# Test your logic



## genwin (Jul 14, 2008)

http://proveyourlogic.com/

try it...


----------



## jackolanternsoup (Jul 14, 2008)

Lol I couldn't get past level 3..


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Jul 14, 2008)

I cannot get pass level 2.


----------



## badmephisto (Jul 14, 2008)

How exactly does this test your logic? This reminds me of an 'IQ test' I took a year ago where they asked me to name animals that were partially concealed by other objects


----------



## Leviticus (Jul 14, 2008)

Lotsofsloths said:


> I cannot get pass level 2.



One
Two
Three
Four...

Like counting him up going up the stairs 

Im up to 8....


----------



## toast (Jul 14, 2008)

I'm on level 12 and im stuck .__.


----------



## Leviticus (Jul 14, 2008)

Which one is that toast? Im doing 17


----------



## fanwuq (Jul 14, 2008)

WTF's with #2?

I tried every single letter and is still does not work.
I don't see a pattern, this game is stupid.


----------



## K8 (Jul 14, 2008)

Solved it all!
I hoped it had a rubik's cube at last level but it was just the stupid lake thing...
It was rather nice, I really liked the atmosphere...


----------



## Leviticus (Jul 14, 2008)

badmephisto said:


> How exactly does this test your logic? This reminds me of an 'IQ test' I took a year ago where they asked me to name animals that were partially concealed by other objects





fanwuq said:


> WTF's with #2?
> 
> I tried every single letter and is still does not work.
> I don't see a pattern, this game is stupid.



It's logic  Read my above post to Daniel and you will see.


----------



## toast (Jul 14, 2008)

blah now i'm stuck on level 23 D:
Edit:I beat it.


----------



## pcharles93 (Jul 14, 2008)

Stuck on 5.


----------



## K8 (Jul 14, 2008)

pm me if you are racking yr mind and can take it no more!I can at least give u a hint if you are too proud for that!


----------



## Johannes91 (Jul 14, 2008)

A lot of stupid "puzzles". What does counting 'F's have to do with logic?

Edit: Done, took about 40 minutes.


----------



## pcharles93 (Jul 14, 2008)

Now, I'm stuck on 8


----------



## fanwuq (Jul 14, 2008)

I'm on lv9 now. It's getting easier!

Edit: I can't count number of F's. LOL.

lv6 is the only one actually requiring basic logic that I see.

What is number 10?


----------



## JBCM627 (Jul 14, 2008)

Leviticus said:


> fanwuq said:
> 
> 
> > WTF's with #2?
> ...



Yeah these games sort of annoy me, and have nothing at all to do with actual logic. They are just silly puzzles, *not* logic games.

Spoiler:
OTTFF = one two three four five ....


----------



## Hadley4000 (Jul 14, 2008)

Anyone else notice this?


----------



## Feanaro (Jul 14, 2008)

Stuck on number 4.......do you have to do math?
I got it by guessing, but now I'm on 7, what is a rusk?


----------



## CAT13 (Jul 14, 2008)

I like #10 

but now stuck on 12


----------



## MistArts (Jul 14, 2008)

Hadley4000 said:


> Anyone else notice this?



Sticker inside a cubie...


----------



## CAT13 (Jul 14, 2008)

yay! I beat 12. If you try this on real books it might help

I like 13 

stuck on 15


----------



## pcharles93 (Jul 14, 2008)

What's #10?


----------



## CAT13 (Jul 14, 2008)

pcharles93 said:


> What's #10?



highlight for answer: gregory


now can someone tell me 15


----------



## MistArts (Jul 14, 2008)

CAT13 said:


> pcharles93 said:
> 
> 
> > What's #10?
> ...



I'm stuck there too.


----------



## pcharles93 (Jul 14, 2008)

15 is the maid. No mail on Sundays. It isn't really fair because some countries have postal services that deliver on Sundays.


----------



## DavidWoner (Jul 14, 2008)

i beat it first try. its kind of stupid really, since i have seen most of these questions before.


----------



## MistArts (Jul 14, 2008)

Now, I'm stuck on 21.


----------



## Uberdad (Jul 14, 2008)

I sort of breezed through it, but then again I like puzzles. If you enjoyed it, then I would get Professor Layton for the Nintendo DS. Lots of similar types of puzzles there. Well worth a look and should be able to get it pretty cheap second hand.


----------



## Mr. E (Jul 15, 2008)

wow this is a really tough one number 8


----------



## Dene (Jul 15, 2008)

I can't get level 11 about the lying pages. I don't have time to figure it out, there isn't anything logical about this test at all, it's just silly puzzles that are easy if you know them, and extremely hard if you don't.


----------



## immortalcube (Jul 15, 2008)

I beat this game very fast, but then again, I was familiar with some of the questions, from puzzle books and such. No logic necessary, most of the quiestions require you to notice a subtle detail, at which point they become very easy.


----------



## shelley (Jul 15, 2008)

heh.. that was easy


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (Jul 15, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> this game is stupid.



In terms of difficulty, yeah, it's not that difficult.


----------



## alexc (Jul 15, 2008)

Stuck on 17. I got through it all up to 17 on my own, except I either got help or guessed at 2, 4, 6, and 8. I like 11 and 12, those are really clever.


----------



## Dene (Jul 16, 2008)

What was the answer to number 11? Seeing as I have no intention of trying again someone should tell me.


----------



## slncuber21 (Jul 16, 2008)

i got through the first 10 or so, then i looked up the answers 

im a bad kid haha


----------



## pcharles93 (Jul 16, 2008)

#11 is 999. You can think about it later when you have the free time.


----------



## Dene (Jul 16, 2008)

pcharles93 said:


> #11 is 999. You can think about it later when you have the free time.



Nope, I don't get it, and I won't unless someone explains it to me.


----------



## bundat (Jul 16, 2008)

If 1 page is not lying out of 1000, then by elimination, the number of lying pages is 1000-1=999 pages.


----------



## Dene (Jul 17, 2008)

So in that case they _were_ playing on an ambiguity in the wording and using extremely bad english to get there. Thanks for explaining this. Obviously the maker of this silly little game doesn't understand that the fallacy of equivocation is a formal fallacy in logic. What a shame.


----------



## alexc (Jul 17, 2008)

Stuck on 21. Help appreciated.


----------



## pcharles93 (Jul 17, 2008)

Dene said:


> So in that case they _were_ playing on an ambiguity in the wording and using extremely bad english to get there. Thanks for explaining this. Obviously the maker of this silly little game doesn't understand that the fallacy of equivocation is a formal fallacy in logic. What a shame.



Just admit you got beat by a simple book problem.


----------



## Dene (Jul 17, 2008)

pcharles93 said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > So in that case they _were_ playing on an ambiguity in the wording and using extremely bad english to get there. Thanks for explaining this. Obviously the maker of this silly little game doesn't understand that the fallacy of equivocation is a formal fallacy in logic. What a shame.
> ...



I'll admit that I got beaten by a guy who seriously needs to take a course in logic.


----------



## pcharles93 (Jul 17, 2008)

No, you got beat by a simple book problem that could even be solved using brute force.


----------



## alexc (Jul 17, 2008)

Dene said:


> pcharles93 said:
> 
> 
> > Dene said:
> ...



I thought 11 was a good one. It makes perfect logic sense to me.


----------



## nitrocan (Jul 17, 2008)

how is money better than god and what is it about that if you eat money that you will die


----------



## MistArts (Jul 17, 2008)

nitrocan said:


> how is money better than god and what is it about that if you eat money that you will die



The answer was nothing....


----------



## nitrocan (Jul 17, 2008)

i wrote money and it accepted wtf


----------



## F.P. (Jul 17, 2008)

nitrocan said:


> i wrote money and it accepted wtf



same here...haha.


----------



## MistArts (Jul 17, 2008)

F.P. said:


> nitrocan said:
> 
> 
> > i wrote money and it accepted wtf
> ...



Poor people don't have money


----------



## shelley (Jul 17, 2008)

Dene said:


> So in that case they _were_ playing on an ambiguity in the wording and using extremely bad english to get there. Thanks for explaining this. Obviously the maker of this silly little game doesn't understand that the fallacy of equivocation is a formal fallacy in logic. What a shame.



What part of the wording was ambiguous to you? It made sense to me: the book has 1000 pages, and each page says "x pages are lying," where x is the page number of that page. Now the book has a certain number of pages that are actually lying. The page that says that number is therefore telling the truth, and all the other pages are wrong.


----------



## F.P. (Jul 17, 2008)

MistArts said:


> F.P. said:
> 
> 
> > nitrocan said:
> ...




"the poor people don't have it"

money?


----------



## nitrocan (Jul 17, 2008)

exactly but i dont get how its better than god


----------



## Dene (Jul 17, 2008)

shelley said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > So in that case they _were_ playing on an ambiguity in the wording and using extremely bad english to get there. Thanks for explaining this. Obviously the maker of this silly little game doesn't understand that the fallacy of equivocation is a formal fallacy in logic. What a shame.
> ...



Of course it was ambiguous! Can you honestly not read that question and interpret it in at least three different ways?

The way I intepreted it was completely literal (as is how logic is meant to be): The are 1000 pages, all of them say **** page(s) is(are) lying. One page isn't lying, which one?

*CONTRADICTION*


----------



## F.P. (Jul 17, 2008)

Well...this "test" obviously has a lot of weak points; the second question also has a few possibilities - even though only one answer is correct.

They should definitely redo it...the way it is at the moment it's a joke.


----------



## pcharles93 (Jul 17, 2008)

It's not a joke. I mean almost 25,000 people have proven their logic. It doesn't seem that hard a test. Some idiot posted the answers though.


----------



## TheCubers (Jul 18, 2008)

I'm tired so i dont fell like solving #2, what is it?


----------



## JBCM627 (Jul 18, 2008)

Dene said:


> The way I intepreted it was completely literal (as is how logic is meant to be): The are 1000 pages, all of them say **** page(s) is(are) lying. One page isn't lying, which one?
> 
> *CONTRADICTION*



Lying about lying is not a contradiction.

This problem is applicable to any book of N pages. I initially tried to prove this using induction, but couldn't find a way to do it... so here is a very simple proof I resorted to:

You have a book with N pages. Each page claims that there are p pages lying, where p is the page number. We can deduce that there can be at most one page telling the truth: if more than one page is telling the truth, the pages will contradict each other. So for starters, assume 0 pages are true. Then N pages are true, so page N must be true. This is a contradiction, so we know that exactly 1 page must be true. So N-1 pages are lying (or, false). As N-1 pages are lying, the N-1th page must be true.


----------



## F.P. (Jul 18, 2008)

pcharles93 said:


> It's not a joke. I mean almost 25,000 people have proven their logic. It doesn't seem that hard a test. Some idiot posted the answers though.



I didn't say it's hard test I just said that it's not a good test. Doesn't really seem to be at least a bit "professional" at all.

Why are there two correct answers for the first question? "nothing" and "money"? 

As there are logical problems with both of the answers...


And then again the second question: there are a lot of possible logical answers; seriously, they should use examples where there is only one logical answer - but other than that, that's one of the biggest problems with IQ-tests.

let's say we have:

1 2 3 4 5

one kid continues it like 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (yeah, that's the "correct" answer)

and one kid continues it like 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 (actually "wrong").


And that almost 25,000 people "have proven their logic" doesn't really indicate that the test is good.


----------



## Carson (Jul 18, 2008)

17... no clue... I also don't understand the one about the old mathematician. I got the answer but had to guess at it.


----------



## nitrocan (Jul 18, 2008)

its how many holes or circles (1 has none, 6 has 1, 8 has 2) the number has


----------



## Dene (Jul 19, 2008)

JBCM627 said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > The way I intepreted it was completely literal (as is how logic is meant to be): The are 1000 pages, all of them say **** page(s) is(are) lying. One page isn't lying, which one?
> ...



No no no, the contradiction is this:

Every page is lying (this is given as a *true* statement).
One page is telling the truth (this is given as a *true* statement).

This is impossible. If every page is lying, one can't be telling the truth. His facts contradict each other.


----------



## JBCM627 (Jul 19, 2008)

Dene said:


> No no no, the contradiction is this:
> 
> Every page is lying (this is given as a *true* statement).
> One page is telling the truth (this is given as a *true* statement).
> ...



Where does it say that every page is lying..? The 1000th page says this, but that does not mean it is true. Part of the problem is to figure out whether or not the 1000th page is lying.


----------



## Dene (Jul 19, 2008)

And this is where the ambiguitiy is. On every page it says "X pages are lying".
The question is to "find which page is telling the truth". My problem is discovering what exactly that means. The way I take it, you need to find a page which in fact says "X page is telling the truth" which can obviously not be the case, as described above.
Another interpretation is that of "it doesn't matter what the page _says_, you can still not tell whether it is lying or telling the truth".
This is why I say there is an ambiguity in the wording (thus the author of this "test" has committed the fallacy of equivocation).

Here's a real logical test for you:

X-->Y
X
Therefore...?


----------



## JBCM627 (Jul 19, 2008)

Dene said:


> And this is where the ambiguitiy is. On every page it says "X pages are lying".
> The question is to "find which page is telling the truth". My problem is discovering what exactly that means. The way I take it, you need to find a page which in fact says "X page is telling the truth" which can obviously not be the case, as described above.
> Another interpretation is that of "it doesn't matter what the page _says_, you can still not tell whether it is lying or telling the truth".
> This is why I say there is an ambiguity in the wording (thus the author of this "test" has committed the fallacy of equivocation).
> ...



I still don't see the ambiguity. If you mean by "X-->Y" that X implies Y, and by stating "X" you mean that X is true, then when Y is true, "X-->Y" is true, and when Y is false, "X-->Y" is false. This is not a "logic test", just a definition.

Here is a "logic test", and a quite simple one too: Prove that the following statement is a tautology without using a case by case analysis or a truth table: [(P→Q) ∩ ~Q] → ~P


----------



## Dene (Jul 19, 2008)

My example was merely my own little game, it has nothing to do with level 11. The idea I'm trying to convey is that my example is one of logic, that other guys test is not logic at all.

I'm thinking your example is modus tollens? I'm not exactly fmailiar with the notation your using but I assume that's what it is. If it is, I found this on a quick google search.


----------



## JBCM627 (Jul 19, 2008)

Err no... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_tollens modus tollens is a method of proof, not something to prove.

The statement I put up is just a logical expression that always will evaluate to "true", regardless of whether or not P and Q are true or false (called a tautology). The logic operators are fairly standard... the conjunction symbol I used might be sort of a stretch, but I couldn't find a better one, and didn't want to use an ampersand. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_operator if you don't know what something I used means. This isn't particularly related to #11 either. Proving that it will always evaluate to true can be somewhat tedious if you do it thoroughly, without a truth table, and without a case-by-case analysis.


----------



## Dene (Jul 19, 2008)

Like anything else, modus tollens needs to have a proof. This has gone way off topic though. Regardless, at least we're discussing _real_ logic.


----------



## Crzyazn (Jul 19, 2008)

This "test" is basically 23 childish riddles. Except for that stupid triangle counting one...


----------



## dinki1968 (Jul 19, 2008)

Please help me w/ #2. huhuhu. Thanks ^_^


----------



## JBCM627 (Jul 19, 2008)

Dene said:


> Like anything else, modus tollens needs to have a proof. This has gone way off topic though. Regardless, at least we're discussing _real_ logic.



Haha yeah. Modus tollens isn't a "problem" or anything per se though, so it doesn't really need a proof. It is simply a method, or argument, which is justifiable... although I guess you could consider the justification for a general case a proof.

Not everything will require a proof though. All proofs must be based upon assumptions... namely axioms, which are statements without proof.


----------



## F.P. (Jul 19, 2008)

dinki1968 said:


> Please help me w/ #2. huhuhu. Thanks ^_^



T?

even though it also "could be" N...or about 10 others...well...


----------



## Dene (Jul 20, 2008)

JBCM627 said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > Like anything else, modus tollens needs to have a proof. This has gone way off topic though. Regardless, at least we're discussing _real_ logic.
> ...



Oh for sure, the system has to be coherent upon itself rather than absolute truth. But seeing as most of the proofs have held for thousands of years (good old ancient Greek's) Hopefully we can assume they're reliable ^^


----------



## JBCM627 (Jul 20, 2008)

Dene said:


> (good old ancient Greek's)



Read:"Geeks"


----------



## Dene (Jul 20, 2008)

Lol, haha. Yea I'm jealous of them, I wish I was Greek, and lived 2300 year ago ^^


----------



## RubixCubix (Jul 20, 2008)

SPOILER highlight for answers

1-Money

2-T

3-First

4-5

5-Anchor

6-Thursday

7-Water

8-2

9-6

10-Gregory

11-999

12-3

13-2

14-Mother

15-Maid

16-M

17-E

18-13

19-28

20-Everest

21-25 (-4 will work as well, even though it's not technically possible)

22-August

23-8000

24-35

25-59


----------



## bundat (Jul 20, 2008)

> And this is where the ambiguitiy is. On every page it says "X pages are lying".
> The question is to "find which page is telling the truth". My problem is discovering what exactly that means.



I still don't see the problem...
The problem says that only EXACTLY ONE page is telling the truth, if you try brute force and test each page:

Premise: EXACTLY ONE page is true

-Let page 1=true
according to page 1, only 1 page is lying out of 1000
-therefore 999 pages are telling the truth
999 pages is not equal to EXACTLY ONE page
-therefore page 1 = false
(also, all 999 "truths" will contradict each other)

-Let page 2=true
according to page 2, only 2 pages are lying out of 1000
-therefore 998 pages are telling the truth
998 pages is not equal to EXACTLY ONE page
-therefore page 2 = false
(also, all 998 "truths" will contradict each other)

-Let page 3=true
according to page 3, only 3 pages are lying out of 1000
-therefore 997 pages are telling the truth
997 pages is not equal to EXACTLY ONE page
-therefore page 3 = false
(also, all 997 "truths" will contradict each other)

...

-Let page 997=true
according to page 997, only 997 pages are lying out of 1000
-therefore 3 pages are telling the truth
3 pages is not equal to EXACTLY ONE page
-therefore page 997 = false
(also, the 3 "truths" will contradict each other)

-Let page 998=true
according to page 998, only 998 pages are lying out of 1000
-therefore 2 pages are telling the truth
2 pages is not equal to EXACTLY ONE page
-therefore page 998 = false
(also, the 2 "truths" will contradict each other)

-Let page 999=true
according to page 999, only 999 pages are lying out of 1000
-therefore 1 page is telling the truth
1 page is EQUAL to EXACTLY ONE page
-therefore page 999 = true
(being the only "truth", the other "lies" will not contradict it)

-Let page 1000=true
according to page 1000, all 1000 pages are lying out of 1000
-therefore 0 pages are telling the truth
0 pages is not equal to EXACTLY ONE page
-therefore page 1000 = false
(also, if all are lies, page 1000 contradicts itself)

... that's how I myself solved it. I don't see the ambiguity, sorry.


----------

