Free Essay

Submitted By LinhLung

Words 1043

Pages 5

Words 1043

Pages 5

Student ID: USTHBI3 - 052

I.28 (p.428) Translate the following statements into symbolic form. Avoid negation signs preceding quantifiers. The predicate letters are given in parentheses.

A good violin is rare and expensive. (G, V, R, E)

Solution:

x is a violin V(x) x is good G(x) x is rare R(x) x is expensive E(x)

→ symbolic form: ( (V(x) ^ G(x) ) ( (R(x) ^ E(x) ) I.29 (p.428) Translate the following statements into symbolic form. Avoid negation signs preceding quantifiers. The predicate letters are given in parentheses. Violins and cellos are stringed instruments. (V, C, S, I)

Solution:

x are violins V(x) x are cellos C(x) x has string S(x) x are instruments I(x)

→ symbolic form: : ( (V(x) ^ C(x) ) ( (S(x) ^ I(x) )

I.8 (p.439) Use the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof. 1. ∀x( A(x) B(x) )

2. A(m) ^ A(n) / B(m) ^ B(n) No. | Predicate | Note | 1. | ∀x( A(x) B(x) ) | Premise(P) | 2. | A(m) ^ A(n) | P | | B(m) ^ B(n) | Expected Conclusion | 3. | A(m) B(m) | 1, UI | 4. | A(n) B(n) | 1, UI | 5. | A(m) | 2, Com, SImp | 6. | A(n) | 2, Simp | 7. | B(m) | 3, 5, MP | 8. | B(n) | 4, 6, MP | 9. | B(m) ^ B(n) | 7, 8, Conj | | | Proved |

II.8 (p.440) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then use the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusion of each. Do not use conditional or indirect proof Some huckleberries are ripe. Furthermore, some boysenberries are sweet. If there are any huckleberries, then the boysenberries are edible if they are sweet. Therefore, some boysenberries are edible. (H, R, B, S, E)

Solution:

H(x) x are hukleberries R(x) x is ripe B(x) x are boysenberries S(x) x is sweet E(x) x is edible NO. | English | Predicates | 1. | Some huckleberries are ripe | ∃x (H(x) ^ R(x)) | 2. | Some boysenberries are sweet | ∃x (B(x) ^ S(x)) | 3. | The boysenberries are edible if they are sweet | (B(x)^S(x) ) E(x) | 4. | If there are any huckleberries, then the boysenberries are edible if they are sweet. | ∃xH(x) ∀x [[B(x) ^S(x)] E(x) ] | 5. | Some boysenberries are edible | ∃x (B(x) ^ E(x)) |

Prove:

No. | Predicate | Note | 1. | ∃x (H(x) ^ R(x)) | Premise(P) | 2. | ∃x (B(x) ^ S(x)) | P | 3. | ∃xH(x) ∀x [[B(x) ^S(x)] E(x) ] | P | | ∃x (B(x) ^ E(x) ) | Expected Conclusion | 4. | H(m) ^ R(m) | 1, EI | 5. | B(n) ^ S(n) | 2, EI | 6. | H(m) | 4, Com, Simp | 7. | ∃x H(x) | 6, EG | 8. | ∀x (B(x) ^ S(x) ) E(x) | 3, 7, MP | 9. | ( B(n) ^ S(n) ) E(n) | 8, UI | 10. | E(n) | 5, 9, MP | 11. | B(n) | 5, Com, Simp | 12. | B(n) ^ E(n) | 10, 11, Conj | 13. | ∃x (B(x) ^ E(x) ) | 12, EG | | | Proved |

I.8 (p.443) Use the change of quantifier rules together with the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof.

1. ∀x A(x) ∃x ¬B(x)

2. ¬ ∀xB(x) ∃x¬ C(x) / ∀x C(x) ∃x¬ A(x)

Solution:

No. | Predicate | Note | 1. | ∀x A(x) ∃x ¬B(x) | Premise(P) | 2. | ¬ ∀xB(x) ∃x¬ C(x) | P | | ∀x C(x) ∃x¬ A(x) | Expected Conclusion | 3. | ¬ ∀xA(x) ¬ ∀x B(x) | 1, CQ | 4. | ∀x A(x) ∃x¬ C(x) | 2, 3, HS | 5. | ¬ ∀xA(x) v ∃x¬ C(x) | 4, Impl | 6. | ¬ ∀x C(x) v ∃x ¬A(x) | 5, CQ, Com | 7. | ∀x C(x) ∃x¬ A(x) | 6, Impl | | | Proved |

II.2 (p.444) Translate the following arguments into symbolic form. Then use the change of quantifier rules and the eighteen rules of inference to derive the conclusion of each. Do not use either conditional proof or indirect proof. Either Dr. Adams is an internist or all the pathologists are internists. But it is not the case that there are any internists. Therefore, Dr. Adams is not a pathologist. (I, P)

Solution:

No. | English | Predicates | 1. | x is an internist | I(x) | 2. | x is a pathologist | P(x) | 3. | All the pathologists are internists | ∀x [P(x) I(x) ] | 4. | There are any internists | ∃x I(x) | | So, the following statements … | …mean: | 5. | Either Dr. Adams is an internist or all the pathologists are internists | I(Dr.Adams) v ∀x [P(x) I(x) ] | 6. | it is not the case that there are any internists | ¬∃x I(x) | 7. | Dr. Adams is not a pathologist | ¬P(Dr.Adams) |

Proved: No. | Predicate | Note | 1. | I(Dr.Adams) v ∀x [P(x) I(x) ] | Premise(P) | 2. | ¬∃x I(x) | P | | ¬P(Dr.Adams) | Expected Conclusion | 3. | ∀x ¬I(x) | 2, CQ | 4. | ¬I(Dr. Adams) | 3, UI | 5. | ∀x [P(x) I(x) ] | 1, 4, Com, DS | 6. | P(Dr.Adams) I (Dr. Adams) | 5, UI | 7. | ¬P(Dr.Adams) v I (Dr. Adams) | 6, Impl | 8. | ¬P(Dr.Adams) | 4, 7, DS | | | Proved |

I.13 (p.449) Use either indirect proof or conditional proof to derive the conclusions of the following symbolized arguments: 1. ∃xA(x) ∀ x(B(x) C(x) )

2. ∃xD(x) ∃xB(x) / ∃x(A(x) ^ D(x)) ∃xC(x) No. | Predicate | Note | 1. | ∃xA(x) ∀ x(B(x) C(x) ) | Premise(P) | 2. | ∃xD(x) ∃xB(x) | P | | ∃x(A(x) ^ D(x)) ∃xC(x) | Expected Conclusion | | 3. ∃x(A(x) ^ D(x)) | ACP | | 4. A(m) ^ D(m) | 3, EI | | 5. A(m) | 4, Com, Simp | | 6. ∃xA(x) | 5, EG | | 7. ∀ x(B(x) C(x) ) | 1, 6, MP | | 8. D(m) | 4, Simp | | 9. ∃xD(x) | 8, EG | | 10. ∃xB(x) | 2, 9, MP | | 11. B(n) | 10, EI | | 12. B(n) C(n) | 7, UI | | 13. C(n) | 11, 12, MP | | 14. ∃xC(x) | 13, EG | 15. | ∃x [(A(x) ^ D(x)] ∃xC(x) | 3-14, CP |…...

Premium Essay

...Logic Application Jessica Mitrov Mat/104 October 28,2013 Rami Hanbali Logic Application We are given an illogically logical problem. When reading the clues that we are given it makes no sense what so ever. I read the problem multiple times and no matter what way I read it there never seemed to have any logic to it. So I will show you the important facts that were given to us, the strategy I used, I will also give you a blow by blow on how to solve the problem, and finally tell you the answer to how Andy figured out what his cards were. By the end of this paper you will see how this illogical problem actually is a very logical problem. The most important information that is given to you in an indirect way is that you have to find the missing information to make the illogical problem become logical. You are told that you plus three other people have cards with numbers anywhere between one and nine. You are given the numbers to Andy, Belle, and Carol. They also tell you that Andy sees two people that have cards that have the same sum, and that Belle sees all of the odd numbers between one and nine. Now that we know the information that we found out that the problem makes no sense our strategy is to use logic and deductive reasoning. In order to do that you have to find out what your three cards are. Once you know that then the answers to the two questions will make since, and from there you will be able to figure out how Andy was able to guess what his cards are. So......

Words: 779 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

...Logical Concepts an overview What is logic? • Logic is the science of reasoning, • which is to say: the academic discipline that investigates reasoning. What is reasoning? • reasoning is inferring (deducing) • to infer is to draw conclusions (output) from a premise or set of premises (input). An Example of Reasoning You see smoke And you infer That there is fire (input) (deduce) (output) Another example of Reasoning You count 19 people in a group; which originally had 20 people in it; and you infer that someone is missing (input) (input) (deduce) (output) The Basic Idea Logic evaluates reasoning in terms of arguments. What is an argument? • The word “argument” can mean many different things depending on the context. • But for the purposes of logic, the term “argument” means something very specific: What is an argument? • an argument is a collection of statements, one of which is designated as the conclusion, and the remainder of which are designated as the premises. • Important note: premises are always intended to provide support or evidence for the conclusion, but they don't always succeed. (It’s still an argument either way.) What is a statement? • A statement is a declarative sentence, • i.e., a sentence that is capable of being true or false. • For example: The door is closed. • Other kinds of sentence are not capable of being true or false: • Interrogative sentences are inquiries for information: Is the......

Words: 2744 - Pages: 11

Premium Essay

...Class: BBA 1 (Section B) Course title: Introduction to logic Assignment no 1 Chapter no 3 Categorical proposition Submitted to: Sir Imran Exercise I. State the converses of the following proposition and indicate which of them are equivalent to the given proposition. 1. No people who are considerate of others are reckless drivers who pay no attention to traffic regulations. Answer: No reckless drivers who pay no attention to traffic regulation are people who are considerate of others. (Equivalent) 2. All those who pass the NDA exam are commissioned officers in Indian army. Answer: *All commissioned officer in Indian army are those who pass NDA exam. (Not equivalent) *Some commissioned officer in Indian army are those who pass NDA exam. (Limit) (Equivalent) 3. Some Korean cars are overpriced and inferior quality automobiles. Answer: Some overpriced and inferior quality automobiles are Korean cars. (Equivalent) 4. No reptiles are warm-blooded animals. Answer: No warm-blooded animals are reptiles. (Equivalent) 5. Some film producers are elderly persons who are incapable of producing works of quality anymore. Answer: Some elderly persons who are incapable of producing works of quality anymore......

Words: 525 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

...Table of Contents * First Order Cybernetic principles: named and defined * Second Order Cybernetic principles: named and defined * How reality is seen by each specific approach * How health and pathology are addressed by each approach * How first and second order cybernetics deal with therapy * The role and function of the therapist in each approach * Critical ethical concerns about each specific perspective * How both approaches can be integrated in a useful and complementary way * References * First Order Cybernetic principles * Recursion - The principle of recursion or reciprocal causality is based on the premise that individuals and elements are constantly interacting and influencing each other. Meaning is derived from the relationship between individuals and elements as each defines and is defined by the other. Each of us, therefore, shares in the destiny of the other (Becvar & Becvar, 2013). Just as every individual is influenced and is being influenced by every other individual, the same can be said for every system. Recursion sees all individuals as members of a world community who are connected at every level of the system. * Feedback - Feedback is the process whereby information about past behaviour is fed back into the system in a circular manner. Two types of feedback occur, namely positive and negative feedback. Positive feedback refers to forces which try to alter the system’s rules,......

Words: 3316 - Pages: 14

Premium Essay

...Part one of the video opens up by telling viewers that Aristotle is credited with formalizing logic as a discipline. Viewers are directed to the aspect of what arguments are in the area of logic. Arguments are not heated exchanges or personal assaults, but however they are a group of statements. Statements are sentences capable of being true or false. An example of a statement is saying, “All cats are vicious animals.” The next topic that is brought up in part one of the video is the subject of inference. Inference is the reasoning process of an argument. Inference can be explicit (using premise and/or conclusion indicator words) and implicit (the reader has to catch the inference). Finally the video concludes with the point that there are four non-inferences commonly mistaken for arguments these are: advice, assertion, reports, and explanations. Part two of the formal logic video is the topic of inference. As stated in the early video inference is the reasoning process of an argument. Viewers are now introduced with the topic of deductive and inductive arguments. A deductive argument means that there is no possibility of the conclusion being false when the premises are true. Inductive arguments mean that the premises merely make the conclusion likely (conclusion “goes beyond” the premises). Lastly inductive forms are arguments based on signs, prediction, and generalization just to name a few. Part three of the video talks about validity, strength, soundness, and......

Words: 423 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

...and, like any successful business, wants to score in new markets. The NFL first tackled Europe in 1991, with plans to establish American football there. After years of failed attempts, NFL Europe emerged as six teams, five of which were based in Germany (such as the Berlin Thunder, the Cologne Centurions, and the Hamburg Sea Devils). Earlier teams established in Spain had failed. Why did American football triumph in Germany but fail in Spain? An excellent metaphor for Spanish culture is the bullfight, an ancient pursuit. In tradition-bound Spain, bullfights are often held in 2,000-year-old Roman amphitheaters. Rather than a competitive sport, bullfighting is a ritual and an art. It is the demonstration of style and courage by the matador, the hero who fights the bulls. If the matador has per- 124 CAVUMC05_124-157hr 10/10/07 1:41 PM Page 125 formed well, he receives a standing ovation by the crowds, who wave white handkerchiefs or throw hats and roses into the ring. The bullfight symbolizes Spanish culture by combining a passionate celebration of life with an elaborate system of rituals, a grandiose and artistic spectacle with blood, violence, and danger. In the hearts of the Spanish people, American football cannot attain such heights. What accounts for American football’s early success in Germany? For one, the sport strongly emphasizes the traditional German traits of rules and order. In Germany, rules are many and conformity is valued. For instance,......

Words: 18507 - Pages: 75

Premium Essay

...CHAPTER 2 Identifying Arguments The starred items are also contained in the Answer Key in the back of The Power of Logic. Exercise 2.1 Part A: Arguments and Nonarguments *1. 2. 3. *4. 5. 6. *7. 8. 9. *10. 11. 12. *13. 14. 15. *16. 17. 18. *19. 20. 21. *22. 23. 24. 25. Nonargument (explanation). Nonargument (conditional statement). Nonargument (report). Argument. Conclusion: Waging war is always wrong. Nonargument (explanation). Argument. Conclusion: Today the principal threat to America is America’s public education establishment. Argument. Conclusion: Without us, light does not exist. Nonargument (conditional statement). Nonargument (report). Nonargument (explanation). Nonargument (explanation). Argument. Conclusion: The population of the world has grown both steadily and rapidly since 1950. Nonargument (report). Argument. Conclusion: James died because he was hanged. Argument. Conclusion: Not all mob bosses avoid prison. Nonargument (illustration). Nonargument (conditional). Nonargument (illustration). Nonargument (conditional). Argument. Conclusion: The U.S. policy of nuclear deterrence was immoral. Nonargument (conditional). Argument. Conclusion: The good don’t always die young. Nonargument (explanation). Argument. Conclusion: Some metals are liquids at room temperature. Argument. Conclusion: Stealing is wrong simply because society disapproves of it. Exercise 2.2 Part A: Identifying Arguments *1. 1. The defendant is insane. So, 2. The defendant is not......

Words: 5559 - Pages: 23

Free Essay

...Introduction The purpose of this essay paper is to critically compare the epistemology governing the first and second order cybernetic approaches. (Epistemology is defined by Becvar and Becvar (2013), as the study of how we know what we know, and how we can make valid knowledge claims based on a particular theoretical framework. It focuses on the assumption that underline a particular framework and whether the knowledge claim made by that theory is logically consistent with its own assumption). In doing so, the student will answer the following questions: 1. Name and define the first-order cybernetic principles as described in the book The first order cybernetic is also known as simple cybernetic. Becvar and Becvar (2013), describe the first order cybernetic metaphorically by using the black box. They stated that it is a system whose operation we attempt to understand by observing what goes into and what comes out of it, analysis of inputs and outputs. In addition, we place ourselves outside the system as observers of what is going on inside the system. We are more interested in understanding the interaction and relationships within the system. The observer stays outside of the system being observed and views him/herself as being in a position to facilitate adjustment in the system without taking into consideration his/her participation. The following are the principles of this approach as stated in Becvar and Becvar (2013): * Recursion: this principle......

Words: 3307 - Pages: 14

Free Essay

...1.2.1.AK Combinational Logic Design Introduction Combinational and sequential logic are the fundamental building blocks of digital electronics. Combinational logic, which is sometimes referred to as "combinatorial logic”, is characterized by its output being a function of the current input value. A variety of different logic gates can be used to implement combinational logic circuits. Many of these gates will be studied in future units of this course. In this introductory unit, we will limit our designs to AND, OR, and INVERTER gates for the sake of simplicity. In this activity you will use the Circuit Design Software (CDS) to build and test your first combinational logic circuits. Equipment * Circuit Design Software (CDS) Procedure Now it’s time for you to implement your first AOI combinational logic circuit. The circuit that we will use for this purpose is a Car Safety Buzzer design.The design specifications are as follows: The buzzer is on whenever the door is open or when the key is in the ignition and the seat belt is not buckled. 1. Create a table that describes these design specification in terms of “highs” (1) and “lows” (0). This is when the sensor or indicator is active or not active. Seat Belt | 0 = SEAT BELT NOT BUCKLED | | 1 = SEAT BELT BUCKLED | Key | 0 = KEY NOT IN THE IGNITION | | 1 = KEY IN THE IGNITION | Door | 0 = DOOR IS NOT OPEN | | 1 = DOOR IS OPEN | Buzzer | 0 = BUZZER is OFF | | 1 = BUZZER is ON | 2.......

Words: 690 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

...deserve a second chance on a new planet." "Maybe so," Claudia says in a patronizing tone."And now that you mention it, we probably have a legal obligation to let them in. Our current immigration laws say that we have to admit at least ten thousand applicants annually, from every major nation. If those aliens would just sign the right papers, we'd have to give them permanent resi dency. However, what worries me is, they may have the wrong intentions. After all, didn't they conduct experiments on those people they abducted?" "Yes, but don't we experiment on animals? If the animals don't complain, why should we? Also, medical experimentation often leads to wonderful new cures. I'm certain we have nothing to worry about," says Ralph, proud of his logic. "Humph! I hope you're right. Well, I've got to go now-and don't let any green men kidnap you," Claudia says with a barb. "And you, either," Ralph answers. 3.4 Fallacies of Presumption, Ambiguity, and Grammatical Analogy The fallacies of presumption include begging the question, complex question, false dichotomy, and suppressed evidence. These fallacies arise not because the premises are irrelevant to the conclusion or provide insufficient reason for believing the conclusion but because the premises presume what they purport to prove. Begging the question presumes that the premises provide adequate support for the conclusion when in fact they do not, and complex question presumes that a question can be answered by a sim ple......

Words: 9519 - Pages: 39

Premium Essay

...Nestlé Nutrition Institute Looking to the future Nestlé: almost 150 years pioneering nutrition and health 26 27 28 30 32 32 33 People, products, brands Putting the consumer first Food is local Nestlé – a company built on brands Contributing to nutrition, health and wellness Ensuring quality and food safety Wherever, whenever, however The changing consumer 16 16 18 18 20 21 45 46 47 48 48 50 How Nestlé runs its business Principles, not rules A multi-cultural business Looking after the environment Sourcing raw materials A network of local companies Beneﬁ ting local economies Nestlé in the community: reaching out beyond our business Consistent, sustainable growth People are Nestlé’s greatest asset Wide variety of career opportunities How our business is organised Other Nestlé Group companies The world of Nestlé 52 Nestlé website and Nestlé publications Website and publications 36 37 38 40 41 42 43 1 2 Welcome to Nestlé The aim of this booklet is to introduce ourselves to you, and to share with you some special insights into the many facets of our Company. Nestlé is the largest food and beverage company in the world. It is also well on its way to becoming world leader in nutrition, health and wellness. In the first part of this booklet, the emphasis is on the way Nestlé brings more nutritious products to more consumers all over the world. In the second part, the focus is on our brands......

Words: 7146 - Pages: 29

Free Essay

...Epistemologies governing the first- and second-order cybernetic approaches: Ivan Bronkhorst Student number: 51863456 PYC4808 Assignment 2 Table of Contents 1. First Order Cybernetic (FOC) principles: 3 Recursion: 3 Feedback: 3 Morphostasis /Morphogenesis: 3 Rules and Boundaries: 3 Openness/Closedness: 4 Entropy/Negentropy: 4 Equifinality/Equipotentiality: 4 Communication and Information Processing 5 Relationship and Wholeness: 5 2. Second Order Cybernetic (FOC) principles: 6 Wholeness and Self-Reference: 6 Openness/Closedness: 7 Autopoiesis: 7 Structural Determinism: 7 Structural Coupling and Nonpurposeful Drift: 7 Epistemology of Participation: 8 Reality as a Multiverse: 8 1. First Order Cybernetic (FOC) principles: Recursion: Recursion is focused on the relationship between individuals and given elements in isolation. Recursion is, thus, focuses on how individuals and elements interact with, and influence one another respectively (Becvar & Becvar, 2014, pp. 69-70). In my opinion recursion in FOC refers to the circular causality or impact, if you will, that individuals and/or given elements have on one another. For instance, a child is extremely fearful of his father and, thus, doesn’t like talking to his father. His father, in turn, gets angry and strict when his son does not talk to him on a regular basis seeing as this makes him feel unwanted as a father. This behaviour from the father fuels the fear of the child creating a negative......

Words: 2814 - Pages: 12

Premium Essay

...First and Second Order Cybernetic Approach 1. How is reality seen by each specific approach? Describing reality is a challenge as is something that is unseen and untouchable. The first order cybernetic approach talks of the system that is entirely independent to the observer, while the second order cybernetic approach talks of systems that observe themselves. Hoffman (1985) challenges the way reality is viewed in second order cybernetic as he believes that people could never be sure as to what they think they saw is actually a real or is actually there. From the first order cybernetic approach the epistemological principle view reality a something that can be learned through the process of observation and at the same time the whoever has went through that process will not influenced by the same process. Individual can observe themselves, reality is how the individual see themselves without looking at the outside world (Becvar & Becvar, 2006). According to Becvar et al (2006) the therapist in the second order cybernetic approach has to take note that their observation can be influenced by the process and reality will be a challenge as they will have to consider the perception of their clients and their own perception. Looking at both the approaches reality is seen or view as perceptions created by the individual. 2. How is health and pathology addressed by each approach? In trying to address health from the first order cybernetic a healthy family is a family......

Words: 1371 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

...Logic Application Project Student Name: _______________________, _______________________ Last Name First Name The Problem: How can you found out what cards you have? The Approach: First, we should examine the stated facts that Andy has the cards 1 3 7 while Belle has the cards 3 4 7 and Carol has the cards 4 6 8. Then the second thing we will look at is their answer on the question cards that they draw. Combining the information given and their answers on the question cards, we can figure out what is the connection of these to your own cards, and that’s how we will figure out what cards you have. Conclusion: First, by examining the stated facts that Andy has the cards 1 3 7 while Belle has the cards 3 4 7 and Carol has the cards 4 6 8, and the answer of Belle to his question card, knowing that she sees Andy, Carol and yours, she says that she sees all of them, the five odd numbers on the cards that she can see and Carol don’t have any odd number on her cards so the ones that are left is you and Andy. Andy has three odd numbers of each kind on his cards and that would leave a conclusion that you have two odd numbers on your cards. Looking back to the answer of Andy to the question “Do you see two or more players whose card sum to the same value?” and answered “Yes”, knowing that the cards he can see are yours, Belle and Carol, and the sum of Belle’s cards and Carol’s cards are not the same, we can conclude that one of them have...

Words: 982 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

... Logic Application After evaluating the game of “Guess your Card”, I assume that my cards could only be 4, 5, and 9. I came up with this logic by starting with Andy. I add all three numbers together from each player. Andy has the cards of 1, 3, and 7 with a sum of 11. Belle has the cards 3, 4, and 7 with a sum of 14, and Carol has the cards 4, 6 and 8 with a sum of 18. Since each player have a different sum I took the players with the highest sum which is Belle and Carol to see which player cards would add up with my cards. Next, Belle draw the question card, “of the five odd numbers”, how many different odd numbers do you see? She answer all of them. Only because the only odd numbers she see is from Andy and Carol which are 1, 3, and 7. That's how I came up with the numbers of 5 and 9. I then, add together 5 and 9 which is 14, let's not forget in the beginning I said the sums must add up to either 14 or 18. Since 5+9=14, and the smallest card is 1 so my cards must add up to more than 14. The sum of my cards must be 18. In order for me to find out what is my final card I must subtract 18 from 9 and 5 which gives me 4. You can also see why Andy knew what cards he had. He realize that the only odd numbers Belle could see from Carol and myself were 5 and 9, but yet she claim she could see all five odd numbers. So the remaining three: 1, 3 and 7 must have come from Andy himself. That's how he figure out what he had. The logic of......

Words: 342 - Pages: 2