# Here’s another one, and I DO have the answer!



## Ronni (Sep 12, 2021)

I just have no clue how it’s  the right answer.  So those of your who know, explain the process please!


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

96?


----------



## Shero (Sep 12, 2021)

Depending on which way you work it out the ans could be either* 40* or *96.*


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

...or 52


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Shero said:


> Depending on which way you work it out the ans could be either 40 or 96.


What's your formula for 40?


----------



## Aunt Bea (Sep 12, 2021)

96


----------



## Shero (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> ...or 52


really? I do not think so!


----------



## Shero (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> What's your formula for 40?


will say when others have had a go.


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Shero said:


> really? I do not think so!



Well... I will say when other have had a go!


----------



## RadishRose (Sep 12, 2021)

40?


----------



## PamfromTx (Sep 12, 2021)

40 ?


----------



## caroln (Sep 12, 2021)

30


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Shero said:


> will say when others have had a go.


Figured out 40 but it doesn't justify the first statement.


----------



## Shero (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> Figured out 40 but it doesn't justify the first statement.


which first statement mon ami?


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

40, like RR & Pam said.  First, you add the 2 numbers.  Then, you add the previous answer to your total to make it totally total @40.


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Pepper said:


> 40, like RR & Pam said.  First, you add the 2 numbers.  Then, you add the previous answer to your total to make it totally total @40.



How do you justify the 1st statement?


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Shero said:


> which first statement mon ami?


1 + 4=5


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

i.e. 
8+11=19 + 21(the previous answer)= 40.


----------



## Shero (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> How do you justify the 1st statement?


that is what I am asking you, which first statement do you mean. You speak Greek, me speak mostly French, so explain.


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

You don't have to justify it. * It Just IS*
It merely begins, is the start of, the query.


----------



## Shero (Sep 12, 2021)

Pepper said:


> You don't have to justify it. * It Just IS*


nothing is just is Ms Pepper, there is always an explanation in math


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Shero said:


> that is what I am asking you, which first statement do you mean. You speak Greek, me speak mostly French, so explain.


I've explained already: The 1st statement (1 + 4 = 5) has no previous statement to obey the formula applied.


Pepper said:


> You don't have to justify it. * It Just IS*


A formula applied to a series of statements must satisfy all of them. "It Just Is" is not scientific. It sounds like.... God!


----------



## PamfromTx (Sep 12, 2021)

Shero said:


> that is what I am asking you, which first statement do you mean. You speak Greek, me speak mostly French, so explain.


And I mostly speak Spanish, boy are we in trouble.   lol


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

It begins.  It is what it is.  After that, statement 2, is the start of the "equation"
Statement 2 is actually statement 1.  1+4=5 could be any simple old thing.  *1+4=5 (prior answer is 0)*


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Pepper said:


> It begins.  It is what it is.  After that, statement 2, is the start of the "equation"



It's like the Big Bang!


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> It's like the Big Bang!


see my last answer
1+4=5 +0 =5 
0 is the legitimate number


----------



## PamfromTx (Sep 12, 2021)

@CAKCy


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

My son is a math & physics graduate, MIT.  Which gives me no credibility whatsoever.


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Pepper said:


> My son is a math & physics graduate, MIT.  Which gives me no credibility whatsoever.



I have no son! You should see MY credibility! 
People still believe I'm not real!


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

Nothing is real @CAKCy.  And nothing to get hung about.


----------



## Shero (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> I have no son! You should see MY credibility!
> People still believe I'm not real!


would you like to adopt Pam's chicken?


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Pepper said:


> Nothing is real @CAKCy.  And nothing to get hung about.



I think, therefore I exist!


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Shero said:


> would you like to adopt Pam's chicken?



It _would_ give me ammunition to fight back!!!


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

So.... where's Ronni??


----------



## PamfromTx (Sep 12, 2021)

Back later, need to go buy a few dozen eggs.


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

PamfromTx said:


> Back later, need to go buy a few dozen eggs.



Wear a mask!


----------



## PamfromTx (Sep 12, 2021)

96


----------



## PamfromTx (Sep 12, 2021)

I will give my explanation when and if I am close to the correct answer. Esta bueno?


----------



## PamfromTx (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> I think, therefore I exist!


COGITO ERGO SUM?


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

PamfromTx said:


> COGITO ERGO SUM?


SIC!


----------



## Warrigal (Sep 12, 2021)

I agree with those who gave the answer 40.
The equality signs are misleading though.


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Warrigal said:


> I agree with those who gave the answer 40.
> The equality signs are misleading though.



Many answers work correctly: 40, 52, 96. There may be more.
I find 40 to be the weakest possibility due to the first statement (equation) not having a preceding statement (equation).


----------



## Warrigal (Sep 12, 2021)

It's a series of sorts and I agree that it could be ambiguous.


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> Many answers work correctly: 40, 52, 96. There may be more.
> I find 40 to be the weakest possibility due to *the first statement (equation) not having a preceding statement (equation).*


Yeah, I told you it Did!  1+4=5 and *5+0=5
Zero *is the prior total of the equation we don't see, but it is there and the only answer that makes sense.  *0*


----------



## Knight (Sep 12, 2021)

40
Following the sequence shown
1+4 =5
5 +2+5 =12
12 + 3+6 =21
21+8+11=40

The sequence doesn't include the + after the 1st. 5 nor after the 12 or 21.  Without the + 's I suppose any combination could be imagined. I took the  presentation of the sequence to be the logical way to solve this.


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Pepper said:


> Yeah, I told you it Did!  1+4=5 and *5+0=5
> Zero *is the prior total of the equation we don't see, but it is there and the only answer that makes sense.  *0*



Oh... So now we are going to rely on imaginary priors to justify the result?


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> Oh... So now we are going to rely on imaginary priors to justify the result?


Nope.  Not imaginary.  Overslept & couldn't make it to the party!  Still there though.  Give me another number that fits..............


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Pepper said:


> Nope.  Not imaginary.  Overslept & couldn't make it to the party!  Still there though.  Give me another number that fits..............



That fits what?
I can give you two formulae that fit perfectly (though @Warrigal has correctly identified that the equal (=) signs are misleading). I'd prefer arrows there (->)


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2021)

Hmmmmm


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

@Ronni iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!


----------



## spectratg (Sep 12, 2021)

Well after that stupid thing with the eggs (white or not), I do believe that this one is 96 as several other folks have stated.

Formula is a+axb=N:   1+1x4=5;    2+2x5=12;    3+3x6=21; and   8+8x11=96.


----------



## Sassycakes (Sep 12, 2021)

135 ?


----------



## Lee (Sep 12, 2021)

40


----------



## Knight (Sep 12, 2021)

spectratg said:


> Well after that stupid thing with the eggs (white or not), I do believe that this one is 96 as several other folks have stated.
> 
> Formula is a+axb=N:   1+1x4=5;    2+2x5=12;    3+3x6=21; and   8+8x11=96.


Applying a formula vs. what is there visually there might be the answer.

I took the picture for what is shown so I guess we'll have to wait for the answer.

Following the sequence shown
1+4 =5
5 +2+5 =12
12 + 3+6 =21
21+8+11=40


----------



## PamfromTx (Sep 12, 2021)

spectratg said:


> Well after that stupid thing with the eggs (white or not), I do believe that this one is 96 as several other folks have stated.
> 
> Formula is a+axb=N:   1+1x4=5;    2+2x5=12;    3+3x6=21; and   8+8x11=96.


LOL!  It isn't stupid, our brain gets a work out.


----------



## Ronni (Sep 12, 2021)

The answer is
.
.
.
.
.
40 OR 52 OR 96!!!

It's not an equation. There's nothing mathematical about it. It's a riddle that involves numbers, that's all, and it's deliberately ambiguous.

DON’T SHOOT THE MESSENGER!!  I didn’t make this up, I just had the devilment and bad taste to share it!!


----------



## Dancing_Queen (Sep 12, 2021)

SPOILER ALERT!!!!





This is explained in the following video.  The answer is questionable.  It's quite interesting.  One interpretation gives "40."  That _same _one and another one can also give "96."

https://mindyourdecisions.com/blog/2016/08/24/the-viral-1-4-5-puzzle-the-correct-answer-explained/


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Ronni said:


> The answer is
> .
> .
> .
> ...



I haven't seen the video.
The formulae for the three answers are:
A+B+P -> R (40)
A +NxB -> R (52)
A + AxB -> R (96)

where 
A = the first term
B = the second term
P= the result of the preceding statement (equation) - ambiguous since the first statement has no precedent (@Pepper )
N = the sequential number of the statement (equation)


----------



## Shero (Sep 12, 2021)

I said in the beginning the answer is either 40 or 96, BUT I do not see where 52 fits!! It is a math problem as shown here:

First line: 1 + 4 = 5

Second line: 2 + 5 = 7.

So now we add the first sum of the previous equation, like so:

5 + 7 = 12

Third line: 3 + 6= 9, so add 9 + 12 = 21.

Solution: 8 + 11 = 19, so add 19 + 21* = 40.*



First line: 1 + (4 x 1) = 5

Second line: 2 + (5 x 2) = 12

Third line: 3 + (6 x 3) = 21

Solution: 8 + (11 x 8) *= 96 *


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Shero said:


> I said in the beginning the answer is either 40 or 96, BUT I do not see where 52 fits!! It is a math problem as shown here:
> 
> First line: 1 + 4 = 5
> 
> ...



Read my post (#58)


----------



## Shero (Sep 12, 2021)

CAKCy said:


> Read my post (#58)


 so mon ami, you have learnt something, you are using "N"as the variable. I did that remember?


----------



## CAKCy (Sep 12, 2021)

Shero said:


> so mon ami, you have learnt something, you are using "N"as the variable. I did that remember?



Yeah! Yeah! Yeah!... Whatever......


----------



## Buckeye (Sep 15, 2021)

The answer is chocolate.  Chocolate is the answer to all of life's problems.

Having said that, note that the first line (1+4=5) is correct, but the second and third line are mathematically incorrect.  So the only real answer is 8+11 = 19.  It's just arithmetic


----------

