Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kashinov
On the Contrary, My Dear Watson....................(Second Coming);
It is deduced that the bear...(i.e. the polar bear) lives at the north pole because by using Holmesian deduction we eliminate all probabilities except two:
1. The bear lives at the north pole because it is the only place on earth where anyone let alone a bear can walk acc. to the directions indicated in the question except for the south pole but no bears live at the south pole not even polar bears. (Also how can you go south when you are already standing on the north pole).
This is possible due to the fact that when we are supposed to walk 5 km east, we have to walk 5km east with respect to the north pole and not the position that we have achieved after walking the first 5 km south. Thus we will be walking east but slightly to the north in other words slightly north-east as Watson( i.e. Second Coming) correctly stated. This is because the earth is geoid in shape and not flat. (REFER TO THE ATTACHMENT)
A good objection is raised here, by Watson (i.e. Second Coming) abt the right angled triangle...(It is in accordance with Pythagorus's Theorem that in any right triangle, the area of the square whose side is the hypotenuse (the side of a right triangle opposite the right angle) is equal to the sum of areas of the squares whose sides are the two legs ( i.e. the two sides other than the hypotenuse) but this then pionts to the fact that the question is flawed. We assume that this is not the case and the only possible explanation is the one given above.
2. In order for the bear to walk in the above directions and reach its original position on any place on earth other than the north pole, it will have to be LEFT-HANDED; the reason being that the bear being left-handed will have stronger muscles of the left limbs and thus it will walk in a line which is slightly off-set to the left, in other words favoring a LEFT-SIDED CURVE. As the possiblity of bears being left-handed is quite low, abt. 10%.....(incidently.....Polar bears are the only Arctic animals that are left-hand preferential... ...Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-handed#In_animals), therefore this probability can be ruled out.
Also, if it is assumed that the bear is supposed to have only one colour then Logic and Holmesian Deduction lead us to the only other explanation that it is, indeed a polar bear and it is white in colour; as if this assumption is not made then the question is flawed.....
How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?
AND THUS THE PATH TO THE TO THE QUESTION IS:
"ELEMENTARY, MY DEAR WATSON".
|
@ Kashinov
I absolutely love the way you responded to my post.......Fantastic!
Though I wasn't able to enjoy the lines.......
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kashinov
@ Second Coming.........
Second Coming almost had made us look like we had egg on our faces......
|
You might have done without them..... just an idea......Though I like your post anyway.
Now to the argument.....
Quote:
|
1. The bear lives at the north pole because it is the only place on earth where anyone let alone a bear can walk acc. to the directions indicated in the question except for the south pole but no bears live at the south pole not even polar bears.
|
Granted......
Quote:
|
(Also how can you go south when you are already standing on the north pole).
|
Why not Mr. Holmes!
A bear has every right to go southwards from north pole, if he wants. There is no physical, scientific, moral or metaphysical restriction preventing him.... Is there?
Quote:
|
This is possible due to the fact that when we are supposed to walk 5 km east, we have to walk 5km east with respect to the north pole and not the position that we have achieved after walking the first 5 km south. Thus we will be walking east but slightly to the north in other words slightly north-east as Watson( i.e. Second Coming) correctly stated. This is because the earth is geoid in shape and not flat.
|
Something very seriously wrong with your deduction here, Mr. Holmes!
First, why do we
"have to" walk 5km east
with respect to the north pole after we have traveled the first five towards south? Secondly my dear Mr. Holmes, by your own rule, traveling east with reference to the original position means traveling south east which of course will take you farther away from the starting point. No amount of left-handedness would probably help the poor polar bear, even if we allow for the fact that it doesn't mind being called a gauche, instead of dexter, reach its original position. Thirdly, after the bear has completed the second round i.e. eastwards, what do you suggest now for its point of reference? Again its starting point? That's impossible my dear Mr. Holmes, if not outrageous..... Because of the inherent impracticality of the path suggested..
Quote:
|
2. In order for the bear to walk in the above directions and reach its original position on any place on earth other than the north pole, it will have to be LEFT-HANDED; the reason being that the bear being left-handed will have stronger muscles of the left limbs and thus it will walk in a line which is slightly off-set to the left, in other words favoring a LEFT-SIDED CURVE. As the possiblity of bears being left-handed is quite low, abt. 10%.....(incidently.....Polar bears are the only Arctic animals that are left-hand preferential... ...Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-handed#In_animals), therefore this probability can be ruled out.
|
First Mr. Holmes, taking "slightly off-set to the left" to mean a 45 degree tilt seems to be an insolence which even a bear won't stand...... It's not PIA my dear Mr Holmes! It's a bear..... Secondly, a 10% possibility is not small enough to be dismissed with a single fickle flick of your eyelashes. If you also don't mind Mr. Holmes, to include a possibility that a polar bear might also be right handed, albeit only 10%, that makes it 20 - quite a respectable one, I guess - and you can expect more, I promise......
[quote]
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kashinov
Actually the majority are.................chk out...........http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_Bear#Fur_and_skin
"A polar bear's fur is white (individual hairs are translucent like the water droplets that make up a cloud) and provides good camouflage and insulation. It may yellow with age."
It says it MAY.............yellow..................with age................
You can...never foretell what any one man will do, but you can say with precision what an average number will be up to. Individuals vary, but percentages remain constant.
|
First, the page you referred to also says, "Its fur is white or "cream-colored" (cream is different from white, My dear Mr. Holmes) providing camouflage from its prey." Some more polar bears, then need to be excluded from your probability percentage.... make it 15.....ok?..... so we have 35% probability now that the holmesian deduction might not work here. Then it says, that "it MAY.............yellow..................with age................"
Ok... Now scientific studies have shown that polar bears have "one of the slowest birth rates of any mammal...." See:
http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/faq/
This slow birth rate, coupled with the fact the very few cubs actually survive child mortality, whatever the factors are, has made them a "probable" victim of extinction:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_bear
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCBs
The fact that they are a victim of extinction shows that they have birth rate lower than the replacement level i.e. less than two cubs per female polar bear. If we apply this less-than-replacement level birth rate on human societies, Japan, for example, it shows that they have old polar bears roughly 19.2% of the entire population! But since Japan is an extreme example, let's take that of Germany, which is about 18.3% (it
was, in fact, in 2004 ):
http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statisti...cators/46.html
Assuming that the similar rate applies to bears as well we might say that almost half of them, roughly 10%, have yellow fur instead of white. Now add this 10% to 35% above and we have 45% polar bears, almost half of them, clearly out of the domain of Holmesian deduction! Not the least because their doctors might have prevented them from taking a 15 km long walk, at this hour of "senility", besides of course the fact that they actually make a serious damage to Holmesian probability.
The conclusion to which we reach, Mr. Holmes, is that:
Even after assuming every "probability" you mentioned as certain, at least 45% of the bears don't turn out to be "polar" or "white", and 45%, my dear Mr. Holmes, are a loud enough entity to stop you from saying that you "have eliminated the impossible".
NOT SO ELEMENTARY AFTER ALL MY DEAR MR. HOLMES!
ON THE CONTRARY MR. WATSON..........Kashinove
Let me make a Holmesian Deduction now.....
From the pains you have undertaking to prove the question right and by doing so, ensure the status quo, I can safely assume that you are uncosiously considering the elitist and influential concern as "natural" and in the event of upcoming conflict of interests, you will act detrimental to the interest of the proletariat........
Outrageous, though it might sound, but
How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?
Regards,
Second Coming