[QUOTE=mfgoode]:smile:
The minimum we can have to call them a single group of brothers is a combination of two of them.
[snip]
a group of brothers taken two at a time to make the group. :confused: :question:
Mally :coffee:[/QUOTE]

I haven't got many knowledge on sets, but it should be pretty obvious that 4C2 is the number of subsets with two elements in a set of four. But yet again the flaw is the same: you're counting subsets, not brothers.

I don't understand the need to consider "a single group of brothers" and brothers "taken two at a time". The only groups of brothers we actually need to consider are sets X and Y, that contain every brother in the family, and we should count the brothers individually.

I really don't see why to contest that the algebra is flawed and your school child's rhyme has no more solutions. Being an open-minded person could really help you to learn more with discussions like this.

[QUOTE=mfgoode]:unsure: How do you arrive at the figure of 2753 ? Is it a typo error?
Mally :coffee:[/QUOTE]

[code]2401 - kits
343 - cats
7 - wives
1 - other man
+ 1 - me
_____________
2753[/code]

A Riddle rhyme
 

[QUOTE=tom11784][code]2401 - kits
343 - cats
7 - wives
1 - other man
+ 1 - me
_____________
2753[/code][/QUOTE]
:rolleyes: You have 48 less :no:
PL check this out:
The riddle of the poem "As I was going to St. Ives" (' Google it')
Only one assumption can be made in the Nursery Rhyme "As I was going to St. Ives" and that is that one person was definitely going there - or was it? It , of course would depend on the direction of the people that were encountered on the way! This type of conundrum is now referred to as a logic problem in lateral thinking designed to improve the logic and deductive skills of children, and indeed, adults! (As I was going to St. Ives refers to the name of a quaint old village in
Cornwall, England) Earliest traceable publication date is 1730.


The Answer to the Riddle
Only one man was going to St.Ives!
He met the following who were
going the other way:
A man (1) with 7 wives
7 x 7 (49) sacks
7x7x7 (343) cats
7x7x7x7 (2,401) kits
A Total of 2,801 wives, sacks
cats and kits!

Poem - As I was going to St. Ives

As I was going to St. Ives I met a man with seven wives,
Each wife had seven sacks, each sack had seven cats,
Each cat had seven kits: kits, cats, sacks and wives,
How many were going to St. Ives ?
Mally :coffee:

[QUOTE=mfgoode]:rolleyes: You have 48 less :no: [/QUOTE]
I'm purposely not counting the 49 sacks because they are not people nor animals, and thus not worthy of the count. (49 less than your count)
I'm counting myself since in that case all the people (including 'I') and animals are going to St Ives (1 more than your count)

However, one could argue that only people should count, and that any number from 0 to 7 of the man's wives are with him, the set of answers would be restricted to 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9.

[QUOTE=mfgoode]As I was going to St. Ives I met a man with seven wives,
Each wife had seven sacks … [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=tom11784]and that any number from 0 to 7 of the man's wives are with him[/QUOTE]
Considering the suggestion that the wives are not present --
I do not see that suggestion to be in conflict with "a man with seven wives" because that statement can be referring to a property of the man which is independent of the location of said wives.

However, I think that it conflicts with "Each wife had seven sacks" because that statement reports an observation that could not have been made were they not present.

Today's question:
"Was there a polygimist present?"

[QUOTE=Wacky]Considering the suggestion that the wives are not present --
I do not see that suggestion to be in conflict with "a man with seven wives" because that statement can be referring to a property of the man which is independent of the location of said wives.

However, I think that it conflicts with "Each wife had seven sacks" because that statement reports an observation that could not have been made were they not present.[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily, m'Lud, if hearsay were acceptable in such circumstances.


Paul

I pity the man who has seven wives. Never mind where they are going.

Mally,

You have shown yourself to use inconsistent logic in this thread. Maybe we should wish 7 wives on you as a curse.:surprised

Fusion

[QUOTE=tom11784]I'm purposely not counting the 49 sacks because they are not people nor animals, and thus not worthy of the count. (49 less than your count)
I'm counting myself since in that case all the people (including 'I') and animals are going to St Ives (1 more than your count)

However, one could argue that only people should count, and that any number from 0 to 7 of the man's wives are with him, the set of answers would be restricted to 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9.[/QUOTE]
:smile:
Where did you get the idea that only people count.? Yes you have a legitimate point about the sacks but lets stick to the problem which clearly in the 2nd last line states
"kits, cats, sacks and wives,
How many were going to St. Ives ? "

Quote:"I'm counting myself since in that case all the people (including 'I') and animals are going to St Ives (1 more than your count)" :no:

What would you call the goods transported by a freight train from A to B ?
Are they not going from A to B ?
Mally :coffee:

A Riddle rhyme
 

[QUOTE=Wacky]However, I think that it conflicts with "Each wife had seven sacks" because that statement reports an observation that could not have been made were they not present.
Today's question:
"Was there a polygimist present?"[/QUOTE]
:bow:
Excellent Wacky! You have a God given talent of viewing a problem from a different angle. This is lateral thinking at its best

In this particular thread there have been people who have viewed the problem also from a different perspective with ulterior motives of throwing a spanner into the works and posing an entirely problematical solution which they themselves cant answer. Amen! to them.

Polygamist ? The man was probably, as any man with more than one wife is a polygamist.

There is a parallel case in the Bible when Christ confronts Mary Magdalene with 6 husbands who were not present and she lies to him. But that's going off topic.
Mally :coffee:

A Riddle rhyme
 

[QUOTE=Fusion_power]I pity the man who has seven wives. Never mind where they are going.

Mally,

You have shown yourself to use inconsistent logic in this thread. Maybe we should wish 7 wives on you as a curse.:surprised

Fusion[/QUOTE]
:rolleyes:
I dont agree to your sweeping statement of inconsistency without a qualification. Never the less I will let it pass as you are entitled to delude yourself as much as you please. :no:
:smile:
" A curse" ? Speak for yourself (we should) but I say the more the merrier!
Solomon had a harem of 700 concubines and he had no problem :wink: But they probably were present one or two at a time and not all at once. There I go again its a vicious circle ! :grin:
Mally :coffee:

[QUOTE=Wacky]
However, I think that it conflicts with "Each wife had seven sacks" because that statement reports an observation that could not have been made were they not present.

[/QUOTE]

I don't think so because that statement can be referring to a property of the wives which is independent of the location of said wives.

Consider the verb had in the same way you are considering "with". It's easier still!
You can easily assume the wives are not there and that all of the mentioned are in home, with seven sacks (because they have them)...

[QUOTE=mfgoode]:rolleyes:
I dont agree to your sweeping statement of inconsistency without a qualification. Never the less I will let it pass as you are entitled to delude yourself as much as you please. :no:[/QUOTE]

You can delude yourself as well Mally, as much as you please.