Jump to content
  • The above Banner is a Sponsored Banner.

    Upgrade to Premium Membership to remove this Banner & All Google Ads. For full list of Premium Member benefits Click HERE.

  • Join The Silver Forum

    The Silver Forum is one of the largest and best loved silver and gold precious metals forums in the world, established since 2014. Join today for FREE! Browse the sponsor's topics (hidden to guests) for special deals and offers, check out the bargains in the members trade section and join in with our community reacting and commenting on topic posts. If you have any questions whatsoever about precious metals collecting and investing please join and start a topic and we will be here to help with our knowledge :) happy stacking/collecting. 21,000+ forum members and 1 million+ forum posts. For the latest up to date stats please see the stats in the right sidebar when browsing from desktop. Sign up for FREE to view the forum with reduced ads. 

Monster box puzzle


Recommended Posts

Just for some Friday fun, a quick topical puzzle...

image.png.6b5ca2a9400959bd114439d2684e6e30.png

You buy a monster box of 1oz silver Britannia coins off your dodgy mate down the pub. You have a quick look inside, and as expected, the box contains 20 tubes, each containing 25 coins (500 coins in total).

But after you leave the pub, your dodgy mate phones you because he's just remembered that he "accidentally" replaced the contents of one of the tubes with 25 fake Britannias! He assures you the remaining 19 tubes are genuine, and helpfully points out that the fake coins can easily be identified as they only weigh 0.95 troy ounces each. The fake coins are extremely convincing and cannot be identified by sight (they even have milkspots!); the weight difference is too slight to detect from handling; and the only testing equipment you have with you is a digital scale that can measure up to 10kg and is accurate to the nearest 0.1g. You do not know in advance how heavy an empty tube is.

So the question is... What is the smallest number of times you would have to use the scales to always guarantee finding the tube of fakes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was tongue in cheek. I haven't worked out the math. It would be 0.05 toz ×25 is what the tube would be less a legitimate tube. Finding it first pick is the conundrum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, paulmerton said:

Just for some Friday fun, a quick topical puzzle...

image.png.6b5ca2a9400959bd114439d2684e6e30.png

You buy a monster box of 1oz silver Britannia coins off your dodgy mate down the pub. You have a quick look inside, and as expected, the box contains 20 tubes, each containing 25 coins (500 coins in total).

But after you leave the pub, your dodgy mate phones you because he's just remembered that he "accidentally" replaced the contents of one of the tubes with 25 fake Britannias! He assures you the remaining 19 tubes are genuine, and helpfully points out that the fake coins can easily be identified as they only weigh 0.95 troy ounces each. The fake coins are extremely convincing and cannot be identified by sight (they even have milkspots!); the weight difference is too slight to detect from handling; and the only testing equipment you have with you is a digital scale that can measure up to 10kg and is accurate to the nearest 0.1g. You do not know in advance how heavy an empty tube is.

So the question is... What is the smallest number of times you would have to use the scales to always guarantee finding the tube of fakes?

On a first attempt basis, I make it 5.

If instead of a digital scale, we had an old-fashioned balance, there may be a different answer.

😎

Chards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LawrenceChard said:

On a first attempt basis, I make it 5.

If instead of a digital scale, we had an old-fashioned balance, there may be a different answer.

😎

I'd be interested in your approach! (Using just a digital scale)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, paulmerton said:

I'd be interested in your approach! (Using just a digital scale)

1st Iteration: Weigh any 10; the rogue tube is in the lighter 10

2nd Iteration: Weigh the suspect 5; the rogue tube is in the lighter 5

3rd Iteration: Weigh 3 of the suspect 5; this will identify either 3 suspects, or 2 suspects.

4th Iteration (a): Weigh 2 of the suspect 3; if one is light, problem solved, if not put the third tube to one side.

4th Iteration (b): Weigh one of the remaining 2; if one is light, problem solved, if not the third tube you put to one side is the target.

It is almost always good practice to show your method.

😎

 

 

 

Chards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

1st Iteration: Weigh any 10; the rogue tube is in the lighter 10

As you don't know the weight of the empty tubes, this step alone would require two weighings, and could be optimised by weighing 7 and 7 rather than 10 and 10. If both 7s are the same weight, then you can deduce that the fake tube exists amongst the 6 unweighed tubes.

Also by that stage you will know what a tube weighs.

I think this kind of approach is probably going to be the fastest.

You can actually solve this problem with just one weighing, but it's far from quick! 😎

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, ady said:

Take one coin from tube one, two coins from tube two and so on. Should equal 1110 ounces. If tube one is fake it weighs 1109.5, if tube 2 is fake it weighs 1109 and so on....

Not quite sure about your maths there 😃 

You seem to have plucked 1110oz of silver out of a 500oz monster box and still have some spare!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, paulmerton said:

You seem to have plucked 1110oz of silver out of a 500oz monster box and still have some spare!

Yes your right should be 210 was getting ahead of myself, but the principal works for one weighing,  Glad you spotted the deliberate mistake😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ady said:

Yes your right should be 210 was getting ahead of myself, but the principal works for one weighing,  Glad you spotted the deliberate mistake😁

You also seem to have assumed that the fake coins now weigh only 0.5oz. My mate ain't that dodgy! 🤠

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, paulmerton said:

Not quite sure about your maths there 😃 

You seem to have plucked 1110oz of silver out of a 500oz monster box and still have some spare!

But he has identified an optimal method in terms of the number of weighings, I think.

😎

Chards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, paulmerton said:

What is the smallest number of times you would have to use the scales to always guarantee finding the tube of fakes?

 

Zero  times.

You open all the tubes and eliminate the ones that have milk coins or scratches, the remaining tube with perfect coins is the one with fakes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, daca said:

 

Zero  times.

You open all the tubes and eliminate the ones that have milk coins or scratches, the remaining tube with perfect coins is the one with fakes.

 

But:

2 hours ago, paulmerton said:

The fake coins are extremely convincing and cannot be identified by sight (they even have milkspots!)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly after all this frustration and wrong answers...personally I'd just dump the whole monster box...better safe than sorry.

I like to buy the pre-dip dip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After I give the dodgy guy a good hiding and making him bring me the full tube of originals back I would be more concerned about what I do with the fakes. Is there some kind of amnesty bin I can put them in to prevent them from getting back in the system? 

I would use the scales once, weigh the whole box and take a tube out at a time until there is not a consistent subtraction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bigmarc said:

I would use the scales once, weigh the whole box and take a tube out at a time until there is not a consistent subtraction. 

A slightly sneaky attempt at cheating there, but it wouldn't work anyway - the scales can only weigh a maximum of 10kg!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, paulmerton said:

As you don't know the weight of the empty tubes, this step alone would require two weighings, and could be optimised by weighing 7 and 7 rather than 10 and 10. If both 7s are the same weight, then you can deduce that the fake tube exists amongst the 6 unweighed tubes.

Also by that stage you will know what a tube weighs.

I think this kind of approach is probably going to be the fastest.

You can actually solve this problem with just one weighing, but it's far from quick! 😎

So, by my sub-optimal method, the answer would be 6, not 5.

@ady was the first and only one to get the correct answer, and method, but failed due to faulty arithmetic.

Thanks for setting us this problem.

Now, how about the correct gross weight of gold sovereigns?

 

😎

Chards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Cookies & terms of service

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies and to our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use