So I have a problem...
You have four small chains with three links each. You want to combine the four small chains into one necklace you can wear around your neck. It costs you ten cents to break a link of chain, and 20 cents to weld it together. What is the least expensive price you can pay to create a necklace of 12 links around?
Someone can explain it to me? Thanks.
Note by
Half Pass3
8 months, 3 weeks ago
No vote yet
1 vote
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*or_italics_**bold**or__bold__paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)> This is a quote# I indented these lines # 4 spaces, and now they show # up as a code block. print "hello world"\(...\)or\[...\]to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 32^{34}a_{i-1}\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{2}\sum_{i=1}^3\sin \theta\boxed{123}Comments
90 cents I think. You can take one of the chains, break all its 3 links, then use them to join the rest into one necklace. This gives us 3 breaks and 3 welds, which amounts to 90 cents.
@Half pass3
Log in to reply
I have to state, 10 cents to break a LINK instead of a whole chain. and to make all 12 pieces into a circle.
Log in to reply
So is my answer correct @Half pass3?
Log in to reply
Not a same problem but See Here. That last line there should've been here.
Log in to reply
See the solution is same as mine.
Log in to reply
@Percy Jackson, your answer was right.
@Devbrat Dandotiya sorry to tell you, but I checked and @Percy Jackson 's answer was correct.
If by links you mean the rings themselves, then there are 12 rings in total already, hence you can only weld, which will be four times for four chains, or 20×4=80 cents.
If by links you mean the connections between the rings, then there are 16 rings in total. Here three chains would be enough to make a 12 rings necklace and 3 welds are the only requirement, or 2×30=60 cents.
Log in to reply
Don't forget that you have to break a link before welding it to join two chains, so both your answers are wrong @Devbrat Dandotiya
Log in to reply
Don't forget that that is already the reason why welding is more expensive
Log in to reply
Thanks for helping me out so much.
Nope, that hasn't been mentioned. Practically even, breaking a link is much is easier than welding it, so welding is costlier. If it is so, then @Half pass3 hasn't stated his problem very well, and has left the solvers to guess out the specifics. If that is not the case, then I am simply correct, and you aren't @Devbrat Dandotiya :)
Log in to reply
Even if the problem isn't stated very well @Percy Jackson my solution makes less assumptions than yours.
Log in to reply
Actually, your solution makes the impractical assumptions that would simplify this problem. I took the practical assumption in my problem. You might as well have said that you could do it in 0 cents because a magic fairy helped you. In chain links, you always break and then weld, and welding usually costs more as it requires more work and precision than breaking a link.
Log in to reply
If I want to 'simplify' this problem which has already no specifications then I'm just being rational and hence it's not just about making 'impractical' or 'practical' assumptions but about making none or some.
Log in to reply
You are not making sense, as you are stating the same argument using different words again and again. Silence is the best answer to those who don't value your words, so I'm putting a pin on this conversation, and ending it. No use explaining it to people who don't accept they are wrong...........
Log in to reply
I might have agreed with you on the fact that the problem is poorly stated, but my reason of argument is that you've in the first reply claimed that my answers are wrong, as if you know what the question really should have been. If only by bringing the argument of 'assumptions' again and again I've become nonsensical, then where do you stand @Percy Jackson with your repeated argument of 'practicality'?
Log in to reply
My argument of 'practicality', is that when problems don't have specific information in them, you cannot make any assumptions. You will have to use real life information. You can't round off g to 10 if the value of gravitational acceleration constant isn't given. You'll have to use 9.81 m/s^2, so in the same way, you can't assume that welding is costlier as it is inclusive of breaking. Anyway, even if you reply to this comment, I will not reply, let's leave the topic.
Log in to reply
I have not assumed that welding is costlier as it includes breaking, I only tried to explain the obscurity in the problem by not assuming that it does not include breaking.
But then at last I have to agree on that you might have been right all along which I kind of knew, I mean, why else the price of breaking would even be there when my solution doesn't even need that. It being there shows that breaking matters and that the price of welding is exclusive.
Log in to reply
I have to state, 10 cents to break a LINK instead of a whole chain. and to make all 12 pieces into a circle.
And 'magic fairies' are just an strawman argument.
Log in to reply
Well, you're being a strawman here :)
Log in to reply
Sure