A challenge I intend to put somewhere in a story (possibly)

No. That ruins the entire thing. That would mean both B and C would get the same answer of "false" and that would make it impossible to solve.

It works just fine the way it is.

As for the 50% wrong bug, that's something I'm ignoring at the moment, as he said we could do.

edited 4th Oct '11 2:56:48 PM by MrAHR

I don't think AHR's solution would count, because there is only one statement in there, and an explanation. The robot should (presumably) ignore the explanation and just say FALSE if C is the good door. You could phrase the explanation as another statement, but the problem is how you connect these two statements.

Uh, it's two.

"Because" is a conjunction.

Also, it will only ignore the correct part if you use the conjunction "and" because then it is grouping the two together irreversibly.

It will ignore the incorrect part if you use the conjunction "or"

Assuming a situation where one statement is correct and one is incorrect, of course, which could very well happen.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:01:08 PM by MrAHR

I don't think that "because" counts as a logical connection between two statements. But I've no idea if I'm right about this.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:02:41 PM by Dealan

If I take portal A, I will end up in the good place.

The two portals that take you to the bad places are next to each other.

"Because" is a Subordinating conjunction.

I'm not an expert at solving these, but I think the solution got to do with forcing the robot to say a statement you already know the solution of (for example, the fact that you're making a statement, or there are three doors), so even if it says false, you know it's true. The problem is covering all the bases by finding the two doors.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:06:46 PM by chihuahua0

"If I take portal A, I will end up in the good place, because the two portals that take you to the bad places are next to each other."

Actually, I think it would be either false, false, false or nothing, false, false. Because saying "because the two portals that take you to the bad places are next to each other" is like saying "something is X because something else is not X", which doesn't really have anything to do with causality. "Because" doesn't really mean anything, in this context.

Let's see...

If portal A is the good one, it is a requirement that the bad portals are next to each other, but that doesn't explain the reason why portal A is good. It's actually redundant.

If portal B or C are the good ones, it's false. No mystery here.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:13:23 PM by Teraus

How is it saying that? If I said the statement "The two bad portals are next to each other" and it's true, I've eliminated one choice for the good portal, and two choices if it's false. It's a way of covering more base.

If C is the good portal, then the two bad portals are still next to each other. It should technically make a paradox that the robot can't answer.

See, it says that A is the good portal because the two bad ones are next to each other.

If it's false "A is not the good portal because the two bad ones are not next to each other."

But the two bad ones ARE next to each other.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:14:49 PM by MrAHR

Actually, even if you said "because someone decided that the bad portals should be next to each other", and it were true, that wouldn't restrict the answer to portal A. Portal C would also be a possible answer to this cause. Therefore, the answer is always false (you can't conclude that it's portal A from the fact that the bad ones are together. If this conclusion cannot be made, your statement is always false).

edited 4th Oct '11 3:14:40 PM by Teraus

That's actually not correct. A can still be bad and the bad portals can be next to each other: they would be A and B.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:17:06 PM by Teraus

But there is no "and" in my statement. The two aren't separatable like that. That would only work if I said "Portal A is the good one AND the two bad portals are next to each other."

edited 4th Oct '11 3:19:35 PM by MrAHR

But your "because" is false by itself, in this case. Like I said, you can't make that conclusion, because it could still be C in the same conditions (two bad portals next to each other). If your because is false, everything is false, because there is no "OR" to save you in this case.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:20:49 PM by Teraus

If it is C, then the question is impossible to answer. Because it is true and false simultaneously.

The "or" would not work, since it would be false in every case except for C.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:22:32 PM by MrAHR

I think you're not getting my point...

Let's try this: "If I take portal A, I will end up in the good place, because the two portals that take you to the bad places are next to each other."

Don't you agree that the word "because" implies that you've concluded that portal A is the good one as a consequence to the fact that the bad ones are next to each other?

Don't you agree that this is an incorrect conclusion, as it could be portal C?

edited 4th Oct '11 3:22:42 PM by Teraus

It may be a right answer, but (possibly) a wrong reasoning behind it and the robot will return false anyway - I gather?

Apart from "because the two badly portals are together", you're basically betting the robot will tell you if A is the right one or not. What if A isn't the fun portal? It's quite a gamble.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:29:38 PM by QQQQQ

That's what I'm trying to say: even if it's portal A, the logic is invalid. That "because" is false no matter what.

I'll be right back.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:28:03 PM by Teraus

Nope.

If the two portals are indeed next to each other, which means either AB or BC, then that part of the statement will always be true. So even if A is indeed a bad portal, and C is the good one, AB are still next to each other. That part is still true. You can't have that part be false.

You can't have "A is not good because the two bad portals are not next to each other" because that would be B. Can't be C.

You can't have "A is not good because the two bad portals are next to each other" because that is an incorrect statement. It's not good because the two bad portals are A and B, not that they're next to each other.

You can't have "A is good because the two bad portals are not next to each other" because that's completely impossible.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:29:47 PM by MrAHR

I'm saying that your statement implies a conclusion that can be made based on the fact that two portals are next to each other. That's what "because" means.

Your statement is always false, because that conclusion cannot be made.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:31:12 PM by Teraus

You can't have "A is good because the two bad portals are next to each other" either. That "because" is FALSE.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:30:56 PM by Teraus

How is it false if the answer is A? The two bad portals are next to each other. The portal is A. All is well.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:31:41 PM by MrAHR

Don't debate; try another way of looking at it, AHR. That insightful answer is still out there. The "because" part is stating the obvious if A is the fun portal, and it doesn't account for if A isn't the one. In that case, the "because" clause will fail along with the incorrect answer.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:32:56 PM by QQQQQ

It's false because the "because" has a false justification.

It's like saying "you're american because you're not african". That doesn't make sense. That "because" is not justified.

That's not very logical to blindly accept an answer.

It works if the only two races in the world are american and african. Which it is in this case.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:32:41 PM by MrAHR

It doesn't matter if that part is true or not. Portal A will never be the good one because of that statement. The logical connection between the two sentences will always be false. Therefore the robot will answer false.

EDIT: Ninjaed by five posts.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:35:33 PM by Dealan

IF the only two races in existence were african and american, it WOULD be a justified "because".

Likewise, IF the only possible outcome for having two bad portals next to each other would be having portal A as the good one, that "because" WOULD be justified. However, that is not the only possible outcome from that condition, therefore, the "because" is invalid no matter what.

Thank you.

edited 4th Oct '11 3:38:51 PM by Teraus