| vishal gupta says... |
| The anomaly is because of the fractions.
the sum of the fractions (1/2, 1/4, 1/,8 and 1/10) comes out to be 39/40. That is the sum is not equal to 1 and therefore after the division there is 1/40 part that will be left unassigned to any of the 4 sons.
The least integer to make this fraction (1/40) a whole number is 40 and thus adding 1 more horse to the available pool avoids the problem of cutting a horse.
In the end, though each of the four sons might argue that they have got more than that which they would have got with 39 horses, they actually get 1 horse less (which finally goes back to the outsider).
|
|
| |
|
| DeepaK says... |
| if we add all the ratios together it comes out to be 39/40...so regardless the number of horses to be divided among sons there will always some horses (portion of total) remain unused...Vishal has rightly said...it the ratio ( 1/2,/14, 1/8, n 1/10 ) 40 horses not of 39...
so after distributing horses among sons from 40 horses 1/40 number of horses remain unused that is one on the counselors...
every one might now argue that they have received more what they should get because they got their shares from a pool of 40 horses which will be bigger than that of from a pool of 39 horses...
Here sons have got their shares from 40 horses not from 39 horses... |
|
| |
|
| Manoj Verma says... |
| What they got is more not less than their share.
I agree with vishal & Deepak that sum of fractions is 39/40 = 0.975 not 1.
i.e. only 39 * 0.975 = 38.025 horse should have been distributed not 39. In total they got 0.975 horse more than they should have(39-38.025).
Division is like this
1st: Share (39 * 1/2) = 19.5 but got 20 so he got .5 horse more than his share.
2nd: Share (39 * 1/4) = 9.75 but got 10 so he got .25 more than his share.
3rd: Share (39 * 1/8) = 4.875 but got 5 so he got .125 more than his share.
4th: Share (39 * 1/10) = 3.9 but got 4 so he got .1 more than his share.
So totally they got 0.975(.5+.25+.125+.1) horse more than there share which actually should not have been distributd.
LOL: But u can't cut the horse and there is nobody for that remaining share so it's OK.
Enjoy |
|
| |
|
| Amith says... |
| It was Alessandra's fault. There are 2 possibilities.
1. She was not good in Maths.
2. She wanted to bring up quarrel.
Case 1: If she were to be good in Maths, she could have as well bought 40 horses (LCM of 2, 4, 8,10).
Case 2: The stranger has a better role to play. He is more clever and should be from the opposition team who always brought obstacles in Alessandra's plots. |
|
| |
|
| abhinav says... |
| gud |
|
| |
|
| Sarma says... |
| The puzzle has a flaw. The ratios do not hold good after the horses have been distributed. Eg. 20/39 is not one half. So the distribution never happenned according to Alessandra's equation. So the puzzle is never solved. |
|
| |
|
