T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1666.1 | | AMCFAC::RABAHY | dtn 456-5689 | Mon Sep 21 1992 10:26 | 13 |
| B+A
Perhaps the athlete can make a cut in the top of the remaining chain
and then shake it loose while standing on the floor. In which case the
answer is 2B.
Perhaps the athlete could climb the chains and break a hole in the
ceiling large enough to pull himself and the chains through. Again,
he can take all of the chain out of the room, 2B.
Perhaps by cutting a single link from one of the chains and then
proceeding to slice it up just so and put it back together in a
different configuration with an much larger volume ...
|
1666.2 | Going for the gold | VMSDEV::HALLYB | Fish have no concept of fire. | Mon Sep 21 1992 10:38 | 13 |
| I think we need to know if splicing the chain back together is
permissible. And if so, how does one measure "length of chain"?
Perhaps the number of links?
My answer is 2B-<1 link>. Athlete climbs to the top, cuts all but
1 link fom chain 1, cuts all of chain 2, splices together chains
1 and 2 into one long chain which he then loops thru the 1 fixed link,
climbs down the chain, cuts it at the bottom and pulls it thru the
one link at the top.
Assuming he can splice chains and reform the shape of the links.
John
|
1666.3 | 2*B - epsilon | TAV02::NITSAN | One side will make you larger | Mon Sep 21 1992 17:01 | 7 |
| Well, actually this was the answer I knew (2B-epsilon).
Perhaps the question would have been phrased better with "golden ropes"
instead of chains, in which case the athlete should have performed the
loop (of size epsilon) at the top...
/Nitsan
|
1666.4 | | HANNAH::OSMAN | see HANNAH::IGLOO$:[OSMAN]ERIC.VT240 | Wed Sep 23 1992 16:18 | 12 |
|
Can the athlete get the chain swinging ? If so, then how about forming a
very small loop near ceiling, threading the rest through the loop, hanging from
the doubled chain, swinging until you are out of the room, then pull most
everything out of the loop and into your hands. All you lose is the small
loop's worth.
Gee, sure wish I could draw pictures in notes... are we in the dark ages
or what ?
/Eric
|
1666.5 | new interpretation of problem | 53099::BUCHANAN | The was not found. | Thu Sep 24 1992 12:41 | 9 |
| If the 2 chains are close to one another, then the problem seems a bit
vacuous. Suppose the two chains are a longer way (>2B) apart. I think that
the best we can get away with is 8A.
We are limited by the fact that if we wish to *return* to a chain, we
must leave at least B-A hanging there.
Cheers,
Andrew.
|
1666.6 | a belfry perhaps | 53099::BUCHANAN | The was not found. | Thu Sep 24 1992 12:45 | 6 |
| In fact, for n chains we can get away with length:
A*n*2^n
Cheers,
Andrew.
|