Then again, I said 6/2(1+2)=1, so what do I know...![]()
I still believe it is 1. Surely you would multiply out the brackets first leaving you with 6/6 why would you divide first?
No, read it again.
He said he's left with one WHOLE melon, notice the whole. -.-
if you have one melon and a half melon you have one WHOLE melon.
So you're saying 1.5 melons = 1 (WHOLE) melon, because that extra 0.5 melon doesn't matter.
So why can't you say 5 melons = 1 (WHOLE) melon because those extra 4 melons don't matter?
The answer is 3 tbh.
No, if I say to you "How many whole melons do you have?" When you have 1 and a half melons. You would say one.
If I said "How many whole melons do you have?" When you have 5 you would say 5.
No, if I say to you "How many whole melons do you have?" When you have 1 and a half melons. You would say one.
I would say one and a half.![]()
You have subtly rephrased it from the original question, which had the sentence 'he is left with one WHOLE melon'.
To say that someone is left with one whole melon is to imply that there is nothing else by the language used. It doesn't categorically exclude there being more than one melon, but that interpretation relies on a deceptive use of language in the first place, hence why I said you could pedantically argue it otherwise.
The only time you would be imprecise in the wording is when you are deliberately giving a vague answer or an estimate, which isn't implied because you are expected to give a correct and accurate answer. An example of a vague answer would be:
"How much money do you have left"
"A tenner*"
*£12.45
This specifically says how many WHOLE melons is he left with, it classifies a type of melon.
You just rephrased it again! It doesn't ask "how many whole melons are you left with?", it states "he is left with one WHOLE melon". Those are not the same thing, the latter is written as an implied answer to a different question, namely 'what is remaining in that person's possession?'.
I'm not sure why you are getting so defensive about it anyway, I have already said you could rightly argue 4 was a valid answer!
Well then why use that awful example which I proved to be bad through the reasoning.
Well you make that example to disprove my point relating to the riddle which I show isn't related because it actually backs up my argument rather than yours? =/
This specifically says how many WHOLE melons is he left with, it classifies a type of melon.
How many melons did he take to town?
It's ambiguous.
When writing out a cheque you don't put "one hundred pounds," you put "one hundred pounds only."
So it could be either.