Ghideon

and resulted in new ideas. Idea 1: "rune stones" raised and attached by using holders. Using paperclip, "rune stone" and a tile from Settlers, without and with a light source. But it may still be possible to reveal runes by mistake. Idea 2: Try without a light at all, very low tech Rune cards and no light. Turn card to reveal the rune to the black player Another low tech idea; "pressure sensitive" runes. These are probably too sensitive to wear and tear. Using two or more layers of semi transparent paper (baking paper):

I think a more clear description an picture is needed, it's hard to comment or discuss the design. I'm pretty sure that device did not, and was not intended to, create intelligence.

Some of my online personalities correlate, others do not.

Good points! I couldn't find white crayons around my desk so I used an old envelope and a separate paper. This also makes it possible to change where symbols are located. And I didn't have to draw the symbols mirrored: Put the paper in envelope and use flashlight from behind the envelope: I may have a few other ideas; @James Daviscourt Can you give som hints about the game? I mean, if the symbols are static then they will all be known once you have played the game once? There must be some dynamics; separate tiles or that the symbols are not attached permanently to a location on the board?

That might apply to some people, but personally I prefer discussions.

I couldn't resist another attempt... how about writing symbols on the back of paper and use back-light? Could work with the right combination of paper thickness, light and ink. Quick experiment, using office paper, ball pen and flashlight from behind paper. Flashlight off: Flashlight on:

Good point. Slightly off topic/less serious: If someone persists in such a literal view, how about a counter argument along the following line? If infinite number of real monkeys are given infinite time, infinite number of typewriters (and infinite number bananas) then some monkeys, or descendants, will learn how to type and develop an interest in Shakespeare literature...

I remember the game Brainstorm had red glasses so that one player at a time could read hidden messages on cards. Not truly invisible to the naked eye but maybe good enough for a board game? The cards have red/white random patterns and I think cyan coloured messages. The cyan coloured messages will look black through the red glasses and the red/white will look red. A sample in Photoshop might be*: For a person wearing red glasses the picture above would look something like the below. I've used a photoshop filter to test the effect, I haven't any red glasses/filters nearby. *) I used a modified version of the sample available at http://photonicswiki.org/index.php?title=How_to_make_a_red_reveal_message

I'll try to add a little example where I think physics/engineering gives same result for 6+6 and 8+4: Moving a certain weight requires force 500N The weight is moved the distance 1m Force x Distance 500x1 = 500 J Doing it for 6+6 times or 8+4 times results in equal amount of Joules. The above is hopefully correct enough to make the point; mathematics (and also hopefully physical formulas) gives same result. Now a philosophical case where the math* above is too restrictive; At the local gym I can do a certain exercise requiring 500N of force 6+6 repetitions within 1 minute if there is a short break between sets of 6. But I can not do the exercise 8+4 repetitions since I'll fail at attempt 7 or 8. In this case the numbers that gives the sum 12 is very important to the outcome; 6+6 is not the same as 8+4. On a good day I think 7+5 may be ok. *) and also physics, mine or in general?

I agree. Your statement made me look at the beginning of the thread again. We didn't get all rules initially, a followup said: So there is no complete English translation given yet? Speculation: What happens if the correction only applies to Jack? So that the following initial statement Actually was supposed to be something like: "Jack only know the range of the digits; meaning he knows that a>=b>=c>=d and he knows a - d (a minus d). John only knows a+b+c+d. James knows a*b*c*d." In other words, is it possible that John and James do not know that a>=b>=c>=d? I haven't yet checked what difference this would make when trying to solve the problem. A maybe even more speculative question: But then they all act in another order: Jack says... James says... John says... Is that change of order the names intentional or was the names mixed up in translation? I haven't yet checked what difference this would make. Can we see the original question? (Even if it's in Turkish it might help at this point)

Yes. Thanks! +1 I missed that possibility because of lack of attention to details. Therefore the solution is incorrect. (I'm beginning to believe my english skills are too limited for these kind of riddles)

Jack has 3 (range) which means he could believe James product is for instance 0 (3*0*0*0) or 4 (4*1*1*1) so therefore Jack is not sure what James has. Jack can figure out that James cannot have for instance 1 or 2 or 9*9*9*9 or any combination of digits that will let Jack know all digits. (I believe that for each number with range=3 there's more than one possible combination for John, I haven't checked this detail yet) So Jack says: I don't know all the digits but James doesn't either. James has 4 (product) so he could guess the number is 2211 or 4111. James can figure out that John’s sum is 6=2+2+1+1 or 7=4+1+1+1. He also see for instance that 6+0+0+0=6 and 7+0+0+0=7 so James, from his point of view, knows that John can’t figure out the four digits from John’s sum (6 or 7). So James says: I don't know all the digits but John doesn't either. John has 7 (sum) so he may guess that possible numbers are 7000, 6100, 5200, 5110, 4300, 4210, 4111, 3220 or 3211. John, with his sum=7 can figure out that Jack’s range is 7,6,5,4,3 or 2 from the possible numbers above. John can also see that James product is 0, 4 or 6. John then sees that if James product is 0 then James, from his point if view above, would have to see the possibility that John could have had sum=0 and the number would then have to be 0000. So John decides that James product is not 0 since James said "John doesn't know". John then sees that if James product is 6 then the number would have to be 3211. Then Jack’s range would be 2. But then, from Jack’s point of view, Jack should have seen that Jack’s range=2 means that James product could be 2 and James, from Jacks initial point of view, should have been able to see that 2111 is the number. But Jack said: "James doesn't know". John then sees that if James product is 4 there is one matching number, 4111, in the list. So John draws the conclusion that James have product = 4 and Jack has range=3 and the number is 4111. 4-1=3 (Jack) 4*1*1*1=4 (James) 4+1+1+1=7 (John) I haven’t yet figured out the very last part, if Jack must be able to tell the number when John says that he has the solution.

I agree! I'm giving this a try. For some reason I'm having a language barrier trying to write down my reasoning... My guess is: I'll try to explain in a followup, not sure at all if my attempt is valid.

bold by me: By using the same argument as above, Tolken's work The Lord of The Rings should be considered a true story? Tolken could not come up with his ideas without solid proof of something? Or did I misunderstand something in your arguments? I haven't seen that show. But I had to check, and you do sound like "Ancient Aliens"*: *) Episode 41 according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Aliens

Hello, I have studied your ideas and have a few questions. Note: there are "hidden content" in the post above but in my browser they are empty sections. Yet they who have seen "bizzare objects" have failed to find or provide any kind of convincing scientific evidence that extraterrestrials are involved? First I think there needs to be scientific reasons why to think any extraterrestrials are involved at all? If you have an insane idea, why add things that makes it less credible? Why not post some kind of evidence that the initial part is something worth to consider? Do you suggest that new spices suddenly appeared? Since theres traces of evolution from earlier to later stages*, "they" had take this into account so that the evolution of species from our perspective now has support by evidence? I believe that Occam and his razor has a few things to say about the ideas. Do you have some kind of support for your claims? *) Someone with more knowledge about evolution may have to correct me, that statement is not very precise.

I have some questions regarding the last part* (bold by me) and Is "gravity"/"gravitational field" the same as what is known from mainstream science? In the last sentence you say "nullify"; that looks like some concept of anti gravity is involved? Or maybe you mean that there will be a Lagrange point between the machine and earth if the machine is placed at an elevated point? Please clarify if we are discussing possible misunderstandings of mainstream topics or completely new stuff. *) I might return to other issues later; other members have already commented.

What happens when there's no friction?

Inertial propulsion / Reactionless drive? (feeling I'm going of topic)

I'm not convinced that the above statement increases the credibility of other statements in this thread. But possibly an interesting topic; maybe better discussed in separate thread?

Thanks for the clarification regarding neutrinos. If you post a detailed description of the experimental setup I'll take a look. Please use definitions from mainstream science or very detailed definitions to avoid further confusion.

So what is your analysis of the counter example I posted? The muons are not man made and they have no knowledge of any human concepts. Yet they are affected by time dilation as predicated by special relativity. When you use a GPS you rely on mathematics models that take 4th dimension into account. I think the opposite is valid as well; If you dismiss math on an incorrect assumption you will always get an incorrect outcome.

So what happens when you use other means than man made clocks to verify time dilation? Muons, caused by the collision of cosmic rays with the upper atmosphere, experience time dilation as predicted by special relativity. If no time dilation exists, muons should decay in the upper regions of the atmosphere but as a consequence of time dilation they are present at much lower heights. More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_testing_of_time_dilation

Can you provide some reference to such ideas? Less serous note: Intentional spelling? I think "metal image" a good name for the concept of a spaceship-shaped set of photons turned into something solid allowing it to be used for travel. (not likely to happen ...)

The Scientific Background paper for the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics summarise experimental achievements regarding predictions by general relativity. The paper also contains 50 references to other papers: https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/advanced-physicsprize2017.pdf (There's also a "popular science" version: https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/popular-physicsprize2017.pdf) @swansont was quicker to respond with my favourite; GPS. +1

Doesn't the photons travel at speed c? You'll have a hard time boarding the spaceship unless you already have some other mechanism for achieving relativistic speeds?