A ten volume set of books are placed upright, in order, on a shelf (see photograph). Each book is 4.5 cm thick, and has two covers, each of which are .5 cm thick. A bookworm starts on page 1 of volume 1 and munches his way in a straight horizontal line through to the last page of the tenth volume. What distance does the worm travel?
As ever, please do NOT post your solution, but feel free to say whether you have a solution and how long it took you. Answer on Monday. Have a great weekend!
Advertisement
February 19, 2010 at 6:58 am |
Strictly speaking, an indeterminate distance.
February 20, 2010 at 4:06 am
I’ve got an answer — it took about a minute. Thanks for the fun!
February 22, 2010 at 4:20 am
Nick gets this week’s gold star.
February 19, 2010 at 7:06 am |
About 30 seconds and then another 30 seconds after an “a-ha” moment.
February 19, 2010 at 7:20 am |
What unit of measure do you require the answer to be in……? You could make it really tricky by specifying that the distance travelled must be given in the geological unit of “X the size of Wales”
February 19, 2010 at 7:30 am |
About 30 seconds – but it makes some assumptions that are not clarified in the question. Can’t really elaborate more without giving it away here…
February 19, 2010 at 7:31 am |
Had to read thrice.
Then got it.
February 19, 2010 at 7:35 am |
Why is it that everyone except physics students get this one right, especially on an exam paper?
February 19, 2010 at 9:33 am
Why do you say that? That’s a provocation!
February 19, 2010 at 9:39 am
maybe because physics students tend to read articles rather than books
February 19, 2010 at 4:44 pm
and?…
Oh, I get it, it’s because physics students take at least the double of the time to solve easy problems, than they use in difficult ones. That would explain why they don’t get it in time in exam papers. Lets thinks on one faster to them,… hmmm…
Our bookworm is kind of insecure. After it reaches a cover and crosses it to the other side, there is a 10% chance that it “thinks” best to not continue, to revert direction, to cross the cover again and continue through the book it crossed already… to easy things, whenever he finds open air, it always reverts its direction. So, what is the average distance it will travel until find the last page of the last volume, for the first time?
I’ll explain a solution at Monday to not spoil Richard’s puzzle, this if can get it until there, since I invented the problem right now. But if I can not get it in two days, then it should be really easy for everyone else
February 19, 2010 at 7:35 am |
About 30 sec, only to realize I was wrong. And then about a minute …
February 19, 2010 at 7:51 am |
This was a puzzle in a 4th grade spelling book that I taught from years ago.
February 19, 2010 at 7:56 am |
About a minute, including drawing a sort of schematic
February 19, 2010 at 7:59 am |
I admit I’ve seen it before, anyway 30 secs. and a smug grin.
February 19, 2010 at 8:03 am |
Although a tricky one, this is a very well known and old problem. I think anybody having a moderate interest in puzzles and quizzes must have already come across this problem in the past.
February 19, 2010 at 8:07 am |
Yep, not as touh as earlier puzzles. Still good, though.
February 19, 2010 at 8:16 am |
The books are moving at the speed of light. The worm cannot move.
February 19, 2010 at 8:20 am |
Too bleeding long. I must be stupid
February 19, 2010 at 8:27 am |
Nice and easy, 30 seconds or so. Reminds me of one of my old maths teachers: “Read the bloomin’ question!”
February 19, 2010 at 8:28 am |
Again with the slight lack of clarity in the description, which can be read two ways, if I’m not mistaken. You could use a good editor on these puzzles!
February 22, 2010 at 4:22 am
You assume his wording was a mistake.
February 19, 2010 at 8:28 am |
Too easy. A doddle compared with last week anyway!
February 19, 2010 at 8:30 am |
Got it…then oh oh no reread yep made little worm mistake then OK now got it……about a minute all said and done…..but wait…..does the book worm still have all of it’s own teeth? I might be able to tell you how fast it can eat it’s way through if I can know if it has all it’s own teeth….between now and Monday……hehe slowwww weekend……
February 22, 2010 at 4:24 am
Hahahaha is a little worm mistake hard to clean up after?
February 19, 2010 at 8:33 am |
Yeah, about a minute or two, got the wrong answer first time round
February 19, 2010 at 8:37 am |
Is it a ladened or unladened book worm?
February 19, 2010 at 9:31 am
And is it African or European?
February 22, 2010 at 3:09 am
1st soldier with a keen interest in birds: Where’d you get the coconuts?
King Arthur: We found them.
1st soldier with a keen interest in birds: Found them? In Mercia? The coconut’s tropical!
King Arthur: What do you mean?
1st soldier with a keen interest in birds: Well, this is a temperate zone
King Arthur: The swallow may fly south with the sun or the house martin or the plover may seek warmer climes in winter, yet these are not strangers to our land?
1st soldier with a keen interest in birds: Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?
King Arthur: Not at all. They could be carried.
1st soldier with a keen interest in birds: What? A swallow carrying a coconut?
King Arthur: It could grip it by the husk!
1st soldier with a keen interest in birds: It’s not a question of where he grips it! It’s a simple question of weight ratios! A five ounce bird could not carry a one pound coconut.
King Arthur: Well, it doesn’t matter. Will you go and tell your master that Arthur from the Court of Camelot is here?
1st soldier with a keen interest in birds: Listen. In order to maintain air-speed velocity, a swallow needs to beat its wings forty-three times every second, right?
King Arthur: Please!
1st soldier with a keen interest in birds: Am I right?
February 19, 2010 at 8:45 am |
Took me 30 sec to get a (more or less) obvious answer, but later I realised the answer can be any distance between this obvious answer and a figure that depends on the width of the pages, unless we make an assumption, just like CyberFerret said.
February 19, 2010 at 8:55 am |
About 2 seconds.
This got me thinking – would the answer be the same for a Muslim bookworm?
February 19, 2010 at 9:09 am
Yes, it would. What defines the order is the books and the book-keeper, not the worm. Now, if you are talking about manga books, you have an issue here (since how the books are stored, is clearly presented by the photo).
February 19, 2010 at 12:40 pm
Religion is not as important as language, ask any worm
February 19, 2010 at 9:03 am |
Think I have it! Only confusion for me is over whether the entire book (with covers) is 4.5cm thick or whether just the pages themselves are 4.5cm thick, with the thickness of the covers to be added on top of that. I think it’s probably the latter but I don’t think the question makes it absolutely clear. Very good puzzle though, and I enjoyed the “Eureka” moment!
February 19, 2010 at 9:11 am |
Are the books placed on the shelf in order from left to right? Does the thickness of the book already include the covers or are the covers added on top of the book thickness?
February 19, 2010 at 9:16 am |
How long is the bookworm? – and actually there isn’t such a species, so a trick question!
February 19, 2010 at 9:40 am
OH just great Simon! Thanks what next you gonna say there isn’t a Santa or Easter Bunny Too?
February 19, 2010 at 10:02 am
Sadly there is no Santa or Easter Bunny
The Tooth Fairy does it all 
February 19, 2010 at 11:27 am
OMG can the tooth fairy tell me if the book worm has all it’s own teeth?
and if I can’t find any book worms I wonder if inch worms could chew their way through in the same time that a book worm with it’s own teeth? OK gotta find me either three book worms or inch worms {just in case the above IS true} that still have all their own teeth… three set of books and see how fast they can chew through those books and then I can say how fast per cm they can chew….. my head hurts now…..
February 19, 2010 at 9:35 am |
About fifteen seconds of wondering what the “twist” was, followed by one of TS’s “aha” moments, then a fwe seconds (with a calculator!) to get my answer.
February 19, 2010 at 9:35 am
*SIGH*
few
February 19, 2010 at 9:58 am |
Took me about 30 secs, then an ‘oh wait – aha’ moment so another 30 secs. Then I re-read the questions had a bigger ‘oh right-bugger-okay sorted’ moment. So about 2 mins in total.
February 19, 2010 at 10:02 am |
This seems so simple and obvious I can’t help feeling I must be missing some twist somewhere
February 19, 2010 at 2:34 pm
I agree. Seems like a straightforward junior school maths problem to me.
February 22, 2010 at 3:27 am
Follow your feelings…
February 19, 2010 at 10:02 am |
Okay – just re-red the question yet again and looked again at the picture, had another big ‘ oh what!, eh! hang on – okay, um, um, um got it!’ So now I have my 4th and final answer.
February 19, 2010 at 10:03 am |
Less seconds than centimetres covered by the bookworm.
February 19, 2010 at 10:12 am |
May we assume the books are not Arabic texts?
About a minute.
February 19, 2010 at 12:44 pm
Same answer if they were…
February 19, 2010 at 4:31 pm
I think the answer would be different if the books were Japanese, though.
February 19, 2010 at 4:37 pm
Oh, wait! Maybe in Japan they would stack the books from right to left… Then, same answer.
February 19, 2010 at 10:17 am |
I think I got it, but most times I say that I totally failed. When I hear the actual answer I will probably say “oh.”
February 19, 2010 at 9:30 pm
I’m with you!
February 20, 2010 at 2:03 pm
GO US!
February 19, 2010 at 10:36 am |
yep got it.
February 19, 2010 at 10:38 am |
I think I have it.
February 19, 2010 at 10:40 am |
Does anybody have a reference about how old this riddle really is? The oldest version I could find in my library was from 1973, but I would imagine that is has been around ever since there were books (printed books?)…
February 19, 2010 at 9:23 pm
I heard it in the ’60s, but it might have been from a book printed in the ’30s – and it is probably much older than that.
February 19, 2010 at 10:42 am |
I think I have the right answer, although there’s some serious ambiguity in the question. It took me about 3.5 to 4 minutes.
February 22, 2010 at 3:29 am
Hahahaha how can you ignore serious ambiguity…is that not a red flag? Yet, you set it aside and solve the puzzle without the clarity needed. How do you do that?
February 19, 2010 at 10:51 am |
The answer depends on what language the books are written in.
February 19, 2010 at 12:10 pm
Does it?
If it’s written in a right to left language, wouldn’t the books be stacked right to left as well?
February 20, 2010 at 7:50 am
I do believe the language only matters if the book worm is reading it out loud while chewing…… but I am sure that any well behaved book worm’s mother {mum} would have taught it better.
February 22, 2010 at 3:31 am
So there! (LilaByrd landed on your shoulder…brought a smile to your conversation…then flew on to spread more happiness!)
February 19, 2010 at 11:20 am |
Finally a classic I can actually remember. There have been so many Friday puzzles where I knew I once knew the trick but couldn’t remember it – this makes a nice change!
February 19, 2010 at 11:45 am |
The question was a bit ambivalent, so I have two answers. (typical psychologist fence-sitting) about half a minute thinking, and half a minute checking the calculations.
February 22, 2010 at 3:34 am
Ambivalence is a state of having simultaneous, conflicting feelings toward a person or thing.
Call me persnickety, but can a question have conflicting feelings?
Inquiring minds want to know…
February 19, 2010 at 11:59 am |
Seconds – quite a nice puzzle, though.
February 19, 2010 at 12:00 pm |
With these puzzles I always wonder how people know they are ‘right’ – as what if you think you have solved it (like I had) and then realise when talking to someone else you hadn’t at all!! sometimes I think you – Richard- should give the answer and ask how it is correct- much harder!
February 19, 2010 at 12:06 pm |
my brother got it in about 15 seconds…..not as hard as usual I think
February 19, 2010 at 12:13 pm |
From page 1 of vol 1 to the last page of vol 10, eh?
Would be more solvable if it it were the first page of vol 1.
Page “1″ can appear quite a way into a book, after the frontispiece, preface, ToC, plate list and introduction on pages i, ii, iii etc.
February 19, 2010 at 12:15 pm |
Honestly I don’t think the question is ambiguous. I think the two measurements need to be read separately. No-one in their right mind, if asked to pass me a book, would tear the cover off before giving it to me. The cover is part of the book. No ambiguity.
February 19, 2010 at 12:28 pm |
The answer depends on whether volume 1 is on the left of the picture (behind volume 2) or on the right (in front of volume 2). This is not clear, as the picture is tiny and the numbers on the volumes indistinct.
It also depends on wether the 4.5cm thickness includes the covers or if the pages are 4.5cm thick.
With these two unclear variables, I get 4 possible solutions.
February 19, 2010 at 12:34 pm |
2 seconds – wrong answer
2 minutes – probably the right answer
I think the distance from Vol 1 first page to Vol 10 last page is shorter than Vol 1 last page to Vol 10 first page…
February 19, 2010 at 12:51 pm |
Tried this as a practical experiment once.
My wife got up early one morning and took volume 4 out just as the worm was in transition between volume 3 and 4.
The early bird got the late worm…
February 19, 2010 at 1:12 pm
hehehe….
February 19, 2010 at 1:22 pm |
This is an old one. Very easy when you have heard it before.
February 19, 2010 at 1:33 pm |
Well, I got a very, very simple algebraic answer, but clearly I’m missing the real point of the question. I’ve read it several times and I’m still not getting it. It’s gonna be a long weekend if I can’t figure this one out. Is it against the rules to leave a hint in the comments?
February 19, 2010 at 1:43 pm
Line up ten books, don’t worry about thickness, and “be” the worm.
February 19, 2010 at 3:00 pm
Thanks, I think I got it.
February 19, 2010 at 1:46 pm |
“Ten-volume book set” is in the singular…
February 19, 2010 at 2:00 pm |
Like many others here, my first solution took about a minute. After a thorough rereading, I believe my second solution is correct.
February 19, 2010 at 2:03 pm |
Read then reread the question, so think I got the correct anwser first time after about 1 minute. Wakes my brain up though!
February 19, 2010 at 2:10 pm |
I came to the “right” answer very quickly. Then realized the “real right” answer after considering the comment about the page widths which gave me my “a ha” moment. Although there are some giveaways in posts after that, they only became giveaways after my own “a ha” moment. If I “read” them right. [pun alert]
February 19, 2010 at 2:17 pm |
the page widths are included in the original dimensions. the answer is really clear, as long as the books are arranged in numerical order.
February 19, 2010 at 3:29 pm
Well, I see there are infinite ways to cross the books as stated in the problem (straight & horizontal), it’s minimum distance being the (not so) obvious answer and the maximum being a value which depends on the width of the pages.
I don’t think this width is stated in the problem. Just in case you thought otherwise, I am not referring to the pages thickness, but to the distance from the spine to the outer edge of the pages.
February 19, 2010 at 7:11 pm
Exactly, jh. It’s curious that Richard went to the trouble of eliminating the ambiguity due to one dimension (the vertical), but neglected to address the transverse dimension. I guess it’s all part of his social psychology experiment.
Many versions of this problem sidestep this issue by giving the number of pages in each volume and asking how many pages the bookwork munches through.
February 19, 2010 at 2:21 pm |
Took some double checking, since at first it looked like a simple math problem. I think I spotted the trick. Call it two minutes.
February 19, 2010 at 3:12 pm |
Urgh it took me ages!
February 19, 2010 at 3:20 pm |
The answer is 11001.
February 19, 2010 at 3:50 pm
Oh no! I posted the ASCII codes and the site translated them, please delete Wiseman.
February 19, 2010 at 3:55 pm
Haha, did you think I would give the answer THAT easy? You’re right, but you’re still wrong.
February 19, 2010 at 6:30 pm
Pheew! Felt like a complete schmuck, should have known better.
February 19, 2010 at 3:21 pm |
TOOK ABOUT 2 MINUTES TODAY; THIS IS AN OLDY BUT GOODY!
February 19, 2010 at 3:25 pm |
About 10 seconds because of “seen it before”.
February 19, 2010 at 3:29 pm |
I’m surprised everyone hasn’t seen this one before. It’s a good puzzle, I think. No algebraic formulas necessary, just some very simple math.
Simon is right. You may be a genius, Richard, but your use of the English language should be more meticulous.
February 22, 2010 at 4:17 am
His use of the language is not the problem…he writes very carefully…our ability to think out of the box is. He is testing our reaction to the concept of ambiguous language. Hello? Heh LLLOOOOOO? hehehehehe
Go back and look at the past Friday Puzzles. Do you really think he is such and idiot that he mistakenly changes puzzles that are very old and very well known in exactly the same way every week?
go back…go baaaack….
February 19, 2010 at 3:43 pm |
What is the _width_ of each book?
February 19, 2010 at 4:06 pm |
About 30 seconds. Figuring out the answer was easy. Figuring out the problem took most of the time.
February 19, 2010 at 4:19 pm |
It took me like 5 minutes and I only figured it out because I knew I had the wrong answer and looked up the right one on a different site. I’m also pretty sure I’ve seen this puzzle before, but I still couldn’t quite make the jump without cheating.
February 19, 2010 at 5:05 pm |
4 minutes, but could Richard have found a more out of focus image? Agree with others about the ambiguities, but assumed the covers and rest of the book thickness are separate measurements i.e. book with covers = 5.5cm.
February 19, 2010 at 5:06 pm |
A couple seconds which makes me wonder if I’m missing something but it seemed straightforward.
February 19, 2010 at 5:36 pm |
45 seconds and then a couple of minutes wondering what I might have done wrong before I figured I’d go ahead and post anyway;
February 19, 2010 at 5:37 pm |
Dead easy.
February 22, 2010 at 4:12 am
Be careful the things you deem to be “dead” easy…it may be a prophetic choice of words, friend.
February 19, 2010 at 6:49 pm |
Ach! Images of book worms make me cringe. Can we maybe stay away from literary massacres in the future? I don’t think my stomach can take it…
Oh, and the puzzle is appallingly simple grade school arithmetic.
February 22, 2010 at 4:41 am
Hahahaha appalling!
February 19, 2010 at 7:43 pm |
The question must say in which language the books are written in order to solve it. Assuming its any language that uses roman writing, it took me about 15 secs
February 19, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Good point. Never thought of that.
February 20, 2010 at 4:24 am
Well, I think that the photograph spoke to that fact. I can’t see what the books are, but they’re certainly in Roman script, which implies that the books read from left to right.
February 19, 2010 at 7:44 pm |
It took me about a minute, I think.
I hope it’s that simple. =D
February 19, 2010 at 7:51 pm |
about 10 seconds to solve, and then a minute of, “could it really be that simple?” before I confirmed my answer.
February 19, 2010 at 8:48 pm |
Physics, schmizics…
It seems so obvious, but then again some things do…
I’m dubious about my answer…but I CAN wait
February 19, 2010 at 9:29 pm |
My first time here, and loving it like crazy. The puzzle made me smile, made me think 1 minute was sure I had the answer. Then I read all the comments and had to go back and check again, and now well I am puzzled over this puzzle and look forward to reading the answer on monday
February 22, 2010 at 3:42 am
Don’t wait for Monday, friend…go back and look at all the other Friday Puzzles…and don’t forget to read all the comments…then, you may understand.
February 19, 2010 at 9:42 pm |
OOOOHHHHHH! OKay, I was going nuts so I googled it (sorry) and now I understand!
February 19, 2010 at 11:57 pm |
Good puzzle. Like many above, I spent about half a minute on the wrong answer before seeing the trick. Another half minute to get the right answer (I think) and double-check it.
Not difficult, but not obvious either – at least to someone with my mindset. (Perhaps I should have studied physics.)
And I agree – the wording is ambiguous as to whether the 4.5cm includes the covers or not. Not a big deal, but with the crowd these things attract it’s probably worth paying attention to such details.
February 20, 2010 at 1:06 am |
“A ten volume set” IS not “are.” Is that the right answer?
February 20, 2010 at 1:43 am |
About a minute to get to the point where I *think* I’ve solved it.
I expect, though, to take sixty hours or so waffling over whether I actually got it (i.e., until you post the answer on Monday.
)
February 20, 2010 at 2:23 am |
well…the 10 seconds or so it took me to do the math…though I am off by the thickness of a couple pages of book…but I figure I’m close enough
February 22, 2010 at 3:20 am
Hahahahaha “Close enough” is a brilliant theme for this blog! Ahahahaha kills me…
February 20, 2010 at 3:18 am |
Had it before I finished the question. I made up this question to fool a friend when I was ten years old. i was *sooo* disappointed when I found out years later that I wasn’t the first!
February 20, 2010 at 3:38 am |
Dont post such stupidly easy ones. Do you know that in India every school going child will answer this right without blinking.
February 20, 2010 at 4:20 am |
jay: Well, 90% of them will undoubtedly give the wrong answer unblinkingly, but this is certainly an elementary school level problem.
February 20, 2010 at 6:26 am |
And how thick is the bookworm?
February 22, 2010 at 3:45 am
Ahahaha how thick are the people who can’t follow the rules? (Or ignore ambiguous language?) Hugs!
February 20, 2010 at 6:31 am |
“on”, not “at”. As asked, you actually do need the width of the bookwork to derive the correct answer.
February 20, 2010 at 7:14 am |
I have it. It took about three seconds after I finished reading the paragraph… One check, and … yeah…
February 20, 2010 at 9:18 am |
… does it matter if he is in the woods and the tree that fell and was used to make the paper for the books made a noise and startled the bookworm? …
February 20, 2010 at 9:37 am
oh young one you must take a journey down the yellow brick road and seek the great oz for your own “aha!” moment and then and only then shall you find your answer!
February 22, 2010 at 3:18 am
(Spoken in voice of Yoda) “Knows much, Lilabyrd does…wise, she is.”
February 20, 2010 at 10:32 am |
It took me less than a minute to say 54cms.
February 20, 2010 at 1:49 pm |
Lo importante no es la solución, ni el tiempo. sino el juego de deconstrucción y reconstrucción puesto en juego. La incertidumbre es aquí la clave. Un desafío al determinismo racional! Muy buen desafío!
February 20, 2010 at 3:29 pm |
since had already done this in 7th grade algebra concepts 1 it took me about 3 sec. and another 2 for the math.
February 20, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
It’s either ridiculously easy and obvious or I’m missing something. It should have been made clear whether the width included the covers.
February 20, 2010 at 8:22 pm
think twice and read thrice
)
i had the same thoughts at last fridays puzzle and felt ambarresed when the solution was posted.
~~~~~~~~~~~
http://shopadidas.wordpress.com
February 20, 2010 at 6:14 pm |
About 20 seconds, because I realised I had to read the question carefully.
February 20, 2010 at 8:06 pm |
at first it took me 10sec, which was obv too fast. so i started reading again and came to a slightly different solution within 30sec.
i hope its right this time.
February 20, 2010 at 9:33 pm |
About a minute or two. Try it with the books on your own bookshelf.
February 20, 2010 at 9:36 pm |
Of course I’m assuming the books are written in a European language and not in Hebrew or Arabic!
February 20, 2010 at 10:13 pm |
I got it!
February 20, 2010 at 10:45 pm |
A similar one:
How many fence posts do you need for a 10 m fence with one post every meter?
February 20, 2010 at 10:47 pm |
Btw, does the 4.5cm thickness of a book include the two 0.5cm covers, or not?
February 22, 2010 at 3:52 am
ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ha haha ha hahaha ha ha haha cough cough hahahahahaha um shrug good question…
February 20, 2010 at 11:14 pm |
I didn’t get the ‘a-ha!’ moment so I think I’m wrong
February 21, 2010 at 2:40 am |
I think I got it right away. I’ll see when the answer is posted.
February 21, 2010 at 3:00 am |
Got this one rather quick, by my own surprise. I am awful at math but figured out the trick within 5 seconds. I nearly broke my arm patting myself on the back!
# Mel Says:
February 20, 2010 at 10:47 pm | Reply
Btw, does the 4.5cm thickness of a book include the two 0.5cm covers, or not?
I kinda agree with Mel’s intent, that the wording is ambiguous, but the best way to read the wording is that the COMPLETE book is 4.5 cm. If I calculated wrong, I and the rest of us only did so because of the ambiguity. If wrong, it just takes a simple recalculation.
February 21, 2010 at 3:12 am |
I just checked with an English major who agrees with me that “the best way to read the wording is that the COMPLETE book is 4.5 cm.”
For anyone looking for an ah-hah moment, just go to a multi-volume set and open the first volume to p. 1.
February 22, 2010 at 4:51 am
May I suggest that you and your friend (the English major) incorrectly assume that it is permitted to decide what is “the best way to read the wording…”?
OK, then, I will.
I suggest that this and every previous Friday Puzzle he has posted has critical information *purposely* omitted. Why? I can guess, but the answer is “I don’t know.”
But, I do know that there is a distinct pattern.
Since I don’t believe he is an idiot who just gets lucky enough to screw it up in a similar way every week, I must assume it is on purpose. But, either way, it is not simply a poorly written puzzle. No, friend…there is clearly mischief afoot…
February 21, 2010 at 3:16 am |
[...] I have found this particular puzzle blog very [...]
February 21, 2010 at 3:51 am |
About 30 second, tough its the first time I have seen this problem.
February 21, 2010 at 4:16 am |
I’ve got the solution! Just a matter of lateral thinking…!
February 21, 2010 at 5:46 am |
I think I’ve got it. It took about 30 seconds after reading it twice
February 21, 2010 at 6:51 am |
10 seconds, just use common sense
February 21, 2010 at 10:11 am |
Two minutes. So slow.
February 21, 2010 at 12:42 pm |
It took me few seconds
February 21, 2010 at 1:35 pm |
we did this in maths last week. just had to try and remember.
February 21, 2010 at 1:49 pm |
Does the worm have length or is it a point object?
Anyways, I imagined a ‘dimensionless’ worm and I think I got the answer. Waiting for Monday! 
February 21, 2010 at 5:38 pm |
Almost immediately – being able to visualise the path helps to get the right answer..
February 21, 2010 at 5:52 pm |
for me it took about 20 seconds after i figured out how to find out the answer
February 21, 2010 at 5:54 pm |
What order are the volumes in?
February 21, 2010 at 6:40 pm |
believe i have it. 30 seconds . first post many other tries. thank you for the fun
G
February 21, 2010 at 7:51 pm |
Less than a minute. How do we know if we’re right?
My first submission, obviously.
February 21, 2010 at 9:41 pm
The answer is revealed Monday.
Then you join the discussions as to how you were mislead by the way the question was worded.
February 22, 2010 at 1:43 am
You got your rage all prepared, TS? I’m thinking about doing my MS Paint tonight.
February 21, 2010 at 7:53 pm |
Problem: the worm would have to curve into the book to start at p. 1 of vol. 1 and curve out — probably opposite the spine — of the last munched page, given that the books are in order from L to R, and page order is a Western standard (I have vols. w/ p. order in reverse).
February 21, 2010 at 8:16 pm |
between 3 and 4 miles,depending on which hemisphere and time of day.
February 21, 2010 at 9:49 pm |
http://www.ihatenikki.com/?mylink=f807796a3c403c24
February 21, 2010 at 9:50 pm |
http://www.ihatenikki.com/?mylink=f807796a3c403c24
February 22, 2010 at 3:14 am |
Ahahahaha can I get an “I told you so” please? (Tapping on the mic) Is this thing on? (Crickets…)
February 22, 2010 at 3:40 am |
Lol. i love these puzzles.
February 22, 2010 at 4:07 am |
OK, everyone, open your minds…open…opennnnn….
Before you can solve a problem, you must have enough information to solve it. “But, how does one determine if there is enough information, teacher?” Well, Grasshopper, if you can reasonably come to more than one answer, then there is not enough information. “But, what is the definition of reasonable, teacher?”
“Young one, many people will never know the answer to that question. They have trouble with the difference between possible and probable…but remember, don’t be afraid to conclude that a question is unanswerable…blindly taking stabs at the answer when clearly ambiguous language exists is as useful as riding a lead balloon in a pickle factory.”
“I still don’t understand, teacher.”
“I know, child, I know. Don’t worry, not everyone is supposed to get it…now go outside and feed the cows.”
February 22, 2010 at 4:08 am |
A little addition, a little multiplication, real easy. Maybe 20 seconds.
A little too easy, actually. Did I get the right answer, I wonder? Let’sl wait and see…
February 22, 2010 at 4:11 am |
Eek, no, I didn’t have the right answer. Need to rethink things…
Okay, got what I think is the REAL answer in another 20 seconds.
February 22, 2010 at 4:13 am |
(Sorry for the triple-post)
The answer would be different if these were Japanese or Arabic books. I will say no more.
February 22, 2010 at 4:32 am |
I think Levi is catching on…go LEVI!
February 22, 2010 at 1:33 pm |
ive got an answer. took about 20 seconds.
February 22, 2010 at 2:44 pm |
Got the answer in about 10 seconds, then re-read the question and noticed I needed a slight adjustment.
Read carefully.
February 23, 2010 at 2:08 am |
You don’t tell us whether the covers are counted as part of the book’s width.
February 23, 2010 at 2:13 am
I guess it just means that the answer is one or the other, so as long as you know both, you win.
February 25, 2010 at 9:58 pm |
haha great puzzle! got all my workmates thinking in our coffee break today
March 29, 2011 at 9:58 am |
3.5 i think cause cover is equal to .5.
.5×2=1 4.5-1=3.5
July 5, 2011 at 10:45 pm |
The worm starts at page so it does not go trou the first cover