Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site vax135.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!ihnp4!vax135!cjp From: cjp@vax135.UUCP (CharlesPoirier) Newsgroups: net.puzzle Subject: Re: Balls in Bowl (no correct answers ye - (nf) Message-ID: <631@vax135.UUCP> Date: Mon, 20-Feb-84 13:19:09 EST Article-I.D.: vax135.631 Posted: Mon Feb 20 13:19:09 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 21-Feb-84 04:23:02 EST References: <5752@uiucdcs.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ Lines: 18 It is now noon. There are no balls in the bowl. There is no bowl, machine, or observer either. Because, acouple of seconds ago, the machines tried to move at infinite speed as the time approached noon; they became relativistically massive, and eventually dragged everything nearby into itself, forming a small lump of neutronium. C'mon, guys, if you want to give a math problem, *state it* as a math problem. I can't deal with infinitely fast machines that have to move mass around. Especially if we are not allowed to add some assumptions. Like, suppose that both machines have the same (fixed, arbitrary) speed at which they break down, but that the 100-ball machine has to run 100 times as fast as the 1-ball machine. Is there a fastest such break-down speed for which the 1-ball machine just manages to empty the bowl before breaking down itself? (Add assumptions if you want.) (I haven't solved this one myself ....) Charles Poirier