be sent to that path.
Based on the wording, there is no choice but to follow the path after it is pointed to by the guardian, assuming he points to anything at all. If the question fails to impel the guardian to point to paradise, we either end up in hell or stuck at the fork forever.
The ideal solution would work regardless of the logical framework the guardians operate in, and the ambiguities stated above.
Well... i have done this riddle before, but chat gpt gave me an harder one with 3 options, anyways,the answer was asking one of them how he looks, if he describes himself correctly then he is the honest one, and if he describes himself wrong, then you smash the shit out of him and go to hell.
She doesn't. Well, if you imagine that twins are blind or something, desrcibe the path in words "the path to my right" or "the bath right behind you" depending on where it is the path you are asking him or her about.
OP says you can ask one to point to a path and once they do the pointing you are sent to that path. Your question should start with "point to the path..."
8 months ago
Anonymous
You're correct. I seem to have some reading comprehension issue. Then "show me the path you would show me if I asked you to show me the path to heaven" would be a command
8 months ago
Anonymous
The never-truth-teller can refuse to point to a path.
8 months ago
Anonymous
If you rape him in the ass for long enough while asking him if your dick is in his ass, the truth or lie will necessarily express itself.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Not according to the conditions of the problem
8 months ago
Anonymous
where does it say they have to do what you say?
8 months ago
Anonymous
> the other always lies
simple as (don't be to bitter that you couldn't solve something as simple as double negation)
8 months ago
Anonymous
show me where the double negation is
8 months ago
Anonymous
She will not tell you the truth about not telling the truth.
8 months ago
Anonymous
"one never tells the truth" has one negation
8 months ago
Anonymous
The task is as simple as single negation.
The answer is as simple as double negation.
(I never even said that it should contain double negation in it, only that it is just as simple)
Are you sure you're on the right board? Are you sure you cannot stay read-only on this board?
8 months ago
Anonymous
false, you can either tell something false or not tell something true
8 months ago
Anonymous
double negations are hard. Usually, it makes more sense to use non-negations because negating is a dumb way of saying what you want.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Even though I hate this show like you wouldn't believe, when they stay away from stem and stick to humanities students of which the authors of this serie obviously are, they even can deliver:
8 months ago
Anonymous
It doesn't. But if you physically put your dick into someone's ass without lube, then they'll eventually say something. The question is "Is my dick in your ass"
8 months ago
Anonymous
yes, no, yes, no, yes, no, yes, noooo
8 months ago
Anonymous
Fair but it assumes I pull it all the out every time. Now assume I never pull it all the way out.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Stop watching porn, sodomy is a form of coprophilia. vegana has way more muscles and nervous endings, just teach your partner to train it.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I'm married and I don't watch porn. What I described is a way force an expression.
8 months ago
Anonymous
you only get one change to ask the question
8 months ago
Anonymous
So ask the question when they're already crying in pain.
8 months ago
Anonymous
and what's stopping his brother from raping you
8 months ago
Anonymous
Nothing. Really?
8 months ago
Anonymous
now you're getting spitroasted for eternity because you couldn't take no for an answer
8 months ago
Anonymous
>no for an answer
I precluded that already
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Your question should start with "point to the path..."
OP didn't say they have to do what you say.
i would ask both to walk down the paths (in order), give them a camera ,tell them to take a picture (with some sort of identification such as a selfie or written message) , and walk back and show me
the pictures. then i chose, bypassing the question all together .
reread again slowly , "you can only ask one to point" means you can only ask one to point , i don't see where it says i can't ask them to walk or do any other action ???
"if I asked your twin which path leads to hell, which path they would point to?"
if i asked that to the one that always tell the truth (T), T would point to the one that leads to heaven, because the twin that always lies (L) would point to heaven, when asked for the path to hell.
if i asked that to the one that always lies (L), L would also point to heaven, because T would point to hell when asked for the path to hell.
Congratulations, that is a ticket directly to hell because in this one both twins are liars. We will use your eternal suffering to reduce entropy in our universe.
I'm pretty sure the solution is to ask them both what would the other twin say if I asked which path leads to heaven >The truth teller will point to hell because that's what the liar would do >The liar would point to hell because the truth teller would point to heaven and the liar lies.
You can't choose what path to take, you will go to the place the twin points to. Since you asked for paradise the twin will point to hell, and you will be sent there.
Ok. In that case, i'd ask them to direct me to the path that will result in agony, torture, and eternal suffering, which according to the conditions, should result in paradise.
Option two. This is a word game and "always lies" is referring to her bodily circumstance, rather than a verbal action.
I would ask them for a threesome then choose the path downwards straight to hell.
>one never tells the truth
What does that mean exactly?
it means the twins are women
You're pretty gay. "Never tells the truth" includes not giving any answer at all for all anyone knows.
So then there is no guarantee of an answer? So it's essentially a coinflip?
If you take OP's riddle at face value. He's either trolling or moronic.
There is also no guarantee the twins will not kill you or mug you, or anything else not explicitly stated.
As the other guy correctly points out, your pants-on-head moronic riddle boils down to a coin toss. You're a sub-GPT-2 meat automaton.
Is /misc/ack peak time it seems.
You will never have a STEM degree.
Ask him if he has experiences or believes in qualia
Per the explicit wording of the problem, one of the twins is not required to lie, only to avoid speaking the truth.
There's no point reasoning with this inbred. Its mind is too simplistic to see that he created a loophole where one of the twins is not required to give you any usable information whatsoever.
>it means the twins are women
lol
>t. picrel
I ask a twin which path the other twin would say leads to paradise.
Then they'd just shrug off my question, because they can't read eachother's minds, and they aren't all-knowing.
>doesn't tell the truth
>the other lies
Where should I not go if I want the wrong path?
The reply: "I dunno".
OP implied they had to point to a path
This is dumb tho
Assert: prop(q) where q is path
If path exists then loc path
Assert n statements from twins is false
At least one false statement must be made by the twins
>I need to negate their false statement
>point me to the path towards hell
>they must lie and point me to heaven
>OP implied they had to point to a path
No, he only implied you can ask them to point to a path, not that they have to point to one.
No, if I ask a question regarding a path to take then OP says they have to point to one.
>OP says
Quote where OP says that.
>To be fair it does say "you will be sent to that path" implying that they will follow your instruction to point to a path when prompted.
It only implies that you will follow the path they give, if they give a path. Not that they will give a path. Why do you guys keep coping so hard?
If there is no path then gravity does not exist
If gravity does not exist, there is no energy
If energy does not exist, then I am in heaven or hell already
>I am definitely in hell right
To be fair it does say "you will be sent to that path" implying that they will follow your instruction to point to a path when prompted.
"if i asked the other guy to point to the path to hell, what would he do?"
"I dunno".
that's not a lie moron
It is if he knows
if he knows what the correct answer is then he would point to the other path moron
That's not stipulated in the phrasing of the problem
a lie and a refusal to answer are different things moron
see
Your problem is that your objective is getting into paradise, which is outside the feasibility region defined by the specified parameters. Redefine your objective to avoiding hell, and the solution becomes obvious.
'I don't know' is an answer, not just a refusal to answer, which may very well be a lie. This is moot because even a plain refusal to answer is consistent with OP's riddle, since saying nothing is perfectly consistent with "not telling the truth".
Clearly I will not be let into heaven if I left liars unpunished.
"Which path would you yourself not want to walk?"
The liar will point to the path he would want to walk, and the non-truth-teller will not point to the path he would rather not walk.
>the non-truth-teller will not point to the path he would rather not walk.
Or he would say "I dunno".
Then I can turn around and go home, avoiding hell. Works for me.
what if they want to go to hell?
Then you'd better hope the answer is "I dunno."
Good point, you can actually just ask "which path leads to hell?" and be certain you'll avoid being sent to hell.
Always telling false statements is the same thing as never saying true statements.
I didn't realize the one that lied would always lie, I was thinking he only needed to lie once.
I can't even logic
>Always telling false statements is the same thing as never saying true statements.
I don't get it
>Always telling false statements is the same thing as never saying true statements.
Not entirely. As has been pointed out, whilst someone who always tells false statements will never say true statements, neither will someone who makes no statements at all.
You can have irrelevant statements, false and irrelevant statements, no statements... OP is a moron. A false or "non-true" statement is only informative if you carefully set up the context.
OP is not a moron. OP is of course a homosexual, as is tradition, but in this case that homosexual rather cleverly demonstrated how framing this very simple problem in a way evocative of similar but more complex problems causes Anons, myself included, to mistakenly apply problem-solving techniques applicable to the more complex variants but not to the simple one presented.
What a ridiculous way to say "I'm too low-IQ for genuine reasoning".
Anon, the phenomenon at play here is the same as in the "chimps have better digit-position recall than humans" thread from a few days ago. I'm not particularly bothered by being less chimp-like than you.
The greentext statement is only true if you assume the law of excluded middle.
The phenomena at play here are simple idiocy on the part of OP, and automatonistic "problem solving" as a substitute for thought on the part of people who didn't notice that OP's riddle is unsolvable.
It's not unsolvable. If you ask "which path leads to hell?" you are guaranteed not to go down the path to hell.
>If you ask "which path leads to hell?" you are guaranteed not to go down the path to hell.
Only insofar as you are guaranteed not to go to hell if you simply turn back and leave.
>Only insofar as you are guaranteed not to go to hell if you simply turn back and leave.
Yes, dumbass. See
You have serious mental problems. Get help.
Sorry to hear about the midwit IQ.
From an intuitionisic perspective, the truth value of a statement is "I don't know" until such point as you either prove it (to yourself, in your own mind, with written proofs being only a tool for accomplishing this goal) to be true or prove that it results in a contradiction. So someone who never says anything true is someone who never says anything that you can prove. If the statements are probable by someone who is smarter than you, but you're too dumb to understand it, then (from an intuitionisic perspective) it is accurate to say the statements are not true, but inaccurate to say they are false.
>If the statements are provable
I am definitely too dumb lol
And no, all True values are always true until they are not True. This is called the universe of proof, which contains all information possible in the universe and the current universe is a subset of that universe.
Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't true lol. All it means is the value cannot be ascribed to the current set of information in a meaningful way. Also, your reasoning is in violation of normal logic because not true is equivalent to false.
What if the twin asks himself what path leads to heaven right after you ask your question?
Damn
I don't get the law of excluded middle
Here we assert the base case is the same . Why would the law of excluded middle apply? Truth = not false
Lie = not True
A false lie is a true lie. I can't lie about what is not true if what is true is a lie.
>the more I study logic, the more insane I feel
Somebody make the angles of spacetime go away.
If someone does not make a statement then they can still lie by reacting to a statement with actions that are false.
Most of the universe is a set of True states. Also, you could argue neither of them need to speak thus they could never lie despite that being their constraint.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfitting
lol
This is assuming 'lying' imply truth can still be deduced from the information shared, and deception is built onto a single layer.
>ask the twin that always lies
He just tells me an unrelated factoid about diet and weightloss.
>frick... that was pointless!
>ask the twin that never tells the truth
He just stands there silent.
>
> There are two paths in front of you, one leads to hell, the other to paradise
This implies there is no turning back, and later on it is mentioned that "you will be sent to that path [which the guardian points to]"
> You see two identical twins
Implies the guardians are humanoids capable of pointing and talking which require reasoning
> one never tells the truth
Whether you assume the law of excluded middle or not, one thing is certain: In the event that the guardian does anything at all in response to a question, it will not be the truth. He can point, tell an irrelevant factoid, say "I dunno" or stay silent; what he will not do is respond in the same manner that a truthful person in his position would.
> the other always lies
We have a choice as to how to define a "lie". One possible definition is in the strongest sense: pointing to the wrong path based on the context of the question. In this sense of "lie", he would never respond with "I dunno" or stay silent, or do anything irrelevant to the question.
The more lax definition of "lie" is: anything but the truth. In this case the two guardians would be identical in behaviour as "always lying" is equivalent to "never telling the truth".
> You can only ask one of them to point to a path, and you will be sent to that path.
Based on the wording, there is no choice but to follow the path after it is pointed to by the guardian, assuming he points to anything at all. If the question fails to impel the guardian to point to paradise, we either end up in hell or stuck at the fork forever.
The ideal solution would work regardless of the logical framework the guardians operate in, and the ambiguities stated above.
>t. GPT 2
Well... i have done this riddle before, but chat gpt gave me an harder one with 3 options, anyways,the answer was asking one of them how he looks, if he describes himself correctly then he is the honest one, and if he describes himself wrong, then you smash the shit out of him and go to hell.
If I asked you, would you tell me that this path is leading to heaven?
>"yes"
>he doesn't point to anything
>you're stuck forever because he didn't point to a path
You pointed, when you asked, morono.
he needs to do the pointing
She doesn't. Well, if you imagine that twins are blind or something, desrcibe the path in words "the path to my right" or "the bath right behind you" depending on where it is the path you are asking him or her about.
OP says you can ask one to point to a path and once they do the pointing you are sent to that path. Your question should start with "point to the path..."
You're correct. I seem to have some reading comprehension issue. Then "show me the path you would show me if I asked you to show me the path to heaven" would be a command
The never-truth-teller can refuse to point to a path.
If you rape him in the ass for long enough while asking him if your dick is in his ass, the truth or lie will necessarily express itself.
Not according to the conditions of the problem
where does it say they have to do what you say?
> the other always lies
simple as (don't be to bitter that you couldn't solve something as simple as double negation)
show me where the double negation is
She will not tell you the truth about not telling the truth.
"one never tells the truth" has one negation
The task is as simple as single negation.
The answer is as simple as double negation.
(I never even said that it should contain double negation in it, only that it is just as simple)
Are you sure you're on the right board? Are you sure you cannot stay read-only on this board?
false, you can either tell something false or not tell something true
double negations are hard. Usually, it makes more sense to use non-negations because negating is a dumb way of saying what you want.
Even though I hate this show like you wouldn't believe, when they stay away from stem and stick to humanities students of which the authors of this serie obviously are, they even can deliver:
It doesn't. But if you physically put your dick into someone's ass without lube, then they'll eventually say something. The question is "Is my dick in your ass"
yes, no, yes, no, yes, no, yes, noooo
Fair but it assumes I pull it all the out every time. Now assume I never pull it all the way out.
Stop watching porn, sodomy is a form of coprophilia. vegana has way more muscles and nervous endings, just teach your partner to train it.
I'm married and I don't watch porn. What I described is a way force an expression.
you only get one change to ask the question
So ask the question when they're already crying in pain.
and what's stopping his brother from raping you
Nothing. Really?
now you're getting spitroasted for eternity because you couldn't take no for an answer
>no for an answer
I precluded that already
>Your question should start with "point to the path..."
OP didn't say they have to do what you say.
Correct.
If I asked you to have sex with me, would the answer to that question be the same as the answer to this question?
and how would it tell you which is the right path? the correct question is right above you though
They would have to have sex with me no matter how they answered, and then I'd already be in heaven.
"I dunno"
i would ask both to walk down the paths (in order), give them a camera ,tell them to take a picture (with some sort of identification such as a selfie or written message) , and walk back and show me
the pictures. then i chose, bypassing the question all together .
THEY ONLY POINT, THEY DON'T DO OTHER ACTIONS. YOU STUPID Black person.
reread again slowly , "you can only ask one to point" means you can only ask one to point , i don't see where it says i can't ask them to walk or do any other action ???
"if I asked your twin which path leads to hell, which path they would point to?"
if i asked that to the one that always tell the truth (T), T would point to the one that leads to heaven, because the twin that always lies (L) would point to heaven, when asked for the path to hell.
if i asked that to the one that always lies (L), L would also point to heaven, because T would point to hell when asked for the path to hell.
can i kiss kurisu now?
Congratulations, that is a ticket directly to hell because in this one both twins are liars. We will use your eternal suffering to reduce entropy in our universe.
oh frick i can't read noooooo
It's a fake answer so your entropy hasn't been reduced.
I'm pretty sure the solution is to ask them both what would the other twin say if I asked which path leads to heaven
>The truth teller will point to hell because that's what the liar would do
>The liar would point to hell because the truth teller would point to heaven and the liar lies.
Then take the opposite path
read again, neither of them tells the truth
Ask the one that always lies which path leads to paradise, then take the opposite.
You can't choose what path to take, you will go to the place the twin points to. Since you asked for paradise the twin will point to hell, and you will be sent there.
Ok. In that case, i'd ask them to direct me to the path that will result in agony, torture, and eternal suffering, which according to the conditions, should result in paradise.
Option two. This is a word game and "always lies" is referring to her bodily circumstance, rather than a verbal action.
You're all fricking moronic.
>one never tells the truth
Means he's always lying
>the other always lies
Same thing
So just ask either of them which path doesn't lead to hell and do the opposite of whatever they say. Solved.
t. GPT5
moron alert!
>means he’s always lying
no. not telling the truth can also mean a non-answer, not necessarily a lie
>do the opposite of whatever they say
OP clearly says you will be sent down the path they point to. you can’t choose to go down the opposite path.
enjoy your time in hell
You should include "assume no outside knowledge" or something like that, else you could just ask what the colour of your shirt is.