salmobytes wrote:
Wolfgang wrote:
RE Obviously, the five dollars must be under one of the other two.

The way you stated this, you removed what at one time looked like
a one in three chance. But, the way you stated this, you took away
one of the three choices, and the one you took away was known
to be false.

So there are now two choices left, one of which is guaranteed
to be correct. And you have no evidence to indicate one choice
over the other.

The current 50-50 condition is unrelated to a previous condition,
when three chances were involved. And it doesn't matter how many times
to you do it (if you follow the sequence of events you specified).

If you restate the problem, and say you now remove one of three
choices, leaving two that might be false, or two choices that
contain at most one true, then it is a different problem.

Jesus, forget mathematicians. When you need answers to difficult
problems,
always ask a sliver digger (a carpenter).

I won't speak for anyone else, but when I need the answer to a
difficult question (or even what may turn out to be a not so difficult
question, for that matter) I think I'll ask someone who can at least
make his or her position on a previous question (not to mention an
explication thereof) clear.

Thanks, anyway.

Wolfgang
still, the venture was not entirely without profit.......we have at
least learned something about the origins of old expression, "to a man
with a hammer......."