There are no missing coins.
The bar owner has 50 coins.
The waiter has 4 coins.
The boys have 6 coins (2 each).
No missing coins.
2006-07-26 05:09:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by jimbob 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The explaination from the question is missleading. Actually, the cost of beer was 50 coins, the waiter took 4 coins; total 54 coins and each guys got 2 coins backs, 2+2+2=6 coins. 54+6=60 coins. The 54 coins (18+18+18) included the 4 coins from the waiter. Isn't clear? (as clear as mud)
2006-07-26 09:32:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by crashy63 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
2+2+2 is given back to 3 guys and the waiter has 4 coins with him. So 3 guys and 1 waiter has 10 coins now. remaining 50 coins is with bar owner. total is 60.
2006-07-26 09:19:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
they didn't pay 60 coins for the beer, only 50, so It's supposed to be 18+18+18=54 BUT they didn't get 4 coins, so 54-4=50 , so every thing is ok!
2006-07-26 09:22:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by Liza 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
if you use an equal sign, what you are representing on both sides must be equal... for example:
ammount given = ammount received
guys paid = bartender received + waiter received
18+18+18 = 50 + 4
no problem.
If you rearrange the equation you get:
guys paid - waiter received = bartender received
54 - 4 = 50
no problem
The problem comes when you make this baseless equality:
waiter received + guys paid = (some senseless ammount)
4 + 54 = 58
Then you are trying to make some senseless ammount be equal to what they paid originally when there is no true relation.
Notice the left part of the last two equations. instead of adding what the guys paid and what the waiter received, you need to substract. There's the fallacy.
2006-07-26 09:49:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
This is just a trick question, read it carefully. There are no missing coins, why don't people understand that. your calculations should be 54-4=50 coins paid for the beer.
2006-07-27 10:18:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by jujz 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The twist is when you add 54+4. the right math is to do 54=2=2=2=60., because that's how much they paid plus the amount they got back collectively.
2006-07-26 10:19:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Rick Blaine 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
he probably lost it
2006-07-26 09:18:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by chameli/bebo 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
too much...too early...your hurting my brain.....
2006-07-26 09:18:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by krnsspott 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
wa!?
2006-07-26 09:18:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋