All about flooble | fun stuff | Get a free chatterbox | Free JavaScript | Avatars    
perplexus dot info

Home > Logic
Who Stole the Birdseed? (Posted on 2004-10-21) Difficulty: 3 of 5
  Bonnie bought a bag of birdseed. She left it in her apartment (#5) before she went to work, intending to fill the feeder that afternoon. But when she got back, the bag of birdseed was gone!

  There were four other people living in the same apartment building as her, all of whom were avid birdwatchers like Bonnie. One of them must have done it. Look at the clues below. If you know everybody's name, apartment number (#1 through #4), and favourite bird, you will know who is guilty.

1. The guilty person's apartment number is not numbered one higher or one lower than Hal's.
2. Joe's favourite bird is the crow; his apartment number is one lower than that of Ike (who doesn't like robins).
3. The guilty person's apartment is not #3 (the number of the finch-lover's).
4. Gil is neither at apartment #1 nor the wren-lover.


See The Solution Submitted by Captain Paradox    
Rating: 3.0263 (38 votes)

Comments: ( Back to comment list | You must be logged in to post comments.)
Not enough information | Comment 32 of 133 |

There are a few items we must assume to eliminate some cases.

1) Bonnie didn't just misplaced the bag of birdseed (in which case, she would be the one who "stole" the bag.) and therefore, one of the other four residents IS, indeed, a thief.

2) Either Bonnie left the door to her APT unlocked or every other resident has the access to her APT.

3) Assuming that there is no trick on wording, by the assumption #1, Hal is on one of 2nd, 3rd, or 4th floor.

4) The four birds listed are favorites of the four other residents (and not Bonnie's).

5) Every person has one favorite bird, and no two people have the same bird as their favourite.

6) Hal is not the guilty one because the guilty one is not one above or below Hal (again, wording).

Assuming the six items above, there are 3 cases (two of which points to Joe),

a) #1 Joe (crow) = guilty, #2Ike (wren), #3 Hal(finch), #4 Gil (robin)

b) #1 Joe (crow) = guilty, #2Ike (wren), #3 Gil(finch), #4 Hal(robin)

c) #1 Joe (crow), #2 Ike(wren) = guilty, #3 Gil (finch), #4 Hal (robin)

If Hal is allowed to be the resident of #1, i.e., my third and sixth assumptions above are not valid ones, then there is two other cases other than the three above,

d) #1 Hal(wren) = guilty, #2 Joe(crow), #3 Ike (finch), #4 Gil(robin)

e) #1 Hal (wren), #2 Joe(crow), #3 Ike(finch), #4 Gil(robin) = guilty

In conclusion, there is not enough information to find the thief. 

  Posted by doremi on 2004-10-25 13:39:09
Please log in:
Remember me:
Sign up! | Forgot password

Search body:
Forums (2)
Newest Problems
Random Problem
FAQ | About This Site
Site Statistics
New Comments (2)
Unsolved Problems
Top Rated Problems
This month's top
Most Commented On

Copyright © 2002 - 2021 by Animus Pactum Consulting. All rights reserved. Privacy Information