53 bicycles: A lateral thinking puzzle

Thread Games
601

So, he had a medical condition that he expected to eventually cause blindness, and he planned to kill himself when that occurred. Had he been on the non-smoking train, when it entered a tunnel he would have been mistaken in believing that his condition had worsened and he was now blind, and would therefore have killed himself.

Is that correct, and is the puzzle done?

602

Wait…he would have killed himself because he thought he’d gone blind because the train went through a tunnel, if he hadn’t been able to see the cigarettes?

[hijack]I have to comment that that’s ridiculous. I know blind people-- I even know Deaf-blind people, and that’s just, well, kinda offensive, really.[/hijack]

OK, back to the game. Was he just diagnosed with some eye disease, and on his way to have it treated, but if he went totally blind before he got to the doctor, they wouldn’t be able to treat it?

603

Edit:
I think Chronos’s rephrasing and Mahaloth’s response nailed it down somewhat. Also Tim’s questions.

  1. So the man would have killed himself because he thought he had gone blind when the train went through the tunnel – except that there were lights from lit cigarettes?
  2. Did he have a specific reason for fearing blindness?
    2a) if so, was it occupational (e.g., he was a photographer)?
    2b) if so, did he have a strong reason to believe he would go blind during this trip?

Further Edit: what they said ^^^^^^

604

Not quite, but I’ll call it anyway because the major work has been done.

The full solution is as follows:

He had been blind and extremely depressed about it, but received a treatment in Switzerland that was supposed to cure him. He was told not to take off his blindfold, though, for over a week. However, when he was on the train, he could not help but lift the blindfold and peek. They were in a tunnel, total darkness. In his depression he would have killed himself. However, he saw the light of the cigarettes and realized his vision had returned.

605

Okay, time for a classic one. As usual for these, if you’ve heard it before please don’t interject, though if you’re sure you know it and I’m offline you can answer for me.

A man wearing a backpack lies dead in a remote forest. His cabin is nearby, but no other people are. How did he die?

606

For Mahaloth:
I’m sure there’s a term for this kind of scenario where a person’s motives are on the face of it totally ridiculous but still logically coherent – if there’s not a name already, it deserves to have one taken from some Agatha Christie novel.

Not to slag on the puzzle, Mahaloth: I found it interesting and, with answers, solvable – we would’ve figured out the last bit pretty soon. :slight_smile:

607
  1. did he intend to return to his cabin?
  2. I know this isn’t a yes-or-no question, but I could rephrase it as a series of such questions, so let’s save time: was his death suicide, homicide, accidental, … or other – EDIT: or “none of the above?”
608
  1. No
  2. No to suicide; No to homicide; yes (sort of) to accidental; yes (sort of) to other.
609

So it wasn’t a heart attack?

610

Does “cabin” refer in this case to a small house (made of logs or otherwise)?

Is the cabin full sized (not a toy)?

Does “people” include only living people, or could there be other dead people?

611

Not a heart attack

612

No
Yes
Neither any people nor other human corpses are nearby.

613

Solution guesses:

  1. it’s a (full-sized) airplane cabin?
  2. The backpack is a parachute?
  3. the man was a solo airplane pilot whose parachute didn’t open when the airplane failed?
614

I’ve got a new one that came up in my history class today. The solution is more interesting than the question, but I’ll throw the question out there:

Certain US presidents of the modern era (let’s say WWII and later) are often referred to by their initials. For example, FDR, or LBJ.

Others are usually not. While we might write “GWB” or “BHO” in blog comments as shorthand, we don’t often use this shorthand in day-to-day speech – except for some presidents from this timeframe.

Why are some of these presidents’ names commonly shortened, while others aren’t?

615

Did these men go by their initials before they were President?

616

Good question! Not relevant, as far as I know, though.

617

I don’t know about JFK, and LBJ, but FDR was FDR on his baby announcements, according to a book on presidential trivia I once had, and he was signing his name FDR back in elementary school.

618

(I am relying on one source for the answer – if it’s wrong, I apologize. But this source’s reasoning – which any of us could duplicate without expert knowledge – is convincing. At least to me.:))

Edit for Rivkah:
The bit about FDR sounds plausible – but that doesn’t account for the other presidents who are commonly known by shortened names, and why others aren’t!

619

Is there really a single factual reason? OR is this some puzzle with a trick answer?

I suspect that there are many reasons. Some TLAs just scan and others don’t.

Saying President Roosevelt is ambiguous. There have been two of them. However there is only one FDR. Same for President Johnson.
And of course, LBJ rhymes so neatly with “kill today.” I suspect that has a lot to do with it.

620

Does it have to do with the art of headline writing in newspapers?