NOT twins
 

So I'm back from my break and find lots of fun puzzles.

In the spirit of the recent ones, here's a quick one that I heard on holiday (I spent an evening swapping puzzles with a russian mathematics teacher - not eveyone's ideal holiday I know)

Two boys were born on the same day of the same year to the same parents, but they're not twins - how can this be?

Should anyone need the answer, I'll post it on wedensday morning (BST).

Graeme

Graeme,

I don't know but we really should ask Bill Clinton. He's explained himself out of worse pickles than this!

Fusion :)

At the risk of hijacking my own thread

I am reminded of a joke from that time:

"I was nearly Clinton's lover, but I declined. Close, but no cigar!"

Re: NOT twins
 

[quote="graeme"]Two boys were born on the same day of the same year to the same parents, but they're not twins - how can this be?
[/quote]

Classical...... heard it a couple of times, and heard more than 1 logical answer.

At the risk of seeming foolish,

You didn't say what month they were born in. I could argue they were born on the 12th (same date) of the year 2000 (same year) but were born in different months.

Unfortunately this doesn't hold much water with me. I have to deal in Julian dates (or more specifically Gregorian dates) in several programs I maintain. So to me, the "same date" literally means the same specific date for example the 12th of March, 2000.

As for Bill Clinton's peccadillos, Monica Lewinsky was heard to mutter under her breath "There IS no relationship with THAT man!".

I suspect she is precisely and exactly aware what the meaning of the word is is.

Fusion

[quote="Fusion_power"]So to me, the "same date" literally means the same specific date for example the 12th of March, 2000[/quote]

Yes, we can stipulate that that is the intended meaning. It therefore follows that the interval between their births is less than 24 hours.

Actually, the interval between births could be almost 48 hours if the first one occurs just west of the International Date Line at, say, 12:01 am Wednesday.

Then almost 24 hours later, the same time and date finally wraps around to just east of the International Date Line. But since that's just the beginning of Wednesday there, there's almost another 24 hours before the end of Wednesday reaches the point just east of the IDL.

But that doesn't seem to mean anything for solving the puzzle. So...

1. They're not twins; they're [b]triplets[/b]! Another, so-far-unmentioned sibling arrives in-between the two boys.

2. In-vitro births: Same parents donate egg and sperm for the embryos, which are implanted in different host mothers. Coming from pregnancies of two different women, the boys cannot be considered twins no matter how they resemble each other.

Re: NOT twins
 

[quote] born on the same day

[/quote]

... means born on the same day i.e. same span of 24 hours

Hi All,

Just to be clear, the answer I was looking for is that they are two members of a set of triplets (or quads &c).

A coupleof people PMed me this answer, and cheesehead posted it up here as well.
With respect to cheesehead though, I dont think that his second scenario can reasonably accomodate the "born to the same parents" criterion. (though he must have a *really* twisted mind to come up with it [this is a intended as a compliment BTW].

Tom11784 claims he has another answer, carfe to share it Tom?

the additional ones were the quads, quints, etc. (as apposed to just triplets)

[quote="graeme"]A coupleof people PMed me this answer, and cheesehead posted it up here as well.[/quote]
Oops -- I should've PMed as well.

[quote]With respect to cheesehead though, I dont think that his second scenario can reasonably accomodate the "born to the same parents" criterion.[/quote]
Well, actually I knew that scenario contained a contradiction. I just threw in some wordplay by claiming that the boys' same genetic mother meant they had the same parents but then also claiming (not sincerely) that the separate birth mothers rendered them non-twins. I expected someone to call me on it.

[quote](though he must have a *really* twisted mind to come up with it [this is a intended as a compliment BTW][/quote]
All I know is what I read in the papers. ;) (Will Rogers)