The clock riddle - HotUKDeals
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

#### Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

# The clock riddle

8y, 9m agoPosted 8 years, 9 months ago
Supposing a clock takes 3 seconds to strike 3. How long will the same clock take to strike 7?
Tags:
8y, 9m agoPosted 8 years, 9 months ago
Options

(28)
#1
ten and half seconds
#2
does 'strike' in this instance mean chime?
#3
7 seconds ?
#4
4 Hours and 3 seconds
#5
Or does it only chime 3 times, no matter what time it is ?
#6
14403 seconds
#7
Predikuesi
ten and half seconds

This :thumbsup:

(1.5 seconds per strike)
#8
9 seconds
#9
surely if it was 1.5 strikes per second then 7 strikes would take

7/1.5 seconds

=

4.67 seconds

and 3 strikes would take 2 seconds...
#10
I'm going to go with 10.5 seconds, no idea why it just sounds about right...:oops:
#11
What? Explain this.

3 seconds to strike 3

3/3 = 1 strike per second

7 strikes = 7 seconds..........
#12
gav989
surely if it was 1.5 strikes per second then 7 strikes would take

7/1.5 seconds

=

4.67 seconds

and 3 strikes would take 2 seconds...

It would, which is why I typed 1.5 seconds per strike. I have no idea why it has shown up the other way round, but I suspect my computer hates me. It also keeps calling me Dave for some reason. :w00t:

(Thank you :oops:)
#13
schaf
9 seconds

Correct. :thumbsup:

3 seconds, 3 strikes = 1.5 per interval

7 strikes = 6 intervals

So 6*1.5 = 9 seconds.

Those who said 10.5 seconds are doing a different version of the riddle (you googled maybe?) this is why I fiddled with the numbers! :roll:
#14
Abvance
Those who said 10.5 seconds are doing a different version of the riddle (you googled maybe?) this is why I fiddled with the numbers! :roll:

Hey, I resent that! :p

I knew that the first strike started at 0, so it's 2 strikes in 3 seconds, or 1 strike every 1.5 seconds.

7 Strikes x 1.5 seconds = 10.5 seconds.

In my answer though, I forgot to take into account that the first strike still doesn't count, so like you say, it should have been 6 x 1.5 = 9
#15
Abvance
Correct. :thumbsup:

3 seconds, 3 strikes = 1.5 per interval

7 strikes = 6 intervals

So 6*1.5 = 9 seconds.

Those who said 10.5 seconds are doing a different version of the riddle (you googled maybe?) this is why I fiddled with the numbers! :roll:

assuming that the strike takes zero time?
#16
Abvance
Correct. :thumbsup:

3 seconds, 3 strikes = 1.5 per interval

7 strikes = 6 intervals

So 6*1.5 = 9 seconds.

Those who said 10.5 seconds are doing a different version of the riddle (you googled maybe?) this is why I fiddled with the numbers! :roll:

Write that out in a time line, it doesn't appear to add up.
#17
I suspect my computer hates me. It also keeps calling me Dave for some reason. :w00t:

I think that this Dave thing has gone too far - TV channel, n-s;what's next?
#18
Alfonse
Write that out in a time line, it doesn't appear to add up.

Seconds - Strikes

0.0 - 1
1.5 - 2
3.0 - 3
4.5 - 4
6.0 - 5
7.5 - 6
9.0 - 7
#19
yeah i agree it should be 9 seconds based on 6 intervals of 1.5 seconds
#20
chesso
I think that this Dave thing has gone too far - TV channel, n-s;what's next?

Prime Minister? :w00t:
#21
nightswimmer
Prime Minister? :w00t:

ohhhhh! I never thought of that. What have I said?:w00t:
#22
only 2 seconds out, boy I was sooooooooooo close:whistling:
#23
Does it have any flashing lights

Cuz Im Deaf
#24
But these answers all ignore the duration of the initial strike:

|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike| = 3 seconds 3S+2P=3
|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike = n seconds 7S+6P=n

You cannot solve this without knowing either the duration of the strike or the duration of the pause. All you can say is that n=9-(2*strike duration) and n=7+(4/3*pause duration)

Eg If the strike time is 1s and there is no pause it will take 7 seconds
If the strike time is 0.8s and the pause time is 0.3s it would take 7.4 seconds
If the strike time is 0.2s and the pause time is 1.2s it would take 8.6 seconds
#25
jah128
But these answers all ignore the duration of the initial strike:

|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike| = 3 seconds 3S+2P=3
|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike|Pause|Strike = n seconds 7S+6P=n

You cannot solve this without knowing either the duration of the strike or the duration of the pause. All you can say is that n=9-(2*strike duration) and n=7+(4/3*pause duration)

Eg If the strike time is 1s and there is no pause it will take 7 seconds
If the strike time is 0.8s and the pause time is 0.3s it would take 7.4 seconds
If the strike time is 0.2s and the pause time is 1.2s it would take 8.6 seconds

Yeah , you see that's what I was just writing :whistling: :-D :oops: (not)
#26
chesso
assuming that the strike takes zero time?

As I said ^^^^^:;-)
#27
Yep you did, sorry I missed it :)

I guess the point is the strike cannot take zero time, so the answer is definately less than 9 seconds, and the pause cannot take zero time, so the answer is definately longer than 7 seconds...
#28
jah128
Yep you did, sorry I missed it :)

I guess the point is the strike cannot take zero time, so the answer is definately less than 9 seconds, and the pause cannot take zero time, so the answer is definately longer than 7 seconds...

As you say:thumbsup: