Monkey Bidness

[araya]

I. Assuming "as many humans in one place as monkeys" means a human staying in the boat while dropping off a monkey is safe from the horrors awaiting him on the shore (only one monkey can get into the boat with him, and you can toss him back, hehe), I think this works:

Skinny takes Ed over and drops him off. Skinny returns and takes another monkey over. Skinny returns and he and Dakota go over and join the two monkeys. Skinny grabs the dumb monkey and they return. Skinny and I go over and join Ed and Dakota. Then Ed hopefully is smart enough to pilot the canoe over, pick up the dumb monkeys and bring them over (2 trips of course). Ed, too, will be rewarded with a trophy featuring the inscription "Banana".

II. Perhaps the hunter adjusted his sights so that there was minimal compensation for gravity (which depends on range, of course), and shot directly at the monkey. As per the current discussion on this subject.

III. By symmetry, the monkey and the weight will rise at the same rate.

[Quailman]

I don't think you can safely toss a monkey onto the shore. In order to get them across, the humans can't be outnumbered by live monkeys on either side, so shoot two (not Ed) first, or:

code:

---

HH                      H


EM	---HM-->	M


:


HHH	<--H--		M


EM


:


HHH	--EM--> 	EMM


:


HHH	<--E--		MM


E


:


H	---HH-->	HH


E			MM


:


HH	<--HM--		H


EM			M


:


H	---HE-->	HH


M			ME


:


HH	<--HM--		H


MM			E


:


	---HH-->	HHH


MM			E


:


	<--E--		HHH


EMM


:


	---EM-->	HHH


M			EM


:


	<--E--		HHH


EM			M


:


	---EM-->	HHH


			EMM

---

It's a few more steps, but at no time do the monkeys outnumber the humans.

[worm]

Yes, Araya, I think you could do it if you have one of those nifty trophies handy. Without it, though, Ed's long gone. BTW, where does Monty fit into all this? hehe

I think problem 2 is pretty weak. I mean the hunter could've adjusted his sights like Araya says or he could've just aimed lower. He could've broken out some specs on his rifle to find out how fast his darts travel relative to the speed of light. From that he could determine how long the monkey would have between the time it sees the rifle kick back. And after making some guesses about the monkey's reaction time he could've figured out how far the monkey would drop by the time the dart gets there. Or he could get over himself and simply aim lower.

[Ghost Post]

Weak? I wouldn't call the 2nd problem weak, but rather not worded as well as it could have been. The point is that bullets out of a gun and the monkey all fall at the same rate, since the only force on each is gravity.

So, you have to realize that at first the hunter was actually aiming ABOVE the monkeys who remained hanging in the tree until the bullet kills them. The answer is that the hunter aims right at the monkey as the monkey falls.

This was visibly shown to me in high school physics class. Teacher shot a dart out of a blow gun aimed at a 'monkey' The contraption was set up such that the blow-dart broke the electromagnet circuit holding up the metallic 'monkey' as the dart left the blow gun, causing the 'monkey' to fall. He hit the monkey every time.

So, the if you extend the principle logically, ignoring the effects of wind resistance, it doesn't matter how far away you are from the monkey when you shoot. As long as:
1. gravity won't cause the bullet to hit ground before reaching the vertical plane of the monkey
2. monkey lets go exactly at the point that the bullet leaves the gun chamber
3. gun is aimed right at the monkey

you'll hit the monkey.

[Ghost Post]

Well, the puzzle says the hunter pointed "at" the monkeys that he shot, so the gun sight must be adjusted to compensate for the fall of the bullet. So if pointing "at" stationary monkeys works, then pointing below falling monkeys should be right, unless he readjusts his gun.

[Ghost Post]

Actually, it would only work if the hunter was at the exact same elevation as the monkey when he fired. Although I must admit that with a monkey, the margin for error is rather large

[Ghost Post]

Actually, it would only work if the hunter was at the exact same elevation as the monkey when he fired.
Sorry. Double post. I have to get used to this forum.

[This message has been edited by RubberPaw (edited 03-30-2000).]

[worm]

Yes, mikemilr, I say weak. I'll say it again: weak!!! Does it bother you that I say weak? I am the worm who says weak.

In my opinion poor wording "weakens" a puzzle. And the poor wording of this puzzle is a large part of what made it weak.

[Ghost Post]

Monkey business 3 is pretty interesting. If it were a smart monkey, he would climb the opposing rope that now hangs a few inches in front of him. He would grab the bannanas and eat them before lowering himself to the ground. In fact, he wouldn't have to climb . If he tried to climb, he would pull himself up a bit. The force of his pulling ation would create an imbalance which would place the majority of weight will on his side. He will fall to the point at which the banannas get stuck in the pulley and he can then climb the rope to the bananna point, assuming that you have rather strong banannas.

[daniel801]

for #2,

he should just aim at the ground below the monkey, wait a half-second then shoot...he KNOWS the monkey will land there. no prob.

[HelenOfTroy]

In Monkey # 3

initially the system of monkey and banana is at rest. How the monkey is attached to the rope is inconsequential...so let the monkey be as tall as the rope. With hands on both ends. In an unbelievable display of gymnastics...as monkeys are wont to. He holds the rope with his other end at it's point of contact with the pulley. As soon as he crosses it the bananas and the monkey are one on the ground.

I didn't get the trick in this one though.

[HyToFry]

Okay heres what I get, monkey problem number one...

I got exactly the same thing that quailman got, and i don't think its possible to dispute his answer

#2, I would aim DIRECTLY at the Monkeys eyes, thus he wouldn't see the gun jerk back and wouldn't know to drop.

#3, I get the same thing rubber paw got
EXCEPT RubberPaw Said

[HyToFry]

By the way, Has anybody else heard the rumors that Monty Hall is the Hunter?

[HyToFry]

Oh By the By the Way... hehe

Anybody who wants to post that the hunter shot the monkey in the back of the head, can just forget it, I VERY SERIOUSLY DOUBT this is what Minotar was looking for....

Remember its not about SOLVEING the riddle, it's about telling Minotaur what he wants to hear so that he doesn't eat you

Almost happend to me last week

[Ghost Post]

I realize that the purpose isn't for the monkey to get the bannanas, but I think that in a real life situation, the monkey would eat the banannas, putting the greater amount of mass on the monkey's side and making him fall to the ground. LOL

[Wonko the Sane]

I thought #2 was the easiest. Assuming the darts have flight feathers like most tranq darts, he could aim just about straight up and fire, the dart will turn over at the apex and come down drilling the monkey in the top of the head. He can't aim below the monkey because the monkey only drops if the gun is aimed at him, and the puzzle says the hunter only takes aim once. I think my solution works.

------------------
It's not the size of the spork, it's whether or not it's made of #7 recyclable plastic.

[Ghost Post]

Wonko: What about firing perfectly horizontally toward the monkey? According to the laws of physics(the #7 plastic here), the projectile will fall at the exact same rate as the monkey no matter what its lateral velocity is. When the monkey lets go, it will follow his elevation and hit him directly where the hunter aimed(btw, it's in my physics text book, so I can't argue )

[HyToFry]

What about this, if the Hunter is DIRECTLY under the monkey, and fires straight up at the monkey... well lets just say the monkey is screwed whether he lets go or not.. hehe also this would put the monkey only "mere meters" away from the Hunter, assumeing that the average tree in the jungle is 9 feet or so...

As for all of you who are going with the "directly horizontal the monkey theory", I like the theory, however, to get the correct answer, your answer would have work no matter where the hunter is, laterall or not, and the only two that i've seen so far are mine and wonkos, however for wonkos to be true, the hunter would have to know EXACLTY without any margin for error how far the dart will go to correctly judge where to shooot to make sute the apex is DIRECTLY above the monkeys head. It never says in the riddle that the hunter isn't the best marksman in the world, and it does come out and say he is EXCELLENT, so I would agree with WONKOS as well as my "Pointing at his eyes" theory, if you point DIRECTLY at his eyes the monkey CAN'T see the gun pull back, and thus never drops....

FLAMES???????

[araya]

Yeah Quailman, good thinking on #1. Tossing Monkeys as far as possible then paddling like hell would probably result in the monkey not waiting around for you.. hehe

For #2, if the sights are set so the bullet comes out of the barrel heading straight toward the monkey, then you don't have to be at the same elevation as the monkey. It will accelerate downward at the same rate as the monkey.

Wonko's solution requires both ridiculous judgment on the part of the hunter as well as assuming the monkey hangs from the branch for, oh, 10 or 15 seconds after the hunter fires, which seems unlikely. Besides, that gives it far too much time to start flinging monkey dung at you.

HyToFry - do you really think that the monkey won't notice the kickback of the gun? Monkeys have two eyes just like people. Not to mention guns don't kick *straight* back.

[Ghost Post]

For #2, if the sights are set so the bullet comes out of the barrel heading straight toward the monkey, then you don't have to be at the same elevation as the monkey. It will accelerate downward at the same rate as the monkey. Good point. I had forgotten. Although the amount your projectile would fall would be less if you were below the monkey, the relative slope difference between the path of the monkey and the projectile would be less, even making an elevation decrease unnecessary if your angle of aim was greater than 45 degrees from horizontal. The change in upward velocity would be the same as the change in upward velocity for the monkey. The monkey is just starting at rest where your projectile is starting in motion. Therefore, the monkey will lose elevation but the projectile won't have to. (*whew!*)

[This message has been edited by RubberPaw (edited 03-31-2000).]

[HyToFry]

OIC......

I still like the bullet in the arse though...

But I have to concede that this makes the most sense.

[Ghost Post]

If I were the hunter, I'd just hold the gun steady while beating the monkey senseless with a sturdy club.

[Braz]

wow, there is a lot of disagreement here on #2, so I thought I would throw in my thoughts.

We are dealing with planet earth here, and in the absence of air physics says that the dart and the monkey fall at the same rate. But, on earth, think about dropping a tranq dart and a monkey from the same height and tell me that they both hit ground at the same time. It just won't happen.

So, it makes sense to me that all you have to do is aim for the heart instead of the head. The monkey won't drop fast enough for you to completely miss it, and since it is a tranq dart all you need is a hit not a killing blow.

[Aarondalf]

I think someones has already solved the first one. So nuts to that.

I dont know the answer to the second one, but whatever the answer is, its gunna dissapoint alot of people-because the logic is very solid from alot of people.

Question 3 is not about whether the monkey eats the banana, its just a physics question using monkeys as examples.

Assuming the monkey and bannanas are level with each other, they will be at rest if the monkey doesnt move. Also when the monkey applies a force down on the rope to climb up, this will cause him to accelerate upwards, realative to the rope, also causing the bannanas to move up. Now since the rope will move downwards at the same speed the monkey moves upwards (because of the simmilar masses, and therefore simmilar accelerations) the monkey will affectively move nowhere realative to the ground, only realative to the rope. And the bannanas will be hoisted upwards.

In conclusion, Bannanas Up- Monkey Nowhere.

Note: This is assuming the force the monkey applies is constant, which would probably never happen.

[Wonko the Sane]

Actually...firing straight at the monkey doesn't work. Two reasons. First, someone said elevation doesn't matter. But if you fire upwards you have force against gravity and it takes awhile for the dart to begin it's fall. If you're firing down or straight, the fact that there's air messes it up. The dart wont fall at a rate of g*t because of the fact that a dart is aerodynamic. The airflow changes the way it flies, so it wont fall at the same rate as the monkey. So I still think firing straight up or straight down is the only plausible solution.

[Quailman]

For #2, the hunter has already been aiming at and hitting monkeys, thus the smart monkey's observation. His gunsight is obviously adjusted to enable him to hit the monkey at a given distance (counteracting the effect of gravity). To hit the smart monkey, he needs to adjust the sight so that the barrel of the rifle is pointed straight at the monkey. Now when the projectile is fired gravity immediately starts affecting both objects equally and simultaneously, so that their paths intersect with the desired result - desired by the hunter, that is.

[Wonko the Sane]

As I said, Quailman. If he's shooting up at all he'll miss. And if he's shooting level with the monkey the flights on the darts will cause it to fall slower than the monkey so he'll also miss.

[Ghost Post]

The pulley was not given as frictionless. In the extreme case where the friction in the pulley is infinite, the monkey goes up and the bananas stay put. Therefore, the friction in the pulley will tend to assist the monkey climb, but the accumulation of rope on the monkey's side will counter that. So what will happen depends on the variables: the friction in the pulley and the mass of the rope.

[Quailman]

Wonko: The puzzle stated "Eventually the hunter figures out what's going on. The next time he sees the monkey, mere meters away, he changes his aim, fires, and it's bedtime for bonzo.

Where did the hunter point his gun?"

If he didn't aim the gunbarrel straight at the monkey, then where did he aim it? I ignored the effect of the flights on the dart's trajectory. If you do ignore that effect, I think that it won't matter if you are firing upwards, downwards or horizontally at the monkey. As soon as the projectile leaves the gun, gravity starts to pull it down from the angle it would have followed without gravity. If it would have taken one second to reach the target on a straight vector, then it will be 16 feet below that target when it gets there, due to the effect of gravity. If the target lets go at the same time, then its path will cross the projectile's at a point 16 feet below its original position.

Of course, the flights are designed to keep the dart on a true course, and air resistance will further slow its progress. I still think the hunter aimed the barrel straight at the monkey. I also do not think he stood directly beneath the monkey for two reasons: being "mere meters away," he would be right in the monkey's path, whether he hit it or not; and the monkey was able to elude the dart until the hunter adjusted his aim.

[Big Ben]

Back to puzzle one: The puzzle stated "there must be at least as many humans in one place as monkeys".

In Quailman's answer there are several times when monkey's are left alone on one shore or the other.

If I was a delinquent monkey (and I'm not denying it) I would take this opportunity to leave the company of my human persecutor's.

So, my solution is that you dismantle the bridge, and use the wood to build a bridge, then all cross together.

[Aarondalf]

For puzzle three, if we were to assume the pully had friction and the rope had mass then it would be impossible to solve the puzzle (unless they gave us the numbers), therefore i think they just assumed the mass of the rope and the friction of the pulley was negligble

[Quailman]

Big Ben: You raise a good point about the monkeys running off. I read that statement to imply only that the monkeys cannot outnumber humans - not that they couldn't be left alone. I composed that solution on the fly, and expected that someone would better it. Looking back at it, though, I don't think you can get across in the manner stated without leaving unattended monkeys somewhere.

That's what you get for hanging around with delinquent monkeys!

[Ghost Post]

Comments on #2:
When I sight my rifle in for 200 yrds, the bullet (dart, projectile, whatever) will hit where the reticle of the scope is aimed at, at 200 yrds. If I aim at something 100 yards away, with reticle on where I want to hit, the bullet will hit higher due to gravity being taken into account with how much the bullet will drop to hit the zero at 200 yards. If my range is increased, and I'm still at a 200 yard zero, the bullet will hit lower than where I aimed. For example with a 200 yard zero, my 55 grain Winchester .225 caliber will hit 1.9 inches high at 100 yards, +1.6" @ 150, 0" @ 200, -8.5 @ 300 and -59.6" @ 500 yards (per Winchester Ballistic Tables) I can adjust from my 200 yard zero by changing the position of my reticle for elevation in 1/4 minute clicks either up or down depending on range.

To hit the monkey insantaly dropping from the tree, distance is irrelevant (unless you're outside the range of the calliber). The hunter needs to set his reticle of his scope or the iron sights for a 0 distance zero, basically having the sights in-line with the barrel. So, when he aims, squeezes the trigger and the monkey instantaneously drops, the monkey and the bullet will fall the exact same amount due to gravity, no matter what the distance is or the relative elevations betwwen the 2.

Now, practically speaking, bullets actually tend to rise ever so slightly immediately leaving the barrel due to lift forces. However, this is a very small rise and negligable over larger distances.

[This message has been edited by Matt (edited 04-04-2000).]

[HyToFry]

Big Ben, your point is invalled about the first question..

you said

[HyToFry]

Also on question two, everyone keeps saying that he "adjusted his sight", this is not the case, the problem clearly states, "he adjusted his aim", i don't see how you think that adjusting the site will somehow appear to the monkey that the gun is pointing a different place, than if you just adjusted your aim (ie. aim low), they have the same effect.

Why not just say that he stopped pointing ABOVE the monkey, and started aiming AT the monkey instead.

AND FURTHERMORE...

It never says who "bonzo" is
Bonzo may have been the depressed hunter, that was sick of chaseing the monkey, so to let the monkey know that he gave up, the hunter turned the gun on himself.

OH!!! and "mere meteres away" could be about 12 feet, thats the height of an average tree, whats to say that the hunter didn't just shoot the monkey in the arse?

And before i forget, my "hunters name is bonzo" is just a joke, so laugh at it, and get over it.

[This message has been edited by HyToFry (edited 04-04-2000).]

[Wonko the Sane]

Few good points. Though this isn't a larger distance. For number two, I say he aimed at the monkey's leg so then even the heigh lost (or failed to be lost) through lift or pull will simply go towards hitting the sucker right in the eye.

Quick mod. So basically that means there are several possible positions.

A) directly across from
B) directly below
C) directly above
D) below and at an angle aiming above the monkey so that it gets nailed in the head

[This message has been edited by Wonko the Sane (edited 04-04-2000).]

[PML]

Monkey Puzzle 1 is a variant of the old
Wolf/Goat/Cabbage puzzle. One general
approach is to draw a graph with nodes
corresponding to whoever is in the same
place as the boat, and with edges
corresponding to permissible transitions.
Then both the start and finish correspond
to the same node, with everybody in the
same place, and the solution is a path
(if any) starting and finishing there but
with an odd number of edges - which forces
the boat to end up on the other side of the
river. In this puzzle one edge is
degenerate, going from a node to itself. PML.

[HyToFry]

Thanks for the insight PML, i didn't understand a word of it, but i'm sure it's "not adequate for real life situations"

Wonko, I agree with everthing you said, so I think we can assume this puzzle solved.

[Rollercoaster]

Thoughts on Monkey #3:

The force in the monkey's arms, throughout the rope, and on the bananas must be equal. It does not matter HOW this force is generated (the monkey flexing his muscles). Therefore, purely by symmetry, the monkey and the bananas must move upward at the same rate, meeting at the pulley.

[HyToFry]

I tried this experament in real life.

The monkey started to eat the banannas, so i had to explain that he was to try to climb the rope, he then proceded to throw one of those fricking banannas at me, little ingrate, after that the monkey was trying to hold on to the stupid banannas with his feet, while eating.

eventually the monkey ran out of banannas, and wound up hanging himself, i fortuneately saved his life but then the little shit bit me.. i could have killed him, i gave him a GOOD spanking, then the humane society showed up and thanks to this stupid riddle i'm being brought up on charges for the same thing pee wee herman got in trouble for, I tried to explain to the chief of police that there really was a monkey involved, and he said "tell it to the judge", i supose i'll have to explain to the judge that there was no "indecent exsposure". luckily for me, we can have the internet in jail, otherwise i would have to miss out on all these arguments.


.

.

<Grin>

[This message has been edited by HyToFry (edited 04-05-2000).]