Trippin... Problem Solving

DarrenHunt

DarrenHunt

Likes Dirt
Has anyone seen this before?

Now ususally i can work this shit out but this has got me.

3 men go to a room at a motel that costs $30-
they pay $10- each and go to their room.
the man behind the counter realised it was only $25- so he gave $5 to the bellboy to take to the men.
the bellboy didn't know how to divide the money between the 3 men so he gave them $1- each and he kept $2-. (thats $5-)
that means each man paid $9 each. thats $27. plus the $2 that the bell boy kept is $29-. where did the other $1- go?

it's tripping me out
 
StormFire

StormFire

Likes Dirt
the $27 INCLUDES the $2 that the bell boy kept, it's not added on.

Each man pays $9, which is $27, but the bell boy has $2 of this, cause he didnt know how to split $2 up three ways. So to explain it again the men got $3 back, meaning that all up they paid $27 for the room.
 
R

R_D

Likes Bikes
hmmm thats a tough one.
Each guy paid $10, and got $1 back,
so now the hotel has $25, the bell boy has $2 and the three guys have $1 each. There is still $30 in the picture. But the way that the question asks it justs stuffs me up...
arrrrg i just keep going round in circles......... it's too early for this:eek:
 
DJninja

DJninja

Likes Bikes and Dirt
DarrenHunt said:
that means each man paid $9 each. thats $27. plus the $2 that the bell boy kept is $29-. where did the other $1- go?

it's tripping me out
Click to expand...
This last part is worded a bit weirdly. Your not adding the $2 onto the sum your taking it away. So $3 goes to the the guys and $2 the the bell boy which now means that the total amount that they ended up paying would of been 25 if the boy didn't pocket the $2. Why should the 3 be taken away and the 2 added on anyway? Hope that all makes sense
 
T

TonyG

Likes Dirt
StormFire said:
the $27 INCLUDES the $2 that the bell boy kept, it's not added on.

Each man pays $9, which is $27, but the bell boy has $2 of this, cause he didnt know how to split $2 up three ways. So to explain it again the men got $3 back, meaning that all up they paid $27 for the room.
Click to expand...
correct answer. They paid $27 for the room, and the guy and bellboy received $27 between them.
 
Dug

Dug

Likes Dirt
Tax :p



No

Just the way its added up... Incorrectly


3 x 10 = 30

30 - 5 = 25

25 + 2 = 27 ( the 2 dollars the boy kept)

each man payed $9 after the boy takes his cut $2

3 x 9 = 27

1 dollar the boy gave as change to each man ($3)

27 + 3 = 30


Soooo Farkin easy ( took me ages to get my head around this):p
 
Last edited:
R

rednightmare

Likes Dirt
amount guests paid : 30
wrong price p/ p: 10
actual price p/p (25/3) 8.333

correct change p/p 1.666
change given p/p 1


the waiter gave only $1 change to each person, and hence ripped them off $0.66 each(x3 =$2) to get his tip
 
Customjimmy

Customjimmy

Likes Dirt
how's this one...

A father died leaving behind 3 sons. To the eldest, he left 1/2 his estate, to the middle son he left 1/3 and to the youngest, 1/9. When it came down to the father's stable of 17 horses, the family was able to divide them up perfectly according to the above fractions (i.e. not chopping up the horses, nor having part shares in any horses). How did they do this?
 
T

TonyG

Likes Dirt
Customjimmy said:
how's this one...

A father died leaving behind 3 sons. To the eldest, he left 1/2 his estate, to the middle son he left 1/3 and to the youngest, 1/9. When it came down to the father's stable of 17 horses, the family was able to divide them up perfectly according to the above fractions (i.e. not chopping up the horses, nor having part shares in any horses). How did they do this?
Click to expand...
9 - 6 - 2 by my calcs.
 
Ivan

Ivan

Eats Squid
So, how do you have half of 17 not being a fraction then? His estate is 17 horses, the eldest is to get half of the estate.

I smell something fishy..........
 
slip

slip

Beefcake...BEEFCAKE!!!
Customjimmy said:
how's this one...

A father died leaving behind 3 sons. To the eldest, he left 1/2 his estate, to the middle son he left 1/3 and to the youngest, 1/9. When it came down to the father's stable of 17 horses, the family was able to divide them up perfectly according to the above fractions (i.e. not chopping up the horses, nor having part shares in any horses). How did they do this?
Click to expand...
I can't figure it out, so I'm going with the trick question answer - that they divided the estate, and one of them wholly received the stable.

Stupid maths problems, this is going to bug me now.
 
stoff

stoff

Likes Dirt
16 horses are divided between the brothers and there is one over.
If you convert the fraction to decimals you get .5, .333 and .111 = .944

.944 x 17 = 16.055 or 16 if you round to the nearest whole number.

So then if you round to the nearest number the brothers get:
1/2 share - 8
1/3 share - 6
1/9 share - 2
with one left over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top