wu :: forums - Print Page


    
      
        wu :: forums
        (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        riddles >> easy >> LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
        
(Message started by: adrian on Jul 25^th, 2002, 4:03am)

Title: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by adrian on Jul 25^th, 2002, 4:03am

anyone able to figure out the solution to the logical signs 1 puzzle, with the python and treasure.

is it possible for both inscriptions to be true?? The gold chest states that "one of these inscriptions is true", but does not say one of these inscriptions is false, therefor is it possible that both inscriptions are true, and the gold is in the "gold" chest. Or would i have been eaten by the python.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by jj on Jul 25^th, 2002, 7:52am

I see two scenarios, both of which depend on "one of these inscriptions is true" to be understood as "one-and-only-one inscription."

In the first, the Gold chest statement that "one of these inscriptions is true" is true. So there must be one-and-only-one true statement. In this case, the other inscription must be false. So, "This chest contains the python" is false, and the Python is in the Gold chest.

In the second scenario, the Gold chest statement that "one of these inscriptions is true" is false. Since the Gold chest is false, what must the Silver chest be? If the Silver chest inscription is true, then there is one true inscription. But we already assumed that there is not one-and-only-one true statement. So the Silver chest must be false also. Since the Silver chest is false, the Python is in the Gold chest.

Both possible scenarios put the Python in the Gold chest.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by hai-yu-ken on Jul 25^th, 2002, 2:38pm

Honestly I don't like this question. It needs more information to solve.
I came to the same answer as jj. However, I would not open either
box, there is still the possibility that both of the enscriptions are true.

I say, pay someone to open the box for you!

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Franklinstein on Jul 26^th, 2002, 12:47am

If "One of these two inscriptions is true" is a true statement, then the other must be false because "one of these two inscriptions is true" Then the treasure must be in the silver chest.
If "One of these two inscriptions is true" is a false statement, then the inscriptions must be either both true or both false. However, If both inscriptions are true, that would contradict the statement "one of these two inscriptions is true" Therefore the inscriptions are both false and the treasure is in the silver chest. :o

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by william wu on Jul 27^th, 2002, 2:52am

Here's an e-mail that a Peter Surda sent me. I think you will find it enlightening.

Quote:

I think I found a bug [with logical signs I]. The person solving it is probably going like this:
- the statement on the golden chest can either be true or false
- if it is true, the inscription on the silver chest is lying and the treasure
in in the silver chest
- if it is false, it means the silver can't be true either and the treasure is
in the silver chest
- so the treasure is for sure in the silver chest and I'm gonna open it,
muahahahaha.

Well, wrong. It omits the third option: the statement on the golden chest doesn't have a logical value, similar to "This sentence is a lie". So basically, it is not determinable which chest holds the treasure.

Proof by practical experiment: as the person building the riddle, you put the treasure in the golden chest, python in the silver chest, and then write the inscriptions. And be astonished that the universe didn't collapse :-).

Conclusively, many people are arriving at their answers by initially assuming that the second inscription has some logical weight. Also, perhaps most disturbingly, they are oblivious to the fact that they are making an assumption. Consequently, through sound logic, they end up feeling 100% certain that the treasure is in the silver chest. However, these inscriptions actually could have been arbitrary. As Peter points out, he could've put the python in the silver chest, and then you'd go through the same logic and just get your head ripped off. So, in a real world situation, don't open anything. Or rather, just take hai-yu-ken's approach, and pay an expendable person to do it for you. I think that's the smartest thing you can do. :)

Title: Contingencies...
Post by Adam Hanig on Jul 27^th, 2002, 9:35am

There are a number of ways to interpert this.

1) The Gold inscription means "At least one of them is true". If only one is true, see interpretation 2. If both are true, than the python must be in the silver and the treasure in the gold.

2) One is true, one is false. This can come about by the contingency from #1, or simply from interpreting the inscription on the gold to mean "One is true, one is false." If the silver is true and the gold is false, then we have a contridiction. If the gold is true then the silver is false and thus the treasure is in the silver.

3) The ancients are f*cking with you. Perhaps they lied on one or more of the boxes. Or there is no treasure. Or no pythons. Or the boxes are empty. All you have to go on is a myth, and within that myth, nowhere is there a reference to what is written in the boxes. Maybe your translator is simply incapable of reading them right. In all honestly, people hiding treasure usually have safety precautions, like they do in the pharohs tombs, with all sorts of traps and tricks that require the knowledge available only to the person hiding the treasure. This is likely the case. I would leave some timed charges, or buy a mongoose, or ship them home after erasing the words and give them as a gift to a competitor. But under no circumstance would I blindly open two chests with inscriptions that I have no reason to trust in the first place!

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Artis Rozentals on Jul 29^th, 2002, 2:40pm

The python is long dead. Open both.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by LB on Jul 30^th, 2002, 10:20am

In the interview, you may have trouble explaining this to the question asker, who "knows" to open silver. Try this:

You: Why should I put any weight on what the boxes say? They could just be completely lying.
Them: What do you mean?
Y: There's no reason to believe anything on the boxes at all.
T: Well, you obviously have missed the point.
Y: No, I understand that if we give logical weight to the statements then it's simple and I'd say "silver" but that doesn't work.
T: No?
Y: No. If the gold box is telling the truth, then you obviously open silver, but if the gold box is lying, we don't know what to do.
T: Yes you do, you know that the statement on Silver must be false, because there is no true statement.
Y: Aha. But that's not true at all.
T: How do you figure?
Y: What if the person who filled the boxes ignored the inscriptions?
T: Keep going...
Y: Well, the inscriptions don't actually mean anything. The gold box just has some symbols on it. The only fact we have is that one box has a python in it, and one has treasure in it. I declare that one of my hands has a quarter in it. On my left hand I will now write "this hand has a quarter in it". and on my right I will write "one of the statements on these two hands is true". <reach into pockets, put quarter in left hand whithout interviewer seeing> Which hand is the quarter in?
T: The right hand of course...
Y: <opens right hand> Nope. <opens left hand> You see, what is written on the chests is irrelevant. Just because I put a sign on me saying I am the richest man alive doesn't make it so...

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Luni_B on Aug 2^nd, 2002, 11:33pm

Actually - as well thought out as any of the "logical" answers are...you can open EITHER chest safely. Webster has archaeology as the scirntific study of ANCIENT poeples etc etc, therefore any snake that was, is dead. Furthermore, Pythons can not lunge, so even if he is alive, just open the chests CAREFULLY, and kill the snake...don't give it the opportunity to "rip you head off".

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Tully Wilson on Aug 6^th, 2002, 10:54am

If you take the snake out of the silver chest and put it in the golden chest, then the silver chest is lying, but the golden chest wouldn't be telling the truth either because it's not telling you the snake is in the golden chest. That then makes the golden chest inscription false because the silver chest inscription is false.

Remember, it says "Only ONE of these inscriptions is true."
the catch here is that there's only one actual statement.

The only way the inscription on the golden chest is true is if the snake is in the silver chest.
;)

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by pqlier on Aug 7^th, 2002, 8:01am

My two cents' worth:

You either believe in the legend about treasure and pythons, or you don't.

The legend, as given, says nothing about the reliability of any inscriptions; so these should simply be ignored unless they are in a modern language. If they are, proceed with caution; one or both chests may contain dangerous explosives.

If you don't believe in the legend, open both chests for curiosity's sake (the chances of any ancient booby trap remaining operable would seem pretty slim).

If you do, you're forced to assume that the head-ripping python is a going concern; which means it must have some way of getting in and out of its chest to feed. So transfer both chests to a secure location and wait for the bastard to come out of its own accord. Then nick the treasure from the other chest.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by zarathustra on Aug 26^th, 2002, 9:57pm

Answer: Quit your job as an archeologist and become a mathamatician, its much safer. You probably weren't very good as an archelogist anyway if you didnt know anything about the two chests riddle before you got there. Consider it a good time for a career change. Before you leave, scratch out both inscriptions and instead write "Open both chests at same time for a surprise!"

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Icarus on Oct 8^th, 2002, 7:04pm

Logicians normally approach this sort of problem by examing each possible situation, and figuring out the truth value for each statement for that situation: Assuming that the legend is true, and that the threat is still real (it's a magic snake), there are still two possible interpretations of the "one of these inscriptions is true" statement. I will handle them separately:

First, if the statement means "exacty one of these inscriptions is true", which seems to be the more popular assumption above:

If the python is in the silver chest, then the silver inscription is true, and the gold inscription is a contradiction (to be true it must be false, and to be false, it must be true). This is not the same as being false.

If the python is in the gold chest, then the silver inscription is false, and the gold inscription is indeterminate (if it is true, then it is true, and if it is false, then it is false). Just as a contradiction is not the same as being false, this indeterminate situation is NOT the same as being true.

Thus in NEITHER case can you say that the gold inscription is true. And if even if you had reason to put faith in those fickle ancients, you would not be wise to cavalierly open the silver chest.

Second, if the gold inscription means "at least one of these statements is true":

If the python is in the silver chest, then both the silver and gold inscriptions are true.
If the python is in the gold chest, then the silver inscription is false, and the gold inscription is again indeterminate, not true or false.

In view of all of this, if I were forced to open one of the chests, and could find no less logically ept person to do it for me, and had reason to believe that the ancients were both logically inclined (so they would not mishandle it) and intended to leave a useful hint rather than a misleading one, then I would open the GOLD chest!

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Icarus on Oct 8^th, 2002, 7:20pm

As I look back over the replies again, I take back what I said about the first choice being more popular! :-X. I'm still opening the gold chest, but only if I'm forced at gunpoint! ;D

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Rohan on Oct 15^th, 2002, 8:44pm

My BLOODY god what a load of CODSWALLOP.

FRANLINSTEIN !! Well done. Look guys, you've got to give the riddle a bit of credibility, you can't go looking for flaws or proposing new philosphies and all that sh*t, otherwise you'll never get an answer.

If you follow the riddle logically the answer is the SILVER CHEST!, See FRANKLINSTEIN's reasoning.

Get a piece of paper, work through it.The silver chest.;)

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by thelonious on Oct 22^nd, 2002, 7:48pm

Sure. Like when I say, "One of the books in the Library of Congress is written by Mark Twain", it's obvious I mean only one, right? There's only one way to interpret that statement, right?
The correct answer is to realize that the ancients didn't want people to take their treasure. A less than bright fellow would read that the snake is in this box, and open the other. A really bright fellow would work it out on paper, discuss it with his friends, debate it online, and then open the same box as the less than bright fellow. Ergo, it's in the other box!!

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Sylvie Tsie on Nov 26^th, 2002, 7:29am

Dump both of the chests in water. And let the contents fill with water. Drown the snake. Then open both chests.

The end

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by towr on Nov 26^th, 2002, 8:49am

you'd think a snake from a thousand or so year old chest would allready be dead about a thousand years..
Drowing it seems like overkill ;)

You could allways let Steve Irwing open the chest :p

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Killian on Feb 18^th, 2003, 11:59pm

I dont understand why it cant the treasure be in the bronze chest

"You know that at least one of the inscriptions is true, and at least one of the inscriptions is false."

If in the bronze chest then :

Silver Chest : Treasure is in this Chest ---- FALSE
Gold Chest : Treasure is not in this Chest ---- TRUE
Bronze Chest : Treasure is not in the Gold Chest ---- TRUE

Treasure being in the GOLD chest does not fit description :

Silver Chest : Treasure is in this Chest ---- FALSE
Gold Chest : Treasure is not in this Chest ---- FALSE
Bronze Chest : Treasure is not in the Gold Chest. ---- FALSE

Treasure Being in the SILVER chest Does not fit description :

Silver Chest : Treasure is in this Chest ------ TRUE
Gold Chest : Treasure is not in this Chest. ----- TRUE
Bronze Chest : Treasure is not in the Gold Chest ---- TRUE

So to have one inscription true and one inscription wrong , the treasure chest must be bronze

:D

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Chronos on Feb 19^th, 2003, 2:16pm

It can't be the bronze chest, because in this problem, there is no bronze chest. You're thinking of Logical Signs II.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by angie on Mar 21^st, 2003, 3:59pm

Ok, seriously, this is not that hard.

if the icon on the silver chest was true, that would make the statement on the gold chest the false one. That would raise two possible scenarios, 1. that both are true, and 2. that both are false. They cannot be both true, that contradicts the gold statement, and if they are both false, then the treasure is in the silver treasure chest.
there you go.
good luck
;)

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Wire17 on Jul 5^th, 2003, 11:35pm

ok, assume the legend is true.

since pythons dont usually eat humans, and they cant rip off a humans head, u can assume that this is a VERY special type of python (ya know, a magical one), meaning a possiblity of eternal life. drowning may work, but it also may have no affect. since this is a special python, it would b able to lunge out of the box with incredible strength and kill u even if u cracked it open. and since u are dealing with ur own life, u likely wouldnt want to take a chance like that, just hoping the thing is dead.

the smart thing to do, if u were to dumb to solve the very ez puzzle, is to shake it or kick it. a python will make a much differnt sound than any treasure. u could get lucky and the python may hiss, or u may thump around and u can hear it moving. its as simple as that/

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by oopyman on Jul 6^th, 2003, 1:30pm

on 07/29/02 at 14:40:10, Artis Rozentals wrote:

The python is long dead. Open both.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Zeitgeist on Apr 4^th, 2004, 5:25pm

The first thing that strikes me while looking at the problem is that it is a man-eating python. Just have a woman open them both for some cut of the profit.

Another thing is that it's an ancient society who, because of the definition of ancient: Of or relating to times long past, especially those of the historical period before the fall of the Western Roman Empire , couldn't have known English, because English wasn't established as a language yet. Therefore, the legendary chests must be a hoax. You should just sell them off, as they are plated with precious metals anyway.

Just because the python can rip your head off, doesn't mean it will. Buy a lot of wild animals, and let the python have it's fill before you waltz on by, and take the other chest for your own.

Couldn't you shake the chests? Whichever thunked around like flesh would be the python, and whichever clinked or clacked like jewels and coins, etc would be the treasure.

A more time-intensive, but far more reliable, way would be to put both chests on extremely accurate scales. We'll assume that the ancients made them equal in mass to make it hard to figure out by mass alone. Place both chest-scale assemblies into a room, and monitor the scale readings over time. The python chest should decrease in weight, as the python would be more and more malnourished by the day, and would lose weight.

Drill a small hole into each chest. If there's a python, you'll be able to see it by shining a flashlight into it. If it's treasure, you will have damaged some of it, but the rest should be fine.

Water is also a decent idea...

See, you have to be creative about these things!

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by rmsgrey on Apr 5^th, 2004, 7:12am

on 04/04/04 at 17:25:43, Zeitgeist wrote:

A more time-intensive, but far more reliable, way would be to put both chests on extremely accurate scales. We'll assume that the ancients made them equal in mass to make it hard to figure out by mass alone. Place both chest-scale assemblies into a room, and monitor the scale readings over time. The python chest should decrease in weight, as the python would be more and more malnourished by the day, and would lose weight.

Firstly, you'd have to be able to move the chests - it's possible that they're built into the wall/floor...

Secondly, if the chests are sealed, then while the python may lose weight over time, the mass is still going to be inside the chest... You're better off watching for variations when it moves. Besides if it's a magic snake, it may well not be active in any way until the chest is opened...

The real question is whether you expect the ancients to be fair towards people trying to steal their treasure. What do you think the chances are of the chest with the treasure also having a cobra? Or triggering some other non-python booby trap (or even a giant foot...).

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by PermanentInk on May 27^th, 2004, 2:20am

on 08/02/02 at 23:33:01, Luni_B wrote:

Furthermore, Pythons can not lunge

Really? How exactly do you think they grab their prey? I've owned a pair of pythons, and I can assure you they lunge quite efficiently.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by towr on May 27^th, 2004, 4:15am

That depends on their temperature of course..
So it'd depend on where the chest were unearthed (if it's in a desert the python would probably be quite energetic if it were still alive)

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by PermanentInk on May 27^th, 2004, 9:07pm

Okay, I'll grant you that it's incorrect to state that it's not the case that pythons "can not lunge," since the usual meaning of "can not" (as opposed to "cannot") is "can elect not to," but I really think that Luni meant "cannot" in any case.

I wasn't claiming that pythons will lunge in all circumstances, just that they are capable of the act.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Jarr on Apr 5^th, 2005, 12:20pm

the riddle does not ask you to determine which chest has what,
"Based on these inscriptions, which chest should you open?" it says.
the word should is generaly useless when logical, but here it is boxed up good.
more likely some one is sneaking up behind you with a well trained python to perpetuate the myth,

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by lee on Apr 30^th, 2005, 8:44pm

1: how does a python live in a treasure chest for so long?

2: what kind of idiot cant find a way to know if there is a freakish pyton in a box e.g listening for sounds

3:both could have a python and treasure inside/there are 2 pythons.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Ricky on May 17^th, 2005, 6:31pm

on 07/27/02 at 02:52:49, william wu wrote:

Or rather, just take hai-yu-ken's approach, and pay an expendable person to do it for you. I think that's the smartest thing you can do. :)

If you can have unnamed people then you could also have unnamed equipment. Thus, you could rapidly heat one or both chests and use infrared vision to look into it. If the python rapidly changes temperature with it then ther will be no temperature difference throughout the chest. However if it does not then you will see it. Either way you know which has the python.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by SteelSoul on Jun 11^th, 2005, 1:06pm

It is so ridiculous how in every single riddle people ignore it COMPLETELY by asking irrelevant questions and solutions from data they invent as they go.
The answer is simple: open the silver box
Explanation:
If the writing on the gold is right then that is the true writing and the silver one is false, so lets open the silver.
If the writing on the gold is false then both inscriptions can't by true (because gold is false) and can't be one true and one false (because then the writing on the gold is true) so it must be both false which means still open silver which is false.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by rmsgrey on Jun 11^th, 2005, 1:12pm

on 06/11/05 at 13:06:22, SteelSoul wrote:

So what happens when the guy setting up the treasure is a complete *child of irregular parentage* and puts the python in the silver chest, and the treasure in the gold chest?

If you trouble to read the first half-page of posts to this thread, you'll notice your solution already given (probably several times, but it's been a while since I last read it myself). Having solved the riddle, we then have a choice: ignore it forever, or try and break it in some way. Those who choose to ignore it tend not to contribute much to the subsequent discussion...

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Icarus on Jun 12^th, 2005, 8:31pm

You are going to require more to be steel than your soul. You have made two assumptions unjustified by the information given with the problem:

1) That the inscription on the gold chest means exactlyone of the inscriptions is true.
2) That the inscription on the gold chest has to be either true or false.

In fact, if we go with assumption (1), then assumption (2) is false! If the inscription on the gold chest means that exactly one inscription is true, then the gold inscription is either a contradiction (assuming the statement to be false implies that it is true, and vice versa), or else it is undecidable (both assuming it to be true and assuming it to be false cause no contradictions). Contradictions and undecidable statements are neither true nor false.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by blah blah on Dec 29^th, 2005, 5:13pm

:P ok look at the silver box. it says"theres a python in it." ok if that silver box said it why would want you to know that there is a python in it? why would they protect you from dying if they knew you were going to take the treasure. so its vice-versa which means the python in the silver box is not really there. they wrote that on it to protect the treasure so that is the answer. soo.. the golden box of course does have the python in it. isn't it obvious?

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by rmsgrey on Dec 30^th, 2005, 2:11pm

on 12/29/05 at 17:13:15, blah blah wrote:

Except if they figured you'd think that, and they wanted to catch you out, so, knowing that you'd figure the python to be in the Gold box, they put it in the Silver instead...

Of course, they could have figured out that you'd be smart enough to figure that out, so put it in the Gold instead, etc...

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Iulia on Jan 1^st, 2006, 12:59am

I think that you should open the silver chest if you want to find the treasure because the gold chest inscripton states that one of the 2 inscriptions are true. If this inscription were not true then the other inscription on the silver chest , which states that the python is in the silver chest would not be true either. So that way you would open the silver chest to find the answer.
If the inscription on the gold chest was ftrue then the other one would have to be wrong because this inscription state that 1 of the 2 inscriptions are right. so the python would again not be in the silver chest and you would find the treasure in it .
So there you can't go wrong anyway . . . unless the legent was not true.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Icarus on Jan 1^st, 2006, 9:21pm

You are assuming that the Gold inscription is either true or false. But it also could be a contradiction (having to be true or false at the same time) or else it could be undecidable (its truth value does not depend on anything given).

To understand this, instead of trying to figure it out from a "what if it is true, what if it is false" approach, consider the problem instead from the two cases allowed by the legend.

According to the legend, one of the two cases contains the python.

Case 1: The python is in the gold chest.
The silver inscription is false.
The gold inscription is undecidable (neither assuming it to be true or assuming it to be false leads to a contradiction).

Case 2: The python is in the silver chest.
The silver inscription is true.
The gold inscription is self-contradicting (both assuming it to be true and assuming it to be false lead to contradictions).

In both cases, the legend is true, but there is no particular reason for you to pick one case over the other, as the legend in no way rules out either undecidable or contradictory inscriptions.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by sov on Nov 3^rd, 2006, 10:57am

If the gold inscription is true, then the silver is false (thus the treasure is in the silver). But, if the gold is false, the silver could be true or false. Thus, opening the silver chest gives you a 75% chance of finding the treasure, but still a 25% chance of getting eaten.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Whiskey Tango Foxtrot on Nov 3^rd, 2006, 12:48pm

50-50, my friend. Equal possibility so you might as well guess.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Icarus on Nov 3^rd, 2006, 3:53pm

Indeed - if you read my post immediately above yours, sov, I explained in it the falacy to your approach.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by mrbahl on Aug 7^th, 2008, 3:15am

I put the chests there. And there is not treasure.... and yeah there is no python also.. :-)
gotcha :-)

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by ozzz169 on Feb 9^th, 2009, 9:50am

OK my 2 cents on this:

"One of these two inscriptions is true."

does not say anything about the other. so one is true, the other is either true or false. so both being true does not invalidate this statement. so the only thing we know is the 2 false case is not possible.

so you still have the tt ft and tf case. and that is not enough information to safely open either case.

all this is assuming that the mythical snake is immortal and that the legend is true.

if not then you still cant open either case because based on intent of the creators of the chest were to protect there gold from non members and could have put an anceint indian jones style booby trap that will shoot 1000 poison darts in all directions in the wrong chest and will kill us all. (if you hide be behind a rock then they have a back up of a very slow acting contagious disease and will still die.

Title: Re: LOGICAL SIGNS I - python and treasure
Post by Grimbal on Feb 10^th, 2009, 12:38am

Both inscriptions could be false. In that case, it is false that one inscriptions is true.

However, the case TF is not ~~possible~~ logical. The second inscription is true but supposed to be false.