Skip to main content

Greedy Pirates



If there are two pirates left (#4 & #5), #4 has no options. No matter what he proposes, pirate #5 will disagree, resulting in a 1-1 vote (no majority). #5 will kill #4 and will keep all of the gold.

Now say there are 3 pirates left. #4 has to agree with whatever #3 decides, because if he doesn't #3 will be killed (because #5 won't vote for #3's proposal no matter what it is). #3 will just propose that he keep all of the gold and will get a 2-1 vote in his favor.

Now if there are 4 pirates left:
#3 won't vote for #2's proposal because if #2's fails, #3 will get all of the gold. #4 and #5 know that they will get nothing if the decision goes to #3, so they will vote for #2's proposal if he gives them one gold piece each. Therefore, #2 would keep 998 gold, and #4 and #5 would each get one gold.

So let's wrap this up:
Pirate #1 needs 2 other votes. He will not get a vote from #2 because #2 will get 998 gold if #1's plan fails.
#1 offers #3 one gold piece to vote for him, which #3 will accept (if it gets to #2's plan, #3 will get nothing).
#1 then offers #4 or #5 (doesn't matter which) two gold pieces, which is more than they would get with #2's plan.
So #1 can end up with 997 gold pieces, with #3 getting one piece and #4 or #5 getting two pieces.
 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Stamps

  B says: "Suppose I have red-red. A would have said on her second turn: 'I see that B has red-red. If I also have red-red, then all four reds would be used, and C would have realized that she had green-green. But C didn't, so I don't have red-red. Suppose I have green-green. In that case, C would have realized that if she had red-red, I would have seen four reds and I would have answered that I had green-green on my first turn. On the other hand, if she also has green-green [we assume that A can see C; this line is only for completeness], then B would have seen four greens and she would have answered that she had two reds. So C would have realized that, if I have green-green and B has red-red, and if neither of us answered on our first turn, then she must have green-red. "'But she didn't. So I can't have green-green either, and if I can't have green-green or red-red, then I must have green-red.' ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Suicidal Monks

  If there is only one monk with red eyes, then he sees all the others are brown-eyed, so he must be the red-eyed one. He kills himself the first night. If there are two monks with red eyes, then each sees one monk with red eyes and reasons that if this other monk is the only monk with red eyes, he will kill himself the first night. Neither monk kills himself the first night, so they each reason that they must have red eyes too. Both kill themselves the second night. If there are three, each expects the other two to commit suicide the second night. This doesn't happen, so each deducts that he must be a third, and the suicides happen the third night. Extends to four, five, etc. If the suicides happened n midnights after the tourist's remark, then there are n monks with red eyes.
Post a Comment
Read more

Backwards Clock

  Suppose that a second pair of hands turns together with the wrong pair of hands, but then in the correct way. When the wrong pair is in the same position as the correct pair, this means that the time is shown in the right way. First look at the hour-hands that are at the twelve. One turns with the correct speed, the other with a speed that is twelve times as small. These two hands are in the same position again when the 'slow' hand has progressed x minutes. The fast hand then has progressed 60+x minutes. For the time x that passed, then holds: (60+x)/12 = x. This means that x = 5 5/11 minutes. For the minutes-hands that start at six holds the same. The confused clock therefore shows the correct time again at 5 5/11 minutes past 7. 
Post a Comment
Read more