ydoaPs

It is a magic trick. If you want the long explanation, see the link in my previous post. For the short one:

Rather than being a math problem, this is actually a magic trick. There is no missing dollar.

It's unfortunate that there doesn't appear to be an Android equivalent.

You sir, are a god among forum bots.

If you don't know what GoogleGoggles is, it's this thing where you can take a picture on your phone and it will translate text from the photo for you. How hard would it be to add a font recognizer/emulator and a photoshop-ish thing so that there is an app that puts the translated text back in the context of the photo? I feel as though it wouldn't be terribly more difficult for languages that use very similar alphabets such as translating between English and Spanish or between Arabic and Farsi.

Well, considering my state is trying to get bronze age religion taught in science class, I'd say yes.

Indeed, but see my more developed reasoning regarding the actual case.

Watch a few videos in the calculus section of this website and see if you can follow them. There are other areas such as biology and physics on that site as well.

Would this be confusing?

This is a good one.

Confused sense data is still sense data. Care to try again?

Google docs might default to view only by those with a google account.

It works for me.

Well, if there was invariant and entanglement worked like it does in "What the Bleep do We Know?", then it would work. However, neither of those requirements are true.

What does he make of the entirely wrong (and contradictory) order of events in Genesis?

That is false according to both Randall's formulation and your own. The islanders have the ability to see. They see more than one of each color and the outsider merely says there exists at least one of one of the colors. The outsider or the guru (depending on the formulation we're talking about) gives no new information. In both formulations, everyone knows that everyone knows that there exists at least one person of each eye color even before the fact was announced.

I don't think it is. It assumes that they don't know that at least one brown eyed person exists whilst simultaneously using that information. Assuming for the sake of the argument that the solution does work, it works equally well if we swap the colors by having the tribe be told that at least one brown eyed islander exists. The problem comes in with the guru (per Randall's version, the traveler per the OP's version) doesn't give the tribe any new information. They already knew that at least one blue-eyed islander existed. They also already knew that at least one brown-eyed islander exists. It doesn't work if the scenario used for the solution is being tried for both colors simultaneously. The answer is that all of the islanders are safe and stay on the island.

The paths to solution run simultaneously interfere with each other and make neither work. And then there's the problem of how the population got that large in the first place given the fact that the traveler didn't give them any information they didn't already have.

Actually, I don't think the puzzle works. The whole island already knows that there is at least one blue eyed person before the traveler gets there since there are 100 of them and they can see each other. There's also the fact that everyone on the island already knows that there is at least one brown eyed person on the island. So, we can run the same solution for the brown eyed people. The problem, however, is that the solutions should be running simultaneously. Wouldn't the presence of one solution ruin the operation of the other?

Ok, I get the reasoning now, but there's still something off about it since they already knew there was at least one person on the island with blue eyes.

Ok, so there is only one blue eyed islander. They are told there is at least one blue eyed islander. This means the blue eyed islander knows there is only one, but each of the brown eyed islanders have only enough information to say that the number of blue eyed islanders is greater than one but less than three since they cannot see their own eyes. Since the blue eyed islander cannot see any blue eyed islander, he kills himself. This means there are now zero blue eyed islanders, but the brown eyed islanders only have enough information to deduce that there are less than two blue eyed islanders. There is no information given to the brown eyed islanders at any point in the scenario such that they would be logically forced to kill themselves.

This breaks down after two. If the islander says "It's nice to see the exactly three pair of blue eyes in the native population here", it might work, but that's not what he said. He merely said that there exists at least two. Even if there are only two blue eyed islanders, since an exact number wasn't given and the islanders can't look at their own eyes, each of the brown islanders can logically think they have blue eyes or brown eyes. Likewise, if there are more than two blue eyed islanders and each sees at least two other blue eyed islanders, the traveler gave them no information from which they could deduce their own blue-eyedness. No cookies for you.....ever. What you did there was have them using information they do not have. All the information that was given to them was that there was at least one islander with blue eyes. This isn't even new information to most of the tribe. All you have the traveler saying is "How pleasant it's to see another pair of blue-eyes, after all these months at sea". This indicates at least one, not the exact number. Your problem doesn't work.

I don't think that holds. There's no reason they would find out that they have brown eyes if one of the at least one blue eyed islanders commits suicide. The jump from here requires knowing exactly how many blue eye islanders there are.

Are all gods gods of the gaps?

It passed in our state Senate and they're not even pretending that they're not intentionally wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars of school money for potential theocratic gain: "This is a different Supreme Court...This Supreme Court could rule differently."-Dennis Kruse (R-District 14)