PROBLEM SOLVING & REASONING

A. Inductive Reasoning

Inductive reasoning is the process of arriving at a conclusion based on a set of

observations. In itself, it is not a valid method of proof. Just because a person observes
a number of situations in which a pattern exists doesn't mean that that pattern is true for
all situations. For example, after seeing many people outside walking their dogs, one
may observe that every dog that is a poodle is being walked by an elderly person. The
person observing this pattern could inductively reason that poodles are owned
exclusively by elderly people. This is by no means a method of proof for such a
suspicion; in fact, in the real world it is a means by which people and things are
stereotyped. A hypothesis based on inductive reasoning, can, however, lead to a more
careful study of a situation. By inductive reasoning, in the example above, a viewer has
formed a hypothesis that poodles are owned exclusively by elderly people. The
observer could then conduct a more formal study based on this hypothesis and
conclude that his hypothesis was either right, wrong, or only partially wrong.
Inductive reasoning is used in geometry in a similar way. One might observe that in a
few given rectangles, the diagonals are congruent. The observer could inductively
reason that in all rectangles, the diagonals are congruent. Although we know this fact to
be generally true, the observer hasn't proved it through his limited observations.
However, he could prove his hypothesis using other means (which we'll learn later) and
come out with a theorem (a proven statement). In this case, as in many others,
inductive reasoning led to a suspicion, or more specifically, a hypothesis, that ended up
being true.
The power of inductive reasoning, then, doesn't lie in its ability to prove mathematical
statements. In fact, inductive reasoning can never be used to provide proofs. Instead,
inductive reasoning is valuable because it allows us to form ideas about groups of
things in real life. In geometry, inductive reasoning helps us organize what we observe
into succinct geometric hypotheses that we can prove using other, more reliable
methods. Whether we know it or not, the process of inductive reasoning almost always
is the way we form ideas about things. Once those ideas form, we can systematically
determine (using formal proofs) whether our initial ideas were right, wrong, or
somewhere in between

A.1 Deductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning, unlike inductive reasoning, is a valid form of proof. It is, in fact, the way in
which geometric proofs are written. Deductive reasoning is the process by which a person makes
conclusions based on previously known facts. An instance of deductive reasoning might go
something like this: a person knows that all the men in a certain room are bakers, that all bakers
get up early to bake bread in the morning, and that Jim is in that specific room. Knowing these
statements to be true, a person could deductively reason that Jim gets up early in the morning.
Such a method of reasoning is a step-by-step process of drawing conclusions based on previously
known truths. Usually a general statement is made about an entire class of things, and then one
specific example is given. If the example fits into the class of things previously mentioned, then
deductive reasoning can be used. Deductive reasoning is the method by which conclusions are
drawn in geometric proofs.
Deductive reasoning in geometry is much like the situation described above, except it relates to
geometric terms. For example, given that a certain quadrilateral is a rectangle, and that all
rectangles have equal diagonals, what can you deduce about the diagonals of this specific
rectangle? They are equal, of course. An example of deductive reasoning in action.
Although deductive reasoning seems rather simple, it can go wrong in more than one way. When
deductive reasoning leads to faulty conclusions, the reason is often that the premises were
incorrect. In the example in the previous paragraph, it was logical that the diagonals of the given
quadrilateral were equal. What if the quadrilateral wasn't a rectangle, though? Maybe it was
actually a parallelogram, or a rhombus. In such a case, the process of deductive reasoning cannot
be used. The fact that the diagonals of a rectangle are equal tells us nothing relevant about the
diagonals of a parallelogram or a rhombus. The premises used in deductive reasoning are in
many ways the most important part of the entire process of deductive reasoning. If they are
incorrect, the foundation of the whole line of reasoning is faulty, and nothing can be reliably
concluded. Even if just one conclusion is incorrect, every conclusion after that is unreliable, and
may very well be incorrect, also.
Another instance in which deductive reasoning doesn't work is when it is not executed properly.
Using the example in the first paragraph, let's add the premise that Bob is a baker. Can we
deduce that Bob is in the room? We could only deduce this if we knew that everybody who was
a baker was in the room. This was not one of the premises, though. When reading premises, it is
very important not to assume anything more than exactly what is written. In Logic
Statements we'll more carefully examine exactly what occurs when premises are misused and
lead to false conclusions. For know, it is enough to know that deductive reasoning is perfectly
B. INTUITION

Literature addressing a type of mathematical knowledge, characterized by

immediacy, self-evidence, and intrinsic certainty.

B.1 PROOF

A mathematical proof shows a statement to be true using definitions, theorems, and postulates.
Just as with a court case, no assumptions can be made in a mathematical proof. Every step in the
logical sequence must be proven. Mathematical proofs use deductive reasoning, where a
conclusion is drawn from multiple premises. The premises in the proof are called statements.
Proofs can be direct or indirect. In a direct proof, the statements are used to prove that the
conclusion is true. An indirect proof, on the other hand, is a proof by contradiction. It begins by
assuming the opposite of the statement that is to be proven. During the proof, a contradiction will be
reached, showing that the assumed statement is false. For the examples in this lesson, we will use
direct proofs since they are used more commonly.
The format of a proof can be a simple paragraph, a flow chart, or a two-column chart. We will look at
an example of each.

effective when all of the premises are true, and each step in the process of deductive reasoning
follows logically from the previous step. *source: sparknotes.com
c. polyas problem solving

Problem Solving One of the primary reasons people have trouble with problem solving is that there is no

single procedure that works all the time — each problem is slightly different. Also, problem solving

requires practical knowledge about the specific situation. If you misunderstand either the problem or

the underlying situation you may make mistakes or incorrect assumptions. One of our main goals for this

semester is to become better problem solvers. To begin this task, we now discuss a framework for

thinking about problem solving: Polya’s four-step approach to problem solving. Polya's four-step

approach to problem solving 1. Preparation: Understand the problem Learn the necessary underlying

mathematical concepts Consider the terminology and notation used in the problem: 1. What sort of a
problem is it? 2. What is being asked? 3. What do the terms mean? 4. Is there enough information or is

more information needed? 5. What is known or unknown? Rephrase the problem in your own words.

Write down specific examples of the conditions given in the problem. 2. Thinking Time: Devise a plan

You must start somewhere so try something. How are you going to attack the problem? Possible

strategies: (i. e. reach into your bag of tricks.) 1. Draw pictures 2. Use a variable and choose helpful

names for variables or unknowns. 3. Be systematic. 4. Solve a simpler version of the problem. 5. Guess

and check. Trial and error. Guess and test. (Guessing is OK.) 6. Look for a pattern or patterns. 7. Make a

list. Once you understand what the problem is, if you are stumped or stuck, set the problem aside for a

while. Your subconscious mind may keep working on it. Moving on to think about other things may help

you stay relaxed, flexible, and creative rather than becoming tense, frustrated, and forced in your efforts

to solve the problem. 3. Insight: Carry out the plan Once you have an idea for a new approach, jot it

down immediately. When you have time, try it out and see if it leads to a solution. If the plan does not

seem to be working, then start over and try another approach. Often the first approach does not work.

Do not worry, just because an approach does not work, it does not mean you did it wrong. You actually

accomplished something, knowing a way does not work is part of the process of elimination. Once you

have thought about a problem or returned to it enough times, you will often have a flash of insight: a

new idea to try or a new perspective on how to approach solving the problem. The key is to keep trying

until something works. 4. Verification: Look back Once you have a potential solution, check to see if it

works. 1. Did you answer the question? 2.Is your result reasonable? 3. Double check to make sure that

all of the conditions related to the problem are satisfied. 4. Double check any computations involved in

finding your solution. If you find that your solution does not work, there may only be a simple mistake.

Try to fix or modify your current attempt before scrapping it. Remember what you tried—it is likely that

at least part of it will end up being useful. Is there another way of doing the problem which may be

simpler? (You need to become flexible in your thinking. There usually is not one right way.) Can the

problem or method be generalized so as to be useful for future problems? Remember, problem solving

is as much an art as it is a science‼ Remember Some of the Possible Strategies Given Earlier 1. Draw

pictures 2. Use a variable and choose helpful names for variables or unknowns. 3. Be systematic. 4. Solve

a simpler version of the problem. 5. Guess and check. Trial and error. Guess and test. (Guessing is OK.) 6.
Look for a pattern or patterns. 7. Make a list. Some Basic Mathematical Principles to Keep in Mind When

Problem Solving: 1. The Always Principle: Unlike many other subjects, when we say a mathematical

statement is true, we mean that it is true 100 percent of the time. We are not dealing with the

uncertainty of statements that are ―usually true‖ or ―sometimes true‖. 2. The Counterexample

Principle: Since a mathematical statement is true only when it is true 100% of the time, we can prove

that is is false by finding a single example where it is not true. Such an example is called a

counterexample. Of cours, when we say a mathematical statement is false, this does not mean that it is

never true — it only means that it is not always true. It might be true some of the time. 3. The Order

Principle: In mathematics, order usually matters. In a multi-step mathematical process, if we carry the

steps out in a different order, we often get a different result. For example, putting your socks on first

and then your shoes is quite different from putting your shoes on first and then your socks. 4. The

Splitting Hairs Principle: In mathematics, details matter. Two terms or symbols that look and sound

similar may have mathematical meanings that are significantly different. For example, in English, we use

the term equal and equivalent interchangeably, but in mathematics, these terms do not mean the same

thing. For this reason, learning and remembering the precise meaning of mathematical terms is

essential. 5. The Analogies Principle: Often the formal terminology used in mathematics has been drawn

from words and concepts used in everyday life. This is not a coincidence. Associating a mathematical

concept with its ―real world‖ counterpart can help you remember both the formal (precise) and

intuitive meanings of a mathematical concept. 6. The Three Way Principle: When approaching a

mathematical concept, it often helps to use three complimentary approaches: Verbal – make analogies,

put the problem in your own words, compare the situation to things you may have seen in other areas

of mathematics. Graphical – draw a graph or a diagram. Examples – use specific examples to illustrate

the situation. By combining one or more of these approaches, one can often get a better idea of how to

think about and how to solve a given problem. Problems. Directions: Work together to solve the

following problems using the problem solving strategies. Make sure at least one member of your group

records the reasoning you used to arrive at your solution. You do not have to work these problems in

order. Once you have found a solution to one of the problems, let me know and I can check to see if

both your reasoning and you solution are correct. 1. Every person at a party of twenty-eight people said
hello to each of the other people at the party exactly once. How many "hello's" were said at the party?

2. There are four volumes of Shakespeare's collected works on a shelf. The volumes are in order from

left to right. The pages of each volume are exactly two inches thick. The covers are each 1/6 inch thick. A

bookworm started eating at page one of Volume I and ate through to the last page of Volume IV. What

is the distance the bookworm traveled? 3. Suppose that thirty-two students signed up for classes during

an orientation session. If exactly twenty of them signed up for Chemistry and exactly sixteen of them

signed up for English, how many of them signed up for both Chemistry and English? 4. A hunter left

camp and walked five miles south and two miles east. He shot a bear and walked five miles north back

to camp. What color was the bear? 5. Suppose Pat has eight shirts and four pairs of pants. How many

different outfits can Pat make by combining one shirt with one pair of pants? 6. Six normal drinking

glasses are standing in a row. The first three are full of water and the following three are empty. By

moving only one glass, can you change the arrangement so that no full glass is next to another full glass

and that no empty glass is next to an empty glass, and we still have three full and three empty glasses?

7. Suppose you work at a bowling alley. After work one day, you decide to line up bowling pins in a

triangular pattern with one pin in the first row, two pins in the second, three pins in the third, and so on.

(a) How many total pins would you need to use in order to complete four rows? (b) How many total pins

would you need to use in order to complete ten rows? (c) How many total pins would you need to use in

order to complete one hundred rows? How about one thousand rows? 8. Pat and Kim bought the same

item. Pat said he paid 20% less than the list price. Kim said that if she would have paid 25% more for the

item, she would have paid the list price. Who paid the least? 9. A family has seven children. If we list the

possible genders of the children (for example bbggbgb where b is a boy and g is a girl), how many lists

are possible? 10. In a class of 25 students, 17 lived with both parents, 21 lived with their mothers, and

20 lived with their fathers. How many lived with neither parent? 11. For each of the following

statements, determine whether the statement is true or false. If the statement is true, give two specific

examples that illustrate the statement. If it is false, give a specific counterexample. (a) If a < b, then a + c

< b + c. (b) If a < b, then ac < bc. (c) If Person X knows Person Y and Person Y knows Person Z, then

Person X knows Person Z. 12. How many forty passenger buses are needed for a school field trip, if 156

students and five teachers will be going on the field trip? (They need to be legal for liability.) 13. Use
inductive reasoning to predict the next three terms in each given sequence. (a) 3, 6, 12, 24, … (b) 0.1,

0.12, 0.121, 0.1212, … (c) 13, 31, 15, 51, 17, 71, 19, 91, … 14. Use inductive reasoning to find the ones

digit for the numeric value of 250 . 15. A grocery store is having a special on cans of soup which is

normally price at 45¢ per can. The advertisement reads 3 for $1.00. You buy only one can of soup. How

much does it cost? 16. Bill and Sue both work a night shift. Bill has every sixth night off and Sue has

every fifth night off. If they both have tonight off, how many nights will it be before they are both off at

the same time again? 17. How many different rectangles with an area of twelve square units can be

formed using unit squares? 18. Compare these two problems: (1) Kim made 1 out of 3 free throws on

one day and 1 out of 4 free throws the next day. What fraction represents the portion of free throws

Kim made over the two days? (2) Kim ate 1/3 of a pie on day and 1/4 of a pie the next day. What

fraction represents the amount of the pie Kim ate over the two days?
What is Problem Solving?

On this page we discuss "What is Problem Solving?" under three headings:

introduction, four stages of problem solving, and the scientific approach.

Introduction
Naturally enough, Problem Solving is about solving problems. And we’ll restrict
ourselves to thinking about mathematical problems here even though Problem Solving
in school has a wider goal. When you think about it, the whole aim of education is to
equip children to solve problems. In the Mathematics Curriculum therefore, Problem
Solving contributes to the generic skill of problem solving in the New Zealand
Curriculum Framework.
But Problem Solving also contributes to mathematics itself. It is part of one whole area
of the subject that, until fairly recently, has largely passed unnoticed in schools around
the world. Mathematics consists of skills and processes. The skills are things that we
are all familiar with. These include the basic arithmetical processes and the algorithms
that go with them. They include algebra in all its levels as well as sophisticated areas
such as the calculus. This is the side of the subject that is largely represented in the
Strands of Number, Algebra, Statistics, Geometry and Measurement.
On the other hand, the processes of mathematics are the ways of using the skills
creatively in new situations. Problem Solving is a mathematical process. As such it is to
be found in the Strand of Mathematical Processes along with Logic and Reasoning, and
Communication. This is the side of mathematics that enables us to use the skills in a
wide variety of situations.
Before we get too far into the discussion of Problem Solving, it is worth pointing out that
we find it useful to distinguish between the three words "method", "answer" and
"solution". By "method" we mean the means used to get an answer. This will generally
involve one or more Problem Solving Strategies. On the other hand, we use "answer" to
mean a number, quantity or some other entity that the problem is asking for. Finally, a
"solution" is the whole process of solving a problem, including the method of obtaining
an answer and the answer itself.
method + answer = solution
But how do we do Problem Solving? There appear to be four basic steps. Pólya
enunciated these in 1945 but all of them were known and used well before then. And we
mean well before then. The Ancient Greek mathematicians like Euclid and Pythagoras
certainly knew how it was done.
Pólya’s four stages of problem solving are listed below.

Four Stages of Problem Solving

1. Understand and explore the problem;
2. Find a strategy;
3. Use the strategy to solve the problem;
4. Look back and reflect on the solution.
Although we have listed the Four Stages of Problem Solving in order, for difficult
problems it may not be possible to simply move through them consecutively to produce
an answer. It is frequently the case that children move backwards and forwards
between and across the steps. In fact the diagram below is much more like what
happens in practice

There is no chance of being able to solve a problem unless you are can
first understand it. This process requires not only knowing what you have to find but
also the key pieces of information that somehow need to be put together to obtain the
answer.
Children (and adults too for that matter) will often not be able to absorb all the important
information of a problem in one go. It will almost always be necessary to read a problem
several times, both at the start and during working on it. During the solution process,
children may find that they have to look back at the original question from time to time to
make sure that they are on the right track. With younger children it is worth repeating
the problem and then asking them to put the question in their own words. Older children
might use a highlighter pen to mark and emphasise the most useful parts of the
problem.
Pólya’s second stage of finding a strategy tends to suggest that it is a fairly simple
matter to think of an appropriate strategy. However, there are certainly problems where
children may find it necessary to play around with the information before they are able
to think of a strategy that might produce a solution. This exploratory phase will also help
them to understand the problem better and may make them aware of some piece of
information that they had neglected after the first reading.
Having explored the problem and decided on a plan of attack, the third problem-solving
step, solve the problem, can be taken. Hopefully now the problem will be solved and
an answer obtained. During this phase it is important for the children to keep a track of
what they are doing. This is useful to show others what they have done and it is also
helpful in finding errors should the right answer not be found.
At this point many children, especially mathematically able ones, will stop. But it is worth
getting them into the habit of looking back over what they have done. There are
several good reasons for this. First of all it is good practice for them to check their
working and make sure that they have not made any errors. Second, it is vital to make
sure that the answer they obtained is in fact the answer to the problem and not to the
problem that they thought was being asked. Third, in looking back and thinking a little
more about the problem, children are often able to see another way of solving the
problem. This new solution may be a nicer solution than the original and may give more
insight into what is really going on. Finally, the better students especially, may be able
to generalise or extend the problem.
Generalising a problem means creating a problem that has the original problem as a
special case. So a problem about three pigs may be changed into one which has any
number of pigs.
In Problem 4 of What is a Problem?, there is a problem on towers. The last part of that
problem asks how many towers can be built for any particular height. The answer to this
problem will contain the answer to the previous three questions. There we were asked
for the number of towers of height one, two and three. If we have some sort of formula,
or expression, for any height, then we can substitute into that formula to get the answer
for height three, for instance. So the "any" height formula is a generalisation of the
height three case. It contains the height three case as a special example.
Extending a problem is a related idea. Here though, we are looking at a new problem
that is somehow related to the first one. For instance, a problem that involves addition
might be looked at to see if it makes any sense with multiplication. A rather nice
problem is to take any whole number and divide it by two if it’s even and multiply it by
three and add one if it’s odd. Keep repeating this manipulation. Is the answer you get
eventually 1? We’ll do an example. Let’s start with 34. Then we get
34 → 17 → 52 → 26 → 13 → 40 → 20 → 10 → 5 → 16 → 8 → 4 → 2 → 1
We certainly got to 1 then. Now it turns out that no one in the world knows if you will
always get to 1 this way, no matter where you start. That’s something for you to worry
about. But where does the extension come in? Well we can extend this problem, make
another problem that’s a bit like it, by just changing the 3 to 5. So this time instead of
dividing by 2 if the number is even and multiplying it by three and adding one if it’s odd,
try dividing by 2 if the number is even and multiplying it by 5 and adding one if it’s odd.
This new problem doesn’t contain the first one as a special case, so it’s not a
generalisation. It is an extension though – it’s a problem that is closely related to the
original. You might like to see if this new problem always ends up at 1. Or is that easy?
It is by this method of generalisation and extension that mathematics makes great
strides forward. Up until Pythagoras’ time, many right-angled triangles were known. For
instance, it was known that a triangle with sides 3, 4 and 5 was a right-angled triangle.
Similarly people knew that triangles with sides 5, 12 and 13, and 7, 24 and 25 were right
angled. Pythagoras’ generalisation was to show that EVERY triangle with sides a, b, c
was a right-angled triangle if and only if a2 + b2 = c2.
This brings us to an aspect of problem solving that we haven’t mentioned so far. That
is justification (or proof). Your students may often be able to guess what the answer to
a problem is but their solution is not complete until they can justify their answer.
Now in some problems it is hard to find a justification. Indeed you may believe that it is
not something that any of the class can do. So you may be happy that the children can
guess the answer. However, bear in mind that this justification is what sets mathematics
apart from every other discipline. Consequently the justification step is an important one
that shouldn’t be missed too often.

Scientific Approach
Another way of looking at the Problem Solving process is what might be called the
scientific approach. We show this in the diagram below.
Here the problem is given and initially the idea is to experiment with it or explore it in
order to get some feeling as to how to proceed. After a while it is hoped that the solver
is able to make a conjecture or guess what the answer might be. If the conjecture is true
it might be possible to prove or justify it. In that case the looking back process sets in
and an effort is made to generalise or extend the problem. In this case you have
essentially chosen a new problem and so the whole process starts over again.
Sometimes, however, the conjecture is wrong and so a counter-example is found. This
is an example that contradicts the conjecture. In that case another conjecture is sought
and you have to look for a proof or another counterexample.
Some problems are too hard so it is necessary to give up. Now you may give up so that
you can take a rest, in which case it is a ‘for now’ giving up. Actually this is a good
problem solving strategy. Often when you give up for a while your subconscious takes
over and comes up with a good idea that you can follow. On the other hand, some
problems are so hard that you eventually have to give up ‘for ever’. There have been
many difficult problems throughout history that mathematicians have had to give up on.
That then is a rough overview of what Problem Solving is all about. For simple problems
the four stage Pólya method and the scientific method can be followed through without
any difficulty. But when the problem is hard it often takes a lot of to-ing and fro-ing
before the problem is finally solved – if it ever is

f. Recreational Problem using mathematics

21-110: Problem Solving in Recreational Mathematics Homework assignment 1 solutions Problem 1.

Find my office. Sign your name on the sheet posted outside my office door. Solution. My office is in the
Physical Plant Building (PPB), room 342. One way to get there is to go to Wean Hall, take the elevator
down to the first floor, exit the building, follow the sidewalk across the street and around the corner of
the FMS Building, and cross the plaza to the southwest corner. My office door is just inside the glass
doors. Problem 2. “How many children do you have, and what are their ages?” asks the census taker.
The mother answers, “I have three children. The product of their ages is 36, and the sum of their ages is
the same as my house number.” The census taker looks at the house number, thinks for a moment, and
responds, “I’m sorry, but I need more information.” “My oldest child likes chocolate ice cream,” says the
mother. “Thank you,” replies the census taker. “I have all the information I require.” How old are the
children? Solution. There are eight possible ways for three children to have ages whose product is 36:
Ages Sum 1, 1, 36 38 1, 2, 18 21 1, 3, 12 16 1, 4, 9 14 1, 6, 6 13 2, 2, 9 13 2, 3, 6 11 3, 3, 4 10 We don’t
know the sum of the ages, but we do know that the census taker knows the sum (she looked at the
house number) and yet she is still unable to determine the three ages. This must be because the house
number is 13; otherwise, knowing the sum would be enough information. So the ages of the children are
either 1, 6, and 6 or 2, 2, and 9. The mother’s statement that her oldest child likes chocolate ice cream
rules out the possibility that the ages are 1, 6, and 6, because in that case there would not be a single
oldest child. Hence we conclude that the ages of the children are 2, 2, and 9. Problem 3. (“Ins and Outs,”
Thinking Mathematically, page 175.) Take a strip of paper and fold it in half several times in the same
fashion as in Paper Strip (page 4). Unfold it and observe that some of the creases are IN and some are
OUT. For example, three folds produce the sequence in in out in in out out What sequence would arise
from 10 folds (if that many were possible)? Solution. It is helpful to carefully and precisely describe the
folding procedure and what is meant by “in” and “out.” Paper Strip describes the method of folding as
follows: “Imagine taking the ends in your hands and placing the right hand end on top of the left. Now
press the strip flat so that it is folded in half and has a crease. Repeat the whole operation on the new
strip. . . .” After folding the strip in half a number of times, the strip should be unfolded by exactly
undoing the folding process (this is important to note, because different unfolding methods can result in
different sequences of creases). Once the strip is unfolded, the creases can be classified as either “in” or
“out.” An “in” crease is one that, when viewed from the “top” (as this word is used in the description of
the folding method), makes an angle of less than 180◦ , while an “out” crease makes an angle of more
than 180◦ . Equivalently, an “in” crease is one that tends to make the adjacent segments of the paper
strip come together by folding toward the viewer, while an “out” crease tends to make them fold away
from the viewer. We discussed Paper Strip in class, which asks for the number of creases resulting from
a number of folds. We found that after n folds the strip has (2n − 1) creases. For example, after 3 folds
there are 23 − 1 = 7 creases, and after 10 folds there would be 210 − 1 = 1023 creases. In reality, it is
impossible to fold a paper strip 10 times. (Actually, this is not true—in 2002, Britney Gallivan, a
California high school student, succeeded in folding a very long strip of very thin paper in half 12 times,
and in the course of studying the problem developed a mathematical theory to describe the limits of
paper folding.) In any case, a sequence of 1023 “ins” or “outs” is not a very helpful answer to this
question and is easy to get lost in. So we would like to identify a pattern in the creases and describe the
pattern instead. After some experimentation, a pattern emerges. It appears that the sequence of
creases after n folds consists of the sequence of creases after (n − 1) folds; followed by an “in” crease;
followed by the sequence of creases after (n − 1) folds, reversed and with all “ins” changed to “outs” and
vice versa. For example, after one fold, the sequence is in; after two folds, in in out; after three folds, in
in out in in out out; and after four folds, in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out. Because of their
symmetry, it turns out that reversing one of these sequences and changing all “ins” to “outs” and vice
versa is the same as simply changing the middle “in” to an “out.” So this pattern can also be described in
a slightly different way. The sequence of creases after n folds consists of the sequence of creases after (n
− 1) folds; followed by an “in” crease; followed by the sequence of creases after (n−1) folds again, with
the middle “in” crease changed to an “out” crease. Why does this pattern appear? I had to spend quite a
bit of time folding and refolding paper to understand what was happening, but in the end I came up with
the following explanation. Suppose we start with the strip all folded. The sequence of creases we see
(no creases) is the same as if the strip had not been folded at all. Next we reveal the last fold by undoing
one fold. What we see now is a single “in” crease, as if a strip had been folded once and then unfolded.
Revealing another fold shows the sequence “in, in, out,” which is what we would see in a strip that had
been folded twice and then unfolded. In general, adding one more fold to a paper strip before unfolding
it is like doing one more such “revealing” step to a strip that is initially folded many times. Now, each
“revealing” step mirrors all of the previously existing creases (doubling their number, reversing their
order, and also changing all “in” creases to “out” creases), and adds a new “in” crease in the middle. This
explains the pattern we observed. Just for completeness, here is the sequence of creases produced by
10 folds. (This was generated by a computer program, not by hand!) in in out in in out out in in in out
out in out out in in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out
in out out out in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in
out out in in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in
out out out in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in
out out in in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out
out out in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out
out in in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out
out out in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out
out in in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out
out in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in
in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out
in in out in in out out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in
in out in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in
out in in out out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in in
out in in out out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in
out in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in in out
in in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in out in
in out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in in out in in
out out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in out in in
out out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in in out in in out
out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in out in in out
out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in in out in in out
out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in out in in out
out out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in in out in in out
out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in out in in out
out out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out
out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out
out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out
out in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out
out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out in in in out in in out out
out in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out in in in out out in out out out in in out in in out out
out in in out out in out out It should be clear why this is not the ideal form of the answer to this
question. Problem 4. (Exercise 1.5 from Problem Solving Through Recreational Mathematics, page 27.)
Six players—Pietrovich, Cavelli, St. Jacques, Smith, Lord Bottomly, and Fernandez—are competing in a
chess tournament over a period of five days. Each player plays each of the others once. Three matches
are played simultaneously during each of the five days. The first day, Cavelli beat Pietrovich after 36
moves. The second day, Cavelli was again victorious when St. Jacques failed to complete 40 moves
within the required time limit. The third day had the most exciting match of all when St. Jacques
declared that he would checkmate Lord Bottomly in 8 moves and succeeded in doing so. On the fourth
day, Pietrovich defeated Smith. Who played against Fernandez on the fifth day? Solution. The hint on
page 381 of the book suggests that we should make a chart showing what happens each day, and we
should begin by determining whom St. Jacques can play on the fourth day. Putting the information given
in the problem into a chart, we have the following: Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Cav vs. Piet Cav vs. St.
J St. J vs. Lord B Piet vs. Smith On the fourth day, St. Jacques cannot play Pietrovich or Smith, because
they are playing each other. He also cannot play Cavelli or Lord Bottomly, as he has played them already.
This means that St. Jacques must play Fernandez on the fourth day. Now that we have two matches
determined for the fourth day, the third match is easy—it must be between the two remaining players,
Cavelli and Lord Bottomly. Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Cav vs. Piet Cav vs. St. J St. J vs. Lord B Piet vs.
Smith St. J vs. Fern Cav vs. Lord B We know whom St. Jacques plays on three of the days. Let’s consider
his opponent on the first day. It cannot be Cavelli, Lord Bottomly, or Fernandez, because these are his
opponents on other days. This leaves either Pietrovich or Smith. But Pietrovich is playing Cavelli on the
first day, so only Smith is available to play St. Jacques. The remaining match on Day 1 must be Lord
Bottomly versus Fernandez. Furthermore, the only player St. Jacques has not yet met is Pietrovich; they
must play on the fifth day. Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Cav vs. Piet Cav vs. St. J St. J vs. Lord B Piet vs.
Smith St. J vs. Piet St. J vs. Smith St. J vs. Fern Lord B vs. Fern Cav vs. Lord B Pietrovich must play Lord
Bottomly on one of the days. The only day they are both available is the second day. Once we have filled
this in, we see that Smith and Fernandez must play each other on the second day, since they are the
only two left. Also, Pietrovich and Lord Bottomly each have just one hole left in their schedules;
Pietrovich must play Fernandez on the third day, and Lord Bottomly must play Smith on the fifth day.
Finally we see that Cavelli plays Smith on the third day, and Cavelli plays Fernandez on the fifth day. Our
completed chart is shown below. Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Cav vs. Piet Cav vs. St. J St. J vs. Lord B
Piet vs. Smith St. J vs. Piet St. J vs. Smith Piet vs. Lord B Piet vs. Fern St. J vs. Fern Lord B vs. Smith Lord B
vs. Fern Smith vs. Fern Cav vs. Smith Cav vs. Lord B Cav vs. Fern So it was Cavelli who played against
Fernandez on the fifth day. Problem 5. A sculpture in an art gallery consists of a wooden cube
suspended from the ceiling by a thin wire. The wire is attached to the cube at one of its corners, so that
the cube hangs at an angle. A fly lands on the top corner of the cube (the one at which the wire is
attached) at 12:00 noon. Every five minutes thereafter (at 12:05, 12:10, 12:15, and so on) the fly moves
along one of the edges of the cube to reach a neighboring corner. The path of the fly around the cube is
random (subject to the restriction that it can only move along edges of the cube). What is the
probability that the fly will be at the bottom corner of the cube (the corner nearest the floor) at 12:31?
Solution. We can color the corners of the cube with two colors (say, black and white) in such a way that
adjacent corners are given opposite colors, as shown below. With this coloring, every move of the fly
takes it from a corner of one color to a corner of the opposite color. Since the fly makes a move every
five minutes, it will have made exactly six moves by 12:31. The fly began at a black corner, so after six
moves it must also be at a black corner. In particular, it cannot be at the bottom corner of the cube,
which is white. So the probability that the fly will be at the bottom corner of the cube at 12:31 is 0.
Problem 6. Three guests check into a hotel and ask what the nightly rate is. The clerk says a room costs
30 dollars a night, so each guest gives the clerk ten dollars, and they head up to the room. A while later,
the clerk realizes he overcharged the guests; the room they are staying in is only 25 dollars a night. So he
takes five one-dollar bills from the cash box and hands them to the bellhop with instructions to return
the money. On the way up to the room, the bellhop realizes that five dollars cannot be split evenly
among three guests, so he pockets two dollars and returns three dollars to the guests. Now, each of the
guests initially paid ten dollars for the room, but later received a dollar back, so effectively each guest
paid nine dollars. In total, then, the room cost the guests 27 dollars. With the two dollars the bellhop
kept, this comes to 29 dollars. What happened to the missing dollar? Solution. This is a dishonest and
misleading question. There is no missing dollar. If we carefully keep track of where all of the money ends
up, we find that the clerk has 25 dollars in the cash box, the bellhop has two dollars in his pocket, and
the three guests have one dollar each. This comes to 30 dollars, as it should. The question is misleading
because the addition is done incorrectly in the last paragraph. It is true that in all the three guests paid
27 dollars, but that total includes both the cost of the room and the two-dollar “tip” for the bellhop. It
does not make sense to add the bellhop’s two dollars to the 27-dollar total, because it is already
included. What should be added to the 27 dollars in order to get a total of 30 is the three dollars the
guests received as change. Problem 7. (Note: The two parts of this question are not meant to be related
to each other, apart from the fact that they are both about arranging coins.) (a) Place 10 coins in five
straight lines so that each line contains exactly four coins. (b) Can you arrange four coins so that if you
choose any three of them (i.e., no matter which three of the four you pick), the three coins you chose
form the corners of an equilateral triangle? Solution. (a) There are several solutions to this puzzle. Here
are two: To make such a figure, it is easier to begin with the five lines than with the 10 coins. Let any five
straight lines be drawn in a plane so that no two of the lines are parallel and no three of the lines meet
in a single point. Then every line will intersect every other line (so there will be four points of
intersection along each line), and in all there will be 10 points of intersection among the five lines.
Placing a coin on each point of intersection will give a solution to this puzzle. (b) It is impossible to solve
this puzzle in two dimensions; three dimensions are required. The trick is to place three of the coins flat
on a tabletop so that they form an equilateral triangle, and then suspend the fourth coin above the
center of the triangle so that it sits at the top of a triangular pyramid (a regular tetrahedron), as shown
below. Problem 8. (From the article “Number Games and Other Mathematical Recreations” in the 15th
edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica.) Three travelers were aboard a train that had just emerged from
a tunnel, leaving a smudge of soot on the forehead of each. While they were laughing at each other, and
before they could look into a mirror, a neighboring passenger suggested that although no one of the
three knew whether he himself was smudged, there was a way of finding out without using a mirror. He
suggested: “Each of the three of you look at the other two; if you see at least one whose forehead is
smudged, raise your hand.” Each raised his hand at once. “Now,” said the neighbor, “as soon as one of
you knows for sure whether his own forehead is smudged or not, he should drop his hand, but not
before.” After a moment or two, one of the men dropped his hand with a smile of satisfaction, saying: “I
know.” How did that man know that his forehead was smudged? Solution. Let’s give the three travelers
names: Augustus, Bertrand, and Kurt (after three famous logicians). Suppose Augustus is the one who
figures out that his forehead is smudged. Let’s look at the situation from his point of view. He sees two
men with smudged foreheads and raised hands. He cannot conclude anything from this directly. Perhaps
Bertrand and Kurt are raising their hands because they see Augustus’ smudged forehead, but it is
equally possible that they are raising their hands merely because they see each other. Augustus reasons
as follows: “I will assume, for the sake of argument, that my own forehead is clean. Then Bertrand and
Kurt must be raising their hands because they see each other. What does the situation look like from
Bertrand’s point of view? He sees Kurt’s smudged forehead and my clean one, and he sees Kurt raising
his hand. Kurt is raising his hand because he sees a smudged forehead, and clearly it is not mine
(because mine is clean), so Bertrand can easily conclude that his own forehead must be smudged. The
situation is exactly the same for Kurt. Therefore, assuming that my own forehead is clean, Bertrand and
Kurt can quickly determine that their own foreheads are smudged. “But wait! Neither Bertrand nor Kurt
is dropping his hand. They must not be able to conclude anything about their own foreheads. This must
mean that my assumption is wrong, and my own forehead is smudged!”

21-110: Problem Solving in Recreational Mathematics Homework assignment 3 solutions Problem 1. (“A
Swimmer and a Hat,” from The Moscow Puzzles by Boris A. Kordemsky, edited by Martin Gardner.) A
boat is being carried away by a current. A man jumps out and swims against the current for a while, then
turns around and catches up with the boat. Did he spend more time swimming against the current or
catching up with the boat? (We assume his muscular efforts never change in strength.) The answer is:
Both times were the same. The current carries man and boat downstream at the same speed. It does
not affect the distance between the swimmer and the boat. Now imagine that a sportsman jumps off a
bridge and begins to swim against the current. The same moment a hat blows off a man’s head on the
bridge and begins to float downstream. After 10 minutes the swimmer turns back, reaches the bridge,
and is asked to swim on until he catches up with the hat. He does, under a second bridge 1,000 yards
from the first. The swimmer does not vary his effort. What is the speed of the current? Solution. The
current carries the swimmer and the hat downstream at the same rate and does not itself change the
distance between them. The swimmer and the hat begin together at the same point (the first bridge)
and end at the same point (the second bridge). Since the sportsman swam away from the hat for 10
minutes, he must have swum toward the hat for 10 minutes to meet it again. (This is just like the
situation with the swimmer and the boat.) In this span of 20 minutes, the current has carried the hat
1,000 yards, from the first bridge to the second. Therefore the speed of the current is 1,000 yards 20
minutes = 50 yards per minute. Problem 2. International paper sizes, standardized in ISO 216, are used
in nearly every country in the world except the United States and Canada. The largest size in the so-
called “A series” is called A0, and has an area of one square meter. The next size is called A1 and is
formed by cutting a sheet of A0 paper in half. Then A2 paper is formed by cutting a sheet of A1 paper in
half, and so on. This continues through the smallest size, A10. Additionally, the various sizes are defined
so that all of the paper sizes are similar (that is, they have the same shape, but different sizes). This
makes it easy to scale documents from one size of paper to another. What size of paper corresponds
most closely to the “letter” size paper common in the United States (8 1 2 inches by 11 inches)? What
are its dimensions, rounded to the nearest millimeter? [There are 25.4 millimeters in one inch, and 1000
millimeters in one meter.] Solution. The dimensions of letter size paper in millimeters are (8.5 in.) 25.4
mm 1 in. = 215.9 mm by (11 in.) 25.4 mm 1 in. = 279.4 mm, so the area of one sheet of letter size
paper is (215.9 mm)(279.4 mm) = 60,322.46 mm2 . The area of one sheet of A0 paper is (1 m2 ) 1000
mm 1 m 2 = 1,000,000 mm2 . So A1 paper has half this area, A2 paper has 1/4 this area, A3 paper has
1/8 this area, A4 paper has 1/16 this area, and so on. It turns out that the area of one sheet of A4 paper
is 1,000,000 mm2 16 = 62,500 mm2 , which is very close to the area of letter size paper. So A4 paper is
the size that corresponds most closely to letter size paper. Page 1 Now we need to determine its
dimensions. We are told that each size of paper in the A series can be obtained by cutting the next
larger size in half, and that all of the sizes are similar. This means that they have the same proportions,
that is, the ratio between the long side and the short side is the same. Let’s draw a picture of a sheet of
A4 paper and introduce some variables to represent lengths of sides: x y x/2 The two halves of this sheet
of A4 paper are sheets of A5 paper, and they must have the same proportions as the sheet of A4 paper.
So we have the equation x y = y x/2 . Cross-multiplying, we get x 2 2 = y 2 . Now we multiply both sides
by 2 to get x 2 = 2y 2 . We can take the square root of both sides of this equation to solve for x. (Since x
and y represent lengths, they cannot be negative, so we do not need to consider negative square roots.)
We get x = p 2y 2 = y √ 2. This gives us an expression for x in terms of y. Now we can use the fact that the
area of one sheet of A4 paper should be 62,500 mm2 to write the equation xy = 62,500. Plugging in x = y
√ 2, we obtain y 2 √ 2 = 62,500, so y 2 = 62,500 √ 2 . Therefore y = s 62,500 √ 2 ≈ 210.2, which means x ≈
(210.2)√ 2 ≈ 297.3. Thus, rounded to the nearest millimeter, a sheet of A4 paper is 210 mm by 297 mm.
Page 2 Problem 3. (Exercise 3.27 from Problem Solving Through Recreational Mathematics.) When Erica
was two years old, Leroy was four times as old as Miriam. When Miriam was twice as old as Erica, Leroy
was three times as old as Miriam. How old was Erica when Leroy was twice as old as Miriam? Solution.
There are three points in time in this problem. At one point in time, Erica is two years old, and Leroy is
four times as old as Miriam. At a second point in time, Miriam is twice as old as Erica, and Leroy is three
times as old as Miriam. At the third point in time, Leroy is twice as old as Miriam. We want to find how
old Erica is at this third point in time. When I worked on this problem, I became stuck almost
immediately. I couldn’t figure out how to represent this information in a coherent way. After I saw that
the problem refers to three points in time, I decided to draw a timeline with three marked points, and
then I tried to write down what was true at each of these points in time. Using E, L, and M for the ages
of Erica, Leroy, and Miriam, respectively, I drew the following picture. E = 2 L = 4M M = 2E L = 3M E = ? L
= 2M time The problem with this picture is that the variables E, L, and M do not consistently represent
the same numbers, because they represent the ages of Erica, Leroy, and Miriam at three different points
in time. To fix this problem, I needed to define more carefully what I wanted the variables E, L, and M to
mean. I decided that they should represent the ages (in years) of Erica, Leroy, and Miriam, respectively,
at the third point in time. (The unknown value we are trying to find is Erica’s age at the third point in
time, so it seemed sensible to make the variables represent these ages.) Now, if E, L, and M represent
the ages at the third point in time, how should we refer to the ages at the second point in time? If we
knew that, say, 2 years had elapsed between the second and third points, we could use E −2, L−2, and M
−2 to represent the ages at the second point in time. But we don’t know this elapsed time. So I decided
to introduce another variable, which I called t, to represent the elapsed time (in years) between the
second and third points; then the ages at the second point in time are E − t, L − t, and M − t. Similarly, I
introduced a variable s to represent the elapsed time (in years) between the first and second points.
Then I could write E − t − s, L − t − s, and M − t − s for the three ages at the first point in time. In picture
form: Erica’s age: E − t − s Leroy’s age: L − t − s Miriam’s age: M − t − s Erica’s age: E − t Leroy’s age: L − t
Miriam’s age: M − t Erica’s age: E Leroy’s age: L Miriam’s age: M time s t Using these expressions for the
ages at the various points in time, we can write the information given in the problem as shown below. E
− t − s = 2 L − t − s = 4(M − t − s) M − t = 2(E − t) L − t = 3(M − t) E = ? L = 2M time s t Now we have five
equations (in the five unknowns E, L, M, s, and t), and each of these variables has a consistent meaning
throughout all five equations. Therefore we have the following system of equations: E − t − s = 2, L − t − s
= 4(M − t − s), M − t = 2(E − t), L − t = 3(M − t), L = 2M. (1) Page 3 All that we have to do now is to solve it.
(Actually, we don’t have to solve it completely; the question asks only for the value of E.) There are
several ways to solve this system of equations. One strategy, which I will follow here, is to systematically
substitute or eliminate each variable one at a time until only one is left. (In our case, we will aim to have
E be the last variable left, since that is the one we are trying to solve for.) Equation (1), the last of the
five equations above, gives us an expression for L in terms of the variable M. So we can substitute 2M
for L in the other equations. This reduces the system to one of four equations in four unknowns. E − t − s
= 2, 2M − t − s = 4(M − t − s), M − t = 2(E − t), 2M − t = 3(M − t). Let’s multiply out the right-hand sides of
these equations to get rid of the parentheses. E − t − s = 2, 2M − t − s = 4M − 4t − 4s, M − t = 2E − 2t, 2M
− t = 3M − 3t. And now let’s move all of the variables to the left-hand sides and combine like terms. E − t
− s = 2, −2M + 3t + 3s = 0, −2E + M + t = 0, −M + 2t = 0. (2) If we solve equation (2), the last equation
above, for the variable M, we get M = 2t. This gives us another substitution to make, so that we can get
rid of another variable. After the substition of 2t for M in the first three equations, we are left with a
system of three equations in three unknowns. E − t − s = 2, −2(2t) + 3t + 3s = 0, −2E + 2t + t = 0. We can
combine like terms to get the following. E − t − s = 2, −t + 3s = 0, (3) −2E + 3t = 0. Now equation (3), the
middle equation above, looks promising. We can solve it for t to get t = 3s. Substituting this into the
other two equations, we get a system of two equations in two unknowns. E − 3s − s = 2, −2E + 3(3s) = 0.
Again we combine like terms. E − 4s = 2, (4) −2E + 9s = 0. (5) Page 4 We are down to just two variables, E
and s. We would like to eliminate s, because E is the variable we’re trying to solve for. To accomplish
this, we can multiply equation (4) by 9 and equation (5) by 4, and then add them together: 9E − 36s = 18
−8E + 36s = 0 E = 18. We got lucky—all we were trying to do was to eliminate s, but it so happened that
we also solved for the value of E in the process. So we see that Erica is 18 years old at the third point in
time, that is, Erica was 18 years old when Leroy was twice as old as Miriam. Even though we have the
answer to the question, let’s go back and solve for the other variables, just to make sure we didn’t make
a mistake in our algebra somewhere. We can retrace our steps in reverse order, substituting the values
of the variables we know. From equation (4), using E = 18, we have 18 − 4s = 2, so 4s = 16, which means
s = 4. Using this in equation (3), we have −t + 3(4) = 0, so t = 12. Now equation (2) becomes −M + 2(12) =
0, so M = 24; and so equation (1) is L = 2(24), so L = 48. This information allows us to fill out the timeline
with actual ages and elapsed times: Erica: 2 Leroy: 32 Miriam: 8 Erica: 6 Leroy: 36 Miriam: 12 Erica: 18
Leroy: 48 Miriam: 24 time 4 years 12 years Everything here matches up with the information given in the
original problem, so our solution checks out. Problem 4. (Exercise 3.19 from Problem Solving Through
Recreational Mathematics.) The silver currency of the Kingdom of Bonoria consists of glomeks, nindars,
and morms. Four glomeks are equal in value to seven nindars; and one glomek and one nindar together
are worth thirty-three morms. On my last visit to Bonoria, I entered a bank, handed the teller some
glomeks and nindars, and asked him to change them into morms. “Do you think that I am a magician?”
he replied. (Bonorians are noted for their warped sense of humor.) “Well, let’s see,” he continued. “If
you had twice as many glomeks, I could give you 120 morms; and if you had twice as many nindars I
could give you 114 morms.” How many morms did he give me? Solution. This problem can be confusing
because there are three different units of currency in use. We should choose one unit of currency and
do all of our calculations in terms of that unit. Let’s choose to do everything in terms of morms. I found
it helpful to first figure out how many morms a glomek is worth, and how many morms a nindar is
worth. Let’s use g to represent the number of morms in one glomek, and n to represent the number of
morms in one nindar. We are told that four glomeks are equal to seven nindars. In other words, the
number of morms in four glomeks (that is, 4g) is equal to the number of morms in seven nindars (that is,
7n); so 4g = 7n. If we solve this equation for n, we get n = 4 7 g. We are also told that one glomek and
one nindar together are worth thirty-three morms, so g + n = 33. Page 5 (We are working in morms;
both sides of this equation are numbers that count morms. The 33 on the right-hand side means 33
morms. There is no need to multiply this 33 by a variable m.) Substituting n = 4 7 g, we have g + 4 7 g =
33. We add like terms on the left-hand side to get 11 7 g = 33. Now we multiply both sides by 7 to obtain
11g = 231; so, dividing both sides of this by 11, we see that g = 21, and thus n = 4 7 (21) = 12. So a
glomek is worth 21 morms, and a nindar is worth 12 morms. Now that we understand the currency
system, let’s figure out how much money the narrator of the story had. We’ll use G and N to represent
the number of glomeks and nindars she had. (Note that these do not mean the same thing that g and n
did previously, which is why we’re using capital letters now.) We will continue to do all our money
calculations in terms of morms. The amount of money the narrator had (in morms) was 21G + 12N,
because each glomek is worth 21 morms and each nindar is worth 12 morms. This is the value we are
trying to find. We are told that if the narrator had had twice as many glomeks, she would have had 120
morms, so 21(2G) + 12N = 120. Also, if the narrator had had twice as many nindars, she would have had
114 morms, so 21G + 12(2N) = 114. So we have a system of two equations in two unknowns: 42G + 12N
= 120, (6) 21G + 24N = 114. (7) We can eliminate G by multiplying equation (7) by −2 and adding it to
equation (6): 42G + 12N = 120 −42G − 48N = −228 −36N = −108. Therefore N = 3. Substituting this value
of N into equation (6), we get 42G + 12(3) = 120, so 42G = 84, which means G = 2. Hence the narrator
had three nindars and two glomeks. This means that the number of morms the teller gave the narrator
was 21(2) + 12(3) = 42 + 36 = 78. Page 6 Problem 5. (Exercise 3.63 from Problem Solving Through
Recreational Mathematics; originally from the Greek Anthology, compiled about A.D. 500 by
Metrodorus.) I am a brazen lion, a fountain; my spouts are my two eyes, my mouth, and the flat of my
right foot. My right eye fills a jar in two days [1 day = 12 hours], my left eye in three, and my foot in four;
my mouth is capable of filling it in six hours. Tell me how long all four together will take to fill it.
Solution. This problem is similar to Sample Problem 3.5 on page 72 of Problem Solving Through
Recreational Mathematics, the solution of which is presented on pages 81–83. The idea is to work with
the rate of flow of the four spouts (measured in, say, “jars per hour”) rather than the times required for
each of the spouts to fill a jar. The reason this idea works is that the rates of flow from the four spouts
can be added together to give a total rate of flow from the fountain, whereas it does not make sense to
add the four times together (it should take less time for a jar to be filled by all four spouts together than
by one spout alone, not more time). We must decide on the units to use to measure the flow rates. “Jars
per hour” seems to be a sensible choice, so let’s go with that. (“Jars per day” would also have been
reasonable.) The right eye fills a jar in two days. A day was divided into 12 hours in the ancient world (as
is explained in the problem), so the flow of the right eye is one jar every 24 hours, or 1 24 jar per hour.
The left eye requires three days, or 36 hours, to fill a jar, so its flow rate is 1 36 jar per hour. The foot can
fill a jar in four days, or 48 hours, so its flow rate is 1 48 jar per hour. Finally, the mouth can fill a jar in
just six hours, so it has a flow of 1 6 jar per hour. The total flow of the fountain, then, is the sum of these
four individual flows. To add these fractions, we need a common denominator; the least common
denominator of 24, 36, 48, and 16 is 144, so we have 1 24 + 1 36 + 1 48 + 1 6 = 6 144 + 4 144 + 3 144 +
24 144 = 37 144 . Therefore, the total flow of the fountain is 37 144 jar per hour. We have a description
of the flow of the fountain in jars per hour, but we would like a description in hours per jar (because we
are interested in knowing how long it will take to fill one jar). Hours per jar is simply the reciprocal of jars
per hour; so an equivalent description of the flow of the fountain is that it can fill jars at the rate of 144
37 hours per jar. In other words, all four spouts together can fill one jar in 144 37 = 3 33 37 ≈ 3.89 hours,
or about 3 hours 54 minutes (assuming that an hour in the ancient world was divided into 60 minutes).
Problem 6. There is a unique real number x that can be expressed in the following form: x = 1 + 1 1 + 1 1
+ 1 1 + · · · , where the dots “ · · · ” mean “and so on, forever.” What is this number x? (This strange-
looking kind of infinite fraction is called a “continued fraction.”) Solution. It is difficult to see where to
begin in this problem; the algebraic expression appears to make no sense. For example, if we attempt to
evaluate the expression, what operation should we do first? It seems as though every step of the
evaluation has infinitely many steps that must be done before it. Let’s take on faith that this expression
has a meaning (the first sentence tells us that there is a real number that can be expressed this way) and
attempt to determine what that meaning must be. Suppose we look at the value of 1 + 1/x: 1 + 1 x = 1 +
1 1 + 1 1 + 1 1 + · · · = x. Page 7 Since the expression for x is infinite, adding one more “layer” like this
does not change it! So we have the equation 1 + 1 x = x. Multiplying this equation by x to get rid of the
fraction, we have x + 1 = x 2 . We can move everything to the right-hand side to get 0 = x 2 − x − 1, which
is a quadratic equation of the form ax2 + bx + c = 0 (with a = 1, b = −1, and c = −1). We can use the
quadratic formula to solve this equation for x: x = −b ± √ b 2 − 4ac 2a = −(−1) ± p (−1)2 − 4(1)(−1) 2(1) = 1
± √ 5 2 . This gives us two solutions for x, one positive and one negative (since √ 5 > 1). From the
expression given for x in the original problem, we see that x must be positive, because all of the
numbers being added are positive. So we reject the negative solution and conclude that x = 1 + √ 5 2 . [
This number, which is approximately equal to 1.618, is often called the golden ratio because of its
surprising occurrence in many places in nature, the aesthetically pleasing form of rectangles whose side
lengths are in this ratio, and its many beautiful mathematical properties (such as this one). ] Problem 7.
In the figures below, there are n points on the circumference of a circle, and a chord is drawn between
every pair of points. This divides the circle into a number of regions. The points are chosen in such a way
that no three of the chords intersect in a single point, so that the number of regions is maximized. How
many regions would be formed if 20 points were chosen around the circumference in this way? (Be
careful—the “obvious” pattern in the number of regions in the examples below does not hold in
general! You will need to count the number of regions for n = 6, and probably n = 7, in order to find the
general pattern.) n = 1 n = 2 n = 3 n = 4 n = 5 1 region 2 regions 4 regions 8 regions 16 regions Solution.
Let’s use r(n) to denote the number of regions into which the circle is divided when we draw lines
between n points on the circumference as in this problem. For example, r(4) = 8. From the first five
examples shown above, it appears that the number of regions doubles each time we add another point,
meaning that the sequence of the numbers of regions is the sequence of powers of 2. This suggests the
formula r(n) = 2n−1 [the exponent is n − 1 rather than n because r(1) should be 1, not 2]. But this is a red
herring! This pattern does not continue past n = 5. (This shows the importance of proving that a
conjecture must always be true rather than relying on evidence gathered from a few examples.) Page 8
If we draw the pictures for n = 6 and n = 7, being careful to arrange the points around the circumference
so that no three chords intersect in a single point, we discover the following. n = 6 n = 7 31 regions 57
regions This gives us the following table. n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 r(n) 1 2 4 8 16 31 57 Let’s try the technique
described in class to guess a polynomial formula for this sequence of numbers. We will take differences
between successive numbers of the sequence, and then differences between the differences, and so on,
until we reach a constant row. We write the successive differences of one row as a new row below it
and make the following table. n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 r(n) 1 2 4 8 16 31 57 1 2 4 8 15 26 1 2 4 7 11 1 2 3 4 1 1 1
We seem to have reached a constant row, after taking differences four times. This suggests that the
formula for r(n) is a quartic polynomial, that is, a polynomial of degree 4. The general form of a quartic
polynomial (in the variable n) is r(n) = an4 + bn3 + cn2 + dn + e, (8) where a, b, c, d, and e are constants.
We can find the values of these constants by plugging into equation (8) some values of n and r(n) that
we know. For example, we know that when n = 1 the value of r(n) is 1. Using these values in equation (8)
gives us 1 = a · 1 4 + b · 1 3 + c · 1 2 + d · 1 + e, which is to say a + b + c + d + e = 1. Since we have five
unknowns, we are going to need to get five equations, so we will do this with four more pairs of values
for n and r(n). Using n = 2 and r(n) = 2, we get 2 = a · 2 4 + b · 2 3 + c · 2 2 + d · 2 + e, Page 9 so 16a + 8b +
4c + 2d + e = 2. Using n = 3 and r(n) = 4, we have 4 = a · 3 4 + b · 3 3 + c · 3 2 + d · 3 + e, or 81a + 27b + 9c
+ 3d + e = 4. Similarly, with n = 4 and r(n) = 8 we obtain 256a + 64b + 16c + 4d + e = 8, and with n = 5 and
r(n) = 16 we find 625a + 125b + 25c + 5d + e = 16. Together, this gives us a system of five linear
equations in five unknowns: a + b + c + d + e = 1, (9) 16a + 8b + 4c + 2d + e = 2, 81a + 27b + 9c + 3d + e =
4, 256a + 64b + 16c + 4d + e = 8, 625a + 125b + 25c + 5d + e = 16. We shall solve this system by
substitution. (Other methods can be used too.) We begin by solving equation (9), the first equation
above, for the variable e, and we get e = 1 − a − b − c − d. (10) We substitute this expression for e in each
of the other four equations: 16a + 8b + 4c + 2d + (1 − a − b − c − d) = 2, 81a + 27b + 9c + 3d + (1 − a − b − c
− d) = 4, 256a + 64b + 16c + 4d + (1 − a − b − c − d) = 8, 625a + 125b + 25c + 5d + (1 − a − b − c − d) = 16.
We should now combine like terms on the left-hand sides and move the constants to the right-hand
sides to obtain the following system of four equations in four unknowns. 15a + 7b + 3c + d = 1, (11) 80a +
26b + 8c + 2d = 3, 255a + 63b + 15c + 3d = 7, 624a + 124b + 24c + 4d = 15. Now we can solve equation
(11), the first equation above, for the variable d; we get d = 1 − 15a − 7b − 3c. (12) Substituting this
expression for d in each of the other three equations, we have 80a + 26b + 8c + 2(1 − 15a − 7b − 3c) = 3,
255a + 63b + 15c + 3(1 − 15a − 7b − 3c) = 7, 624a + 124b + 24c + 4d = 15. Page 10 We multiply out the
left-hand sides to remove the parentheses and then combine like terms on the left-hand sides and move
the constants to the right-hand sides. This gives us a system of three equations in three unknowns. 50a +
12b + 2c = 1, (13) 210a + 42b + 6c = 4, 564a + 96b + 12c = 11. Next we solve equation (13), the first
equation above, for the variable c. We have 2c = 1 − 50a − 12b, which means c = 1 2 − 25a − 6b. (14) If
we substitute this expression for c in the other two equations, we get 210a + 42b + 6( 1 2 − 25a − 6b) =
4, 564a + 96b + 12( 1 2 − 25a − 6b) = 11. Again multiplying out the left-hand sides, combining like terms,
and moving the constants to the right-hand sides, we obtain 60a + 6b = 1, (15) 264a + 24b = 5. (16)
Continuing in this pattern, we solve equation (15) for b. We find 6b = 1 − 60a, so b = 1 6 − 10a. (17) We
substitute this into equation (16) to get 264a + 24( 1 6 − 10a) = 5, which, after simplification, becomes
24a = 1. Therefore we have a = 1 24 . Now we can begin the process of back-substituting known values
of variables into previous equations in order to determine the values of the other variables. We begin by
substituting a = 1 24 into equation (17), which gives us b = 1 6 − 10( 1 24 ) = − 1 4 . We can substitute the
known values of a and b into equation (14) to get c = 1 2 − 25( 1 24 ) − 6(− 1 4 ) = 23 24 , which we can
then use in equation (12) to find d = 1 − 15( 1 24 ) − 7(− 1 4 ) − 3( 23 24 ) = − 3 4 . Finally, using the known
values of a, b, c, and d in equation (10), we see that e = 1 − 1 24 − (− 1 4 ) − 23 24 − (− 3 4 ) = 1. So we
have found the values of the coefficients a, b, c, d, and e. We substitute these values into the quartic
polynomial function (8) to get a guess for a formula for r(n): r(n) = 1 24n 4 − 1 4 n 3 + 23 24n 2 − 3 4 n +
1. Page 11 We can check our algebra by plugging in some values for n (say, n = 5) and making sure that
our formula gives us the correct known value of r(n). In class I gave the value r(10) = 256 as a hint; let’s
verify that this is the value predicted by our formula. We have r(10) = 1 24 (104 ) − 1 4 (103 ) + 23 24
(102 ) − 3 4 (10) + 1 = 256, so the formula seems to check out. Thus, based on this formula, we can
predict that if 20 points are placed around the circumference of a circle and chords are drawn as
described in the problem, the number of regions produced will be r(20) = 1 24 (204 ) − 1 4 (203 ) + 23 24
(202 ) − 3 4 (20) + 1 = 5,036. [ In the first paragraph of this solution I pointed out the importance of
proving mathematical conjectures rather than relying on evidence based on a few examples. Strictly
speaking, we have not proved that our formula for r(n) is correct, so we must regard our answer as
merely a conjecture, though it is certainly a well-reasoned, educated guess based on substantial
evidence. In fact, this formula is correct, though the proof of this fact requires some concepts we have
not seen yet. A more interesting way to write the formula for r(n) is r(n) = n − 1 4 + n − 1 3 + n − 1 2 +
n − 1 1 + n − 1 0 . These symbols are binomial coefficients, which we will discuss at some point in this
course. ] Problem 8. (From Challenging Problems in Algebra by Alfred S. Posamentier and Charles T.
Salkind.) A shopkeeper orders 19 large and 3 small packets of marbles, all alike. When they arrive at the
shop, he finds the packets broken open with all the marbles loose in the container. Can you help the
shopkeeper make new packets with the proper number of marbles in each, if the total number of
marbles is 224? Solution. Let’s introduce the variables L and S to represent the number of marbles in
one large packet and one small packet, respectively. Since there are 19 large and 3 small packets of
marbles, the total number of marbles is 19L + 3S. We are told that this number is 224, so we have the
equation 19L + 3S = 224. Since the number of marbles in a packet should be a whole number, and hence
the values of L and S must be integers, we see that this is a (linear) Diophantine equation. Furthermore,
the values of L and S should be positive integers. The most straightforward method of solving this
problem, without the use of special techniques for solving linear Diophantine equations, is probably
simply to guess. In order to put some bounds on the values we should guess, let’s consider how many
marbles might be in a large packet. Certainly there should be at least one, so L ≥ 1. On the other hand,
224 ÷ 19 ≈ 11.789, so there cannot be more than 11 marbles in a large packet (if there were 12, then the
total number of marbles in the large packets alone would be 19 × 12 = 228). Therefore we can restrict
our search to values of L in the range 1 ≤ L ≤ 11. In addition, since the number of marbles in a large
packet should be more than the number of marbles in a small packet, we should have L > S. Since L ≤ 11,
we must have S ≤ 10. So the total number of marbles in the 3 small packets can be no more than 30. If
there are L marbles in one large packet, then the total number of marbles in the large packets is 19L, so
the small packets must contain a total of 224 − 19L marbles. Since there are 3 small packets, the value
224 − 19L should be divisible by 3 (and it should be no more than 30, as noted above). Let’s make a table
of the possible values of L and the corresponding values of 224 − 19L. L 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 224 − 19L
205 186 167 148 129 110 91 72 53 34 15 Page 12 Out of the values in the bottom row, the only ones
which are divisible by 3 are 186, 129, 72, and 15, corresponding to L = 2, L = 5, L = 8, and L = 11,
respectively. But three of these values are greater than 30, so the only possibility is L = 11, which means
that S = (224 − 19 × 11)/3 = 5. So a large packet contains 11 marbles and a small packet contains 5
marbles. [ The solution given by Posamentier and Salkind is somewhat more clever than this, although it
uses essentially the same ideas. I have quoted it below. ] Represent the number of marbles in a large
packet by L and the number in a small packet by S. Then 19L + 3S = 224, S = 74 − 6L + 2−L 3 . Since S and
L are positive integers, 2−L 3 must be an integer. If L = 2, not a likely value, 2−L 3 = 0; otherwise 2−L 3 is
negative. Let us put 2−L 3 = −k so that L = 2 + 3k. Since 74 − 6L + 2−L 3 > 0, 74 > 6(2 + 3k) + k so that k ≤ 3.
Also, S = 74 − 6(2 + 3k) − k = 62 − 19k. Since L > S, 2 + 3k > 62 − 19k so that k > 2. Since 2 < k ≤ 3, k = 3.
Therefore, L = 2 + 3k = 11 and S = 62 − 19k = 5. The values L = 11, S = 5 satisfy the conditions of the
problem uniquely. Problem 9. (From a short story, “Coconuts,” by Ben Ames Williams.) . . . So at last
Wadlin told him. “Well,” he explained, “according to the way the thing was given to me, five men and a
monkey were shipwrecked on a desert island, and they spent the first day gathering coconuts for food.
Piled them all up together and then went to sleep for the night. “But when they were all asleep one man
woke up, and he thought there might be a row about dividing the coconuts in the morning, so he
decided to take his share. So he divided the coconuts into five piles. He had one coconut left over, and
he gave that to the monkey, and he hid his pile and put the rest all back together.” He looked at Marr;
the man was listening attentively. “So by and by the next man woke up and did the same thing,” Wadlin
continued. “And he had one left over, and he gave it to the monkey. And all five of the men did the
same thing, one after the other, each one taking a fifth of the coconuts in the pile when he woke up, and
each one having one left over for the monkey. And in the morning they divided what coconuts were left,
and they came out in five equal shares.” He added morosely, “Of course each one must have known
there were coconuts missing; but each one was guilty as the others, so they didn’t say anything.” Marr
asked sharply, “But what’s the question?” “How many coconuts were there in the beginning?” Wadlin
meekly explained. Solution. This is a hard puzzle. In Mr. Williams’ tale, Wadlin is an accountant who
works for a building contractor named Dean Story, whose competitor is Marr. Both Story and Marr
intend to place bids on a building contract. The night before the bids are due, Wadlin, knowing Marr’s
love of puzzles, gives this problem to him. Marr stays up till dawn trying to solve it and thus misses the
deadline, allowing Story to win the bid at a comfortable profit. Williams’ story was first published in The
Saturday Evening Post in 1926. The answer to the puzzle was not given in the story. In the first week
after it was published the Post received over 2,000 letters from readers asking for the answer or offering
solutions. The editor-in-chief, George Horace Lorimer, sent a desperate telegram to Williams that read,
“FOR THE LOVE OF MIKE, HOW MANY COCONUTS? HELL POPPING AROUND HERE.” It is tempting to
begin to write equations, so let’s do that. Suppose we let n represent the number of coconuts in the
beginning, a through e represent the numbers of coconuts that the first man through the fifth man hid
in the middle of the night, and f represent the number of coconuts taken by each man in the morning.
Note that these variables all represent positive integers, so the equations that we write will be
Diophantine equations. We are told that the first man divided the n coconuts into five piles (each of size
a) and found there was one left over. So n is one more than a multiple of 5; in particular, n = 5a + 1. The
first man gave one coconut to the monkey, hid one of the five piles, and put the other four piles back
together. So when the second man woke up there were 4a coconuts left. Page 13 Now the second man
did the same thing, so 4a = 5b + 1. Similarly, we have 4b = 5c + 1, 4c = 5d + 1, and 4d = 5e + 1. The fifth
man put the remaining 4e coconuts back together in a pile, and these were split evenly among the five
men in the morning, so 4e = 5f. So we have the following system of six linear Diophantine equations in
seven unknowns: n = 5a + 1, (18) 4a = 5b + 1, (19) 4b = 5c + 1, (20) 4c = 5d + 1, (21) 4d = 5e + 1, (22) 4e =
5f. (23) One reason this is a challenging puzzle is that there are more unknowns than there are
equations, so standard algebraic techniques cannot be used to solve it. Let’s attempt to reduce the
number of variables by substitution. We can solve equations (19) through (23) for the variables a
through e by dividing by 4, giving us a = 5 4 b + 1 4 , b = 5 4 c + 1 4 , c = 5 4 d + 1 4 , d = 5 4 e + 1 4 , e = 5
4 f. Repeatedly substituting variables into equation (18), and then simplifying, we get n = 5a + 1 = 5( 5 4
b + 1 4 ) + 1 = 5[ 5 4 ( 5 4 c + 1 4 ) + 1 4 ] + 1 = 5 5 4 [ 5 4 ( 5 4 d + 1 4 ) + 1 4 ] + 1 4 + 1 = 5 5 4 5 4 [ 5 4 ( 5
4 e + 1 4 ) + 1 4 ] + 1 4 + 1 4 + 1 = 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 [ 5 4 ( 5 4 f) + 1 4 ] + 1 4 + 1 4 + 1 4 + 1 = 15,625 1,024 f +
2,101 256 . We multiply both sides of this equation by 1,024 to clear the fractions and get the linear
Diophantine equation 1,024n = 15,625f + 8,404. (24) This equation tells us a few things. Observe that if n
increases by 1 the left-hand side will increase by 1,024, and in general two possible values of the left-
hand side (corresponding to two possible values of n) must differ by a multiple of 1,024. Likewise, if f
increases by 1 the right-hand side will increase by 15,625, and in general two possible values of the
right-hand side must differ by a multiple of 15,625. Since 1,024 = 210 and 15,625 = 56 , these two
numbers are relatively prime, so lcm(1,024, 15,625) = 1,024×15,625; this is the smallest amount by
which both sides of the equation can increase while remaining in balance. Hence, if we have some
numbers n and f that are a solution to equation (24), we can add 15,625 to n (and 1,024 to f) to obtain
another solution. Of course, this means that we could add any multiple of 15,625 to n to get another
solution. We could also subtract any multiple of 15,625 from n for the same reason. So, if there are any
solutions at all to the Diophantine equation (24), there are infinitely many of them, and we can go from
one of them to any other by increasing or decreasing n by a multiple of 15,625. Page This equation can
be solved by standard methods for solving linear Diophantine equations, but this is rather tedious. There
is an extraordinarily brilliant and creative solution that uses blue coconuts, which was first given by
Norman Anning in 1912 (though the problem he considered used apples instead of coconuts). The key
insight that led to this solution is that the monkey is the complicating element in the puzzle—if the
division into five parts came out even every time, the puzzle would be much simpler. Let’s imagine that,
in addition to the pile of coconuts, there are four imaginary blue coconuts. Since the original pile of
coconuts gave a remainder of 1 when it was divided into five parts, these four blue coconuts will allow
the pile to be divided into five parts evenly. When the first man wakes up and divides the pile, four of
the smaller piles will have a blue coconut on top, while the fifth pile will contain only regular coconuts
(and so it has one more regular coconut than the other piles do—this is the coconut that was originally
given to the monkey). Let’s say the man hides this fifth pile, and puts all the rest of the coconuts,
including the four blue coconuts, back together. Then the first man takes away the same number of
coconuts as he did in the original puzzle; the “extra” coconut is in his own hoard this time, instead of
having been given to the monkey. So, when the first man goes to sleep, the pile of coconuts looks just as
it did at this point in the original puzzle, except that it also contains the four imaginary blue coconuts. In
turn, the other men each wake up and do the same thing. The big pile of coconuts is always divided into
five parts with no remainder, because of the four blue coconuts. Each man removes from the pile the
same number of coconuts as he did in the original puzzle, but instead of giving the “extra” coconut to
the monkey he keeps it for himself. The four blue coconuts remain in the big pile. Every time one of the
men wakes up and takes his share, the number of coconuts in the big pile is reduced by one-fifth, that is,
the number of coconuts is multiplied by 4 5 . So, after all five men have taken their shares, the number
of coconuts in the big pile is ( 4 5 ) 5 , or 4 5 5 5 , of the original number. This must be an integer, so the
original number of coconuts (including the blue ones) must be divisible by 55 , which is 3,125. This
means that the smallest possible number of regular coconuts in the original pile is 3,121 (after taking
out the four blue coconuts). So far we haven’t verified that this number will work, because we haven’t
checked to see whether the pile of coconuts that remains in the morning can be divided evenly into five
piles, but we can check that now: There are 3,121 coconuts in the original pile. The first man wakes up,
divides the pile into five equal parts having 624 coconuts in each, and throws one coconut to the
monkey. He hides one pile and puts the other four back together, so there are now 624 × 4 = 2,496
coconuts in the pile. The second man divides the pile into five equal parts having 499 coconuts in each,
throws one coconut to the monkey, hides one pile, and puts the remaining 499 × 4 = 1,996 coconuts
back together. The third man divides these into five parts of 399 coconuts each, throws a coconut away,
hides a pile, and puts the remaining 399 × 4 = 1,596 coconuts back together. The fourth man makes five
piles of 319 coconuts, throws a coconut to the monkey, hides a pile, and puts the other 319 × 4 = 1,276
coconuts back together. Finally, the fifth man divides the pile into five parts of 255 coconuts each,
throws one last coconut to the monkey, hides his pile, and puts back 255 × 4 = 1,020 coconuts. This is
the number of coconuts that are divided in the morning, and it is divisible by 5, so this solution works.
Thus there were 3,121 coconuts in the original pile. As previously noted, we can add or subtract any
multiple of 15,625 to this number to get another solution. (Some of these solutions will have “negative
coconuts” in the original pile, which is meaningless in a physical sense; but thinking about solutions
using negative coconuts and then adjusting the answer at the end by adding 15,625 is another creative
approach to solving this puzzle. In fact, the blue coconuts used in the solution presented here can be
thought of as manifestations of negative coconuts.) [ For more about this problem, including an
explanation of the solution using negative coconuts, see the chapter called “The Monkey and the
Coconuts” in The Colossal Book of Mathematics by Martin Gardner. ] Page 15

EXAMPLES:
a. Inductive reasoning