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