THE QUESTION: WHO OWNS THE FISH?

[Servo888]

So I've run into Einstein's Riddle...

1. In a street there are five houses, painted five different colours.
2. In each house lives a person of different nationality
3. These five homeowners each drink a different kind of beverage, smoke different brand of cigar and keep a different pet.

THE QUESTION: WHO OWNS THE FISH?

HINTS

1. The Brit lives in a red house.
2. The Swede keeps dogs as pets.
3. The Dane drinks tea.
4. The Green house is next to, and on the left of the White house.
5. The owner of the Green house drinks coffee.
6. The person who smokes Pall Mall rears birds.
7. The owner of the Yellow house smokes Dunhill.
8. The man living in the centre house drinks milk.
9. The Norwegian lives in the first house.
10. The man who smokes Blends lives next to the one who keeps cats.
11. The man who keeps horses lives next to the man who smokes Dunhill.
12. The man who smokes Blue Master drinks beer.
13. The German smokes Prince.
14. The Norwegian lives next to the blue house.
15. The man who smokes Blends has a neighbour who drinks water.

ALBERT EINSTEIN WROTE THIS RIDDLE EARLY DURING THE 19th CENTURY. HE SAID THAT 98% OF THE WORLD POPULATION WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SOLVE IT.

The answer is "The German" - but we're not done. What about the fact that only 2% of the world population will be able to solve the riddle? Say if you only considering the population in the USA, I'm quite sure at least 20% of the population should be able to solve this. Hell, the probability of getting the correct answer is already 1:5! Though, obviously it's not solving it.

Something just doesn't seem right... There has to be more to this riddle.

 

[dontdisturbmycircles]

There is a good discussion about this in the brain teaser forum. Some say the german has the fish, others say that no one owns the fish. I think "Einstein" originally said that 98% of the population would NOT be able to solve it, thus opening the discussion as to whether it is solvable at all (Maybe there is no fish?) But then people point out that there is a THE in the question, not A. lol

 

[MeJennifer]

Assuming that Einstein said that only 2% can solve it does not make it so. Even Einstein is not excused from making statement without evidence.

 

[Servo888]

Assuming that Einstein said that only 2% can solve it does not make it so. Even Einstein is not excused from making statement without evidence.

Because it's tied so closely to the riddle, I don't think he would just pull that number out of his butt... Even as an educated guess, it doesn't seem right.

 

[MeJennifer]

Because it's tied so closely to the riddle, I don't think he would just pull that number out of his butt... Even as an educated guess, it doesn't seem right.

I think it is most likely he just used that number as a figure of speech. Not in a scientific way.

Unfortunately some people think that each utterance and intonation of Prof. Einstein must contain something not less of near mystical truth.

 

[Kurdt]

One has to remember that there is a lot of misinformation on the internet. There could be any number of reasons for that particular statistic to be attached to that riddle. Unless you find a concrete source that confirms or denies it, it will remain a mystery.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

This puzzle has been posted here before.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=7193

 

[DaveC426913]

As Kurdt points out, who said ANY of the backstory to the riddle has any truth to it?

Both the '2%' AND the 'Einstein' appeal to our affinity for 'truthiness'.

 

[Ruian]

There is a good discussion about this in the brain teaser forum. Some say the german has the fish, others say that no one owns the fish. I think "Einstein" originally said that 98% of the population would NOT be able to solve it, thus opening the discussion as to whether it is solvable at all (Maybe there is no fish?) But then people point out that there is a THE in the question, not A. lol

I Have solved this puzzles years ago and get throught it over and over again
and i still derived with GERMAN as the answer because i considered that
the fish in the question --> "WHO OWNS THE FISH?" because the facts said that there are 5 pets so if you will no consider FISH as one pet so what's the german pet ?

 

[dontdisturbmycircles]

I don't know, discussing such trivialities is not my cup of tea. I was just saying there is some discussion about that, and it has been largely discussed in the link jimmysnyder pasted.

 

[Ruian]

I don't know, discussing such trivialities is not my cup of tea. I was just saying there is some discussion about that, and it has been largely discussed in the link jimmysnyder pasted.

well ok a so what was your answer.

 

[x12179x]

possible explanation?

"According to Special Relativity, absolute space and time does not exist and simultaneity is a meaningless concept. Just because there is no animal assigned to the German, does not mean that he owns a fish. However, it is easy to assume it when one reads the question. This is perhaps the thing that Einstein was talking about when he, according to legend, said that 98% could not solve this problem. Note that it is just speculations. Perhaps the truth will never be known."

http://moridin.moved.in/science/misc/einsteins-riddle-exposed

 

[AaronDesselle]

I'd like to offer a suggestion and have it discussed... It hit me the first time I saw the very last clue.

First, here is my logic, feel free to point out how wrong it is:

1) If supposedly only 2% of the population will get this, then the obvious solution that most people get in 30 minutes on some scratch paper, probably isn't it.
2) According to the rules, no one drinks the same thing
3) Everyone on the planet drinks water... Einstein, or whoever the made this puzzle, knows that.


So when I read the last clue, I saw it as a trick question... Try finishing it without knowing what the fifth drink actually is.

I've read people's ideas about the fish not being mentioned in the actual clues, therefore the puzzle can't be solved, but I think that's just them trying to explain why only 2% would get such an easy logic puzzle. Obviously the fish is one of the pets, duh. This puzzle is not unsolvable, it's just really hard without the fifth drink. Water doesn't count.

-Aaron Desselle

 

[K.J.Healey]

Did people really know how to do logic puzzles as we do know, back in the 1910-40's or whatever? Perhaps no one had heard of them or made them but the elite intellectuals.

 

[RandallB]

Of course water counts as a preferred drink, just as no one expects to find a person that drinks exclusively coffee (maybe beer).
The problem is difficult because you must place every element in its proper place on the street. The clues imply 5 variables, but location makes 6. To find has the fish you first figured out they are between a Brit & Swede in Red and White houses at the end of the street. Along with what everyone prefers for drink, color, smoke & pets.

I think the more difficult task was creating a puzzle like this with a minimum of required clues.

Also I don’t think Einstein could have done this in the early 19 century. I assume they meant late 19th century while in school, or more likely early 1900’s

 

[AaronDesselle]

You are right

"just as no one expects to find a person that drinks exclusively coffee"

This is actually my point exactly... Thank you. It is not stated that they drink their personal beverage exclusively at the exclusion of all other drinks, just that it is different from what the other four drink. You are right, you would not find a person who drinks only coffee (maybe beer, haha, funny). Therefore, a logical person would conclude that they ALL still drink water from time to time.
It does state that their beverage preferences (when it comes to choices stated) do not overlap. Water can not be an exclusive choice for one person, because every living person needs water. I feel that clue 15 is simply pointless and a misdirection, because they ALL have neighbors that drink water. It might as well say he has a neighbor that wears shoes.

 

[davee123]

Try finishing it without knowing what the fifth drink actually is.
[...]
I've read people's ideas about the fish not being mentioned in the actual clues, therefore the puzzle can't be solved, but I think that's just them trying to explain why only 2% would get such an easy logic puzzle. Obviously the fish is one of the pets, duh. This puzzle is not unsolvable, it's just really hard without the fifth drink. Water doesn't count.

It's an interesting proposition, except that the 15th clue (as it turns out) really IS unecessary. You CAN solve it without the 15th clue. Except the problem is that the answer is still the same as it was WITH the 15th clue, assuming water as the 5th drink.

If your proposition were correct, then the 15th clue would be something like "The person who smokes Blue Master has a neighbor that drinks water". Because THEN, if you went ahead and assumed that water were the 5th drink, you'd end up with a conflicting answer, and you'd be convinced that the puzzle was in error, until you found the loophole of assuming water to be the 5th drink.

But personally, I think that's a pretty silly assertion. You'd be just as well to assume that the homeowner isn't necessarily the same person as the one who lives in the house. EG that the German LIVES in the 4th house, but OWNS the 2nd house. Or perhaps that the "first" house referrs to the time that it was built, rather than the left/right order of houses. Or that one of the men's wives also smokes a kind of cigar. Or whatever. I'm sure there are plenty of loopholes like that. That's part of what makes word problems so difficult to write-- there's lots of unintentional assumptions that you can make depending on how the question is phrased.

DaveE

 

[AaronDesselle]

But personally, I think that's a pretty silly assertion. You'd be just as well to assume that the homeowner isn't necessarily the same person as the one who lives in the house. EG that the German LIVES in the 4th house, but OWNS the 2nd house. Or perhaps that the "first" house referrs to the time that it was built, rather than the left/right order of houses. Or that one of the men's wives also smokes a kind of cigar. Or whatever. I'm sure there are plenty of loopholes like that. That's part of what makes word problems so difficult to write-- there's lots of unintentional assumptions that you can make depending on how the question is phrased.

DaveE

Fair enough, but I don't see it as a loophole, merely a logical assumption with some actual reasoning behind it. As you clearly demonstrated, there are lots of different assumptions you could make on several fronts, but my argument is this that particular assumption (that only one person drinks water) breaks the laws of physics when all of the others do not.

The other ones you brought up are pretty good, actually, and would fit within the wording, but they would be leaps without reason for the sake of an argument. :)

I guess I just can't imagine how someone would think only 2% of the population could solve this, unless at least part of it is a trick question. My argument at least makes more sense than saying "the fish doesn't count because it's only mentioned in the final question", right? And that one happens to be the official stance on several sites.

 

[davee123]

The other ones you brought up are pretty good, actually, and would fit within the wording, but they would be leaps without reason for the sake of an argument. :)

Heh, that's how I see the water vs. 'something else' argument :)

I guess I just can't imagine how someone would think only 2% of the population could solve this, unless at least part of it is a trick question.

I think everyone gets hung up and bent out of shape about that percentage. As though that percentage were perfectly accurate and reflected the current world population. The reality is that that number is junk. How'd the verify that number? Test 100 people on the street back in 1935? Did they test college students? 2nd graders? Men? Women? Construction workers? People who didn't speak English? People who didn't know what a cigar was?

Also, how'd they verify that the answer really IS the answer? Just because it's the answer they're *LOOKING* for doesn't mean it's *THE* answer. That's what I hate about word problems. You have to accept answers that fit the wording, regardless of whether or not they were what you as the author expected the answer to be. "The German owns the fish" fits the clues, and is pretty easy to verify. And if you made some of the other wacky assumptions thanks to the imperfect wording, you could conceivably verify other answers too, which you'd be forced into accepting. You'd be far better off having a lawyer re-write your problem so that you can't make assumptions other than the intentional ones.

My argument at least makes more sense than saying "the fish doesn't count because it's only mentioned in the final question", right? And that one happens to be the official stance on several sites.

Meh. I happen to think the "fish doesn't count" point is similarly an argument for the sake of argument. I think people are intentionally trying to come up with loopholes because they think the problem as stated is too easy to have been composed by Einstein, or that it's too easy for the '98% unsolvable' statistic. So they try and come up with other interpretations in order to satisfy their belief/desire that they're somehow more intelligent or 'worthy of Einstein" or something. But the truth is, the problem is faulty. It allows for more than one answer, and probably doesn't accurately reflect the "98%" statistic it's typically presented with. Whoever the problem's author is/was would probably rewrite it differently without as many loopholes it if they heard all this silly hubbub.

DaveE

 

[AaronDesselle]

DaveE, everything you stated makes perfect sense logically. But it leaves us with two options:
1) Accept that the writer horribly misjudged his calculation. Exactly what most of us would have done had the puzzle not been, arguably, credited to Einstein. You may choose to end the logic there.
2) Choose to follow the white rabbit. The 98% comment opens a question, like it or not.
You may choose to follow the path that anomaly suggests...

Even if unintentional, I think this puzzle demonstrates, quite clearly, the different thinking pattern of different people... I was not surprised to find that your occupation is a Programmer. You would choose option 1. I happen to be an Artist and I choose option 2... You stand on a solid foundation of logic and reason and they will most likely never let you down... For myself, although I see them quite clearly, I do choose to look underneath the rocks that we walk over on a daily basis.
Message me if there are other subjects you would like to argue :)

-Aaron Desselle

 

[davee123]

DaveE, everything you stated makes perfect sense logically. But it leaves us with two options:
1) Accept that the writer horribly misjudged his calculation. Exactly what most of us would have done had the puzzle not been, arguably, credited to Einstein. You may choose to end the logic there.
2) Choose to follow the white rabbit. The 98% comment opens a question, like it or not.
You may choose to follow the path that anomaly suggests...

Yep, I think that's totally correct. I've tried both, and found that those white rabbits multiply quickly! Basically, that there's so many white rabbits to follow that it seems rather pointless when the far more realistic (IMHO) possibility is (1). I'd be more inclined to chase rabbits if (as I suggested earlier) there were a logical fallacy like if the 15th clue were, for instance, "The man who smokes Prince has a neighbour who drinks water."

Even if unintentional, I think this puzzle demonstrates, quite clearly, the different thinking pattern of different people... I was not surprised to find that your occupation is a Programmer. You would choose option 1. I happen to be an Artist and I choose option 2... You stand on a solid foundation of logic and reason and they will most likely never let you down... For myself, although I see them quite clearly, I do choose to look underneath the rocks that we walk over on a daily basis.

Well, I think that's assuming that I (or programmers in general?) don't travel down (2), when it's more accurate to say that I just don't put any *faith* in (2). As I pointed out earlier, we can investigate other possibilities 'till the cows come home-- ones that are "illogical" or whatever. But who's to say that debating "home ownership vs. residence" is more or less logical than "everyone drinking water"? Hence, because there's no objective method of arbitration to determine which white rabbit we ought to be following (and all the rabbits lead in different directions), the best option (which IS an objective one) is to assume (1), and accept answers as correct that make assumptions not explicitly stated in the problem but don't result in logical fallacy, provided the assumptions are understood by those involved.

I think as an artist, you can find subjective beauty or elegance in a particular solution, and argue something as a good solution because it "fits" somehow (like, if somehow your assumption with water amazingly coincided with a paper or theory of Einstein's). But the difference is that I will try and withhold subjective judgement as it pertains to "accuracy", where you might not with a particularly elegant answer.

DaveE

 

[AaronDesselle]

But the difference is that I will try and withhold subjective judgement as it pertains to "accuracy", where you might not with a particularly elegant answer.

DaveE

Well stated.

 

[smdm0816]

I'd like to offer a suggestion and have it discussed... It hit me the first time I saw the very last clue.

First, here is my logic, feel free to point out how wrong it is:

1) If supposedly only 2% of the population will get this, then the obvious solution that most people get in 30 minutes on some scratch paper, probably isn't it.
2) According to the rules, no one drinks the same thing
3) Everyone on the planet drinks water... Einstein, or whoever the made this puzzle, knows that.


So when I read the last clue, I saw it as a trick question... Try finishing it without knowing what the fifth drink actually is.

I've read people's ideas about the fish not being mentioned in the actual clues, therefore the puzzle can't be solved, but I think that's just them trying to explain why only 2% would get such an easy logic puzzle. Obviously the fish is one of the pets, duh. This puzzle is not unsolvable, it's just really hard without the fifth drink. Water doesn't count.

-Aaron Desselle

The way I see it - it isn't easy and most would probably give up. that might be the reason for only 2% or at least something close. That is correct, no one does drink the same thing - and I had no complications figuring out beverages. None overlap. I'm sure by drinking water meant that they don't really drink anything else. But please note that tea, coffee and beer all have water in it.
Also - the person who said that the fish could belong to anyone - the riddle says they all have a different PET. Singular noun. Having a different pet does not mean more than one nor does it mean that somebody has none.

 

[ahmedhassan72]

take it easy

that simple riddle doesn't need all of that when i just thought it is difficult i took long time but in that session when i tried to solve it normally without any complicated thinking i found it easy! He (Einstein) said that any fool intelligent can make things more complicated. (if i am not true i just think that the 15 given points can still make probability that will get you to no answer but i couldn't find that although i solved it and revised every point to my scratch and found it true and my result got to the German) I think that Einstein was never concerned with water as it is a common drink or the article before fish . It is not a biology riddle and imagine they are symbols x,y,z,... But even if it is the German is the result I think the riddle is capable of making 98% of population doesn't solve it even in our time (Don't think that all people think like you!)
I think I am talkative!

 

[Noone]

So I've run into Einstein's Riddle...



The answer is "The German" - but we're not done. What about the fact that only 2% of the world population will be able to solve the riddle? Say if you only considering the population in the USA, I'm quite sure at least 20% of the population should be able to solve this. Hell, the probability of getting the correct answer is already 1:5! Though, obviously it's not solving it.

Something just doesn't seem right... There has to be more to this riddle.

LOL! if you all came up with the german well have fun your in the 98%...

Its a perception joke! a play on word's a false analization of sat's...

LOL what's the oppisite oppisite of red? the answer is red, but only if your house is on the Earth and is applied by normal laws of physic's, the correct answer would be the question it's self... Who own's the fish... so the answer is the question and the question is the answer, it relate's to my first comment about oppisite's, the whole point of the riddle is the key with in it, of someone and no one, somebody and no body... its just a statement one of which people had a false perception of such, and in doing so landed in the 98% of the world :) so there is no right answer to it, there only is if you say there is, therefore you make the answer, and so meany people picked from the list or added there own... but only 2% say's the asnwer is the question it's self :) which mean's they think on a difrent level of perception of the view of the world around them, Hence we all see the same light and the same word's but only 2% will ever say the answer is the question it's self... and only the true 2% will be able to use that concept to create any other concept ever desired... a true root and point of thought while sitting in one spot...

 

[Noone]

its all worthless without the concept of the 16th, the start and the end... (hence)what started it all, for each of the 15 people to get them to the end spot of where they live and what they own... 1-----6 so then you ask what things would effect them along the way from there start point to there end point within any give point of perceptable time...
well...
..34.=7
.2..5.=7
1...6.=7 the founding concept of start and a end, can be applied to allthings to find how they were made and how they must have not been made, what can and can't be done within the middle because it wouldn't create the end, because the actions and reactions wouldn't macth the end from the start, applied with the things that must have effected the person -.-, this is what the riddle create's, just a reaction from everyone, aka information tool for helping humanity, another one would be the concept of alien's, which has inspired a lot of new tech's that were deamed impossible -.-

 

[Noone]

i don't like to be tricked, but when i do i got to give some cred to those that do it, and to those that point it out...

you can only break in down to which person has the highest % of chance of owning the fish...meany people say the german i hear... all 15 can't have 100% chance of owning the fish..because of the means of finding which one must own the fish...
BUT.. the question has the highest % Who own's the fish there is a 100% chance that who owns the fish, therefore the hints are just there to throw you off, check out my brain teaser that i posted, it works dang near the same way...

 

[Noone]

Sorry for the multi-post's on this subject, but i was holding out a bit :/

a logic riddle...
1.Someone who own's a fish----100%
2.Somebody who own's a fish----100%
3.No one who own's a fish----100%
4 No body who own's a fish----100%

these are the start's, each has a ending to them
they each have a 100% chance, but each in a difrent way, it lays on the concept that you couldn't never know for 100% that the german has the fish or any other person dose... you can only say with the information given that is true... and that is

--=(The person who own's the fish has 100% chance of owning the fish)=--
^.^ so who owns the fish? speculation, and lack of infomation will only lead to one logical truth that was given, and that's not the information about the houses or the color or there drink's or pets...thats just a missleading random bs...

the question makes all other hint's pointless, since the point of the question is to see which people over think things and which people think them through, in the perception of the person creating it -.- also this is the first time looking at this riddle...but I've used the same based thoughts for a long time off nature's workings :/
--=(The person who own's the fish has 100% chance of owning the fish)=--
therefore you don't need to know which person because you know the person owns a fish :)... yea Mr. Albert seem's to be a tricky 1 to analize perception of one's action's and intention's :/ truly a great riddle that still won't be solved because of lack of information :)

 

[ahmedhassan72]

You are just a great like man NOONE great deductions!

 

[a2tha3]

A chart seems like the most useful tool to help solve this riddle: Five columns for the five houses, and five rows for nationality, house color, type of drink, type of cigar, and finally, pets. Clue #8 states the man in the middle house drinks milk, so we can start by filling in that one of the 25 boxes created.


1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
Nation
Color
Drink Milk
Cigar
Pet


Then we deduce as much as possible from each clue. The Norwegian living in the first house (# 9) could mean the first on the left or the right, since it isn't specified. I assume the left (first on chart) for now. Often, with riddles or puzzles, it is faster to make an assumption and if it doesn't work out go back and try the other way, rather than trying to hold open both possibilities while analyzing the other clues.

Clue# 14 says the Norwegian lives next to the blue house, so we can fill in the house color in the second column.

Clue # 4 tells us that the green house has to be in the 3rd or 4th column, since the white house is to the right of it, and that now only works in one of these two positions. However, since clue # 5 says that the owner of the green house drinks coffee, and the milk is the drink of the third house, that means the 4th house is green, the fifth white, and of course, coffee is drunk in the 4th. We can fill in 3 more boxes.

Clue #1 says the British man is in the red house, and the third house is the only one that has neither color nor nationality specified yet, so we can fill in those two boxes. This also gives us the color of the first house, since only yellow is left. Yellow smokes Dunhill (#7), so we get that too.

Horses are next to the Dunhill smoker (#11). The "Blends" smoker lives has a water-drinker to either side (#15), which,looking at the chart now, means in the 1st or 2nd house. Since he also lives next to cats (#10), and horses are in the 2nd house, he has to be in the 2nd, and cats have to be in the 1st, along with a water drinker. The first column is now complete.

The blue master smoker drinks beer (#12), so since two drink boxes are open, but the 2nd house has a Blends smoker, the 5th house has to have the blue master smoking beer drinker.

The Danish man drinks tea (#3), which puts him and his tea in the only house without a drink box filled in; the 2nd.

The German smokes Prince (#13), and only the 4th house has columns open for nationality and cigar type, so we can fill those in. That also leaves only the Swedish man to inhabit the 5th house, and we know that the Swede owns dogs (#2). This is how the chart now looks:


1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
Nation Norwegian Danish British German Swedish
Color Yellow Blue Red Green White
Drink Water Tea Milk Coffee Beer
Cigar Dunhill Blends Prince Blue Master
Pet Cats Horses Dogs


Now, since clue # 6 says the person who smokes Pall Mall rears birds, and the 3rd house is the only place left for Pall Malls, it must also be for the birds. That, of course, leaves only one box unfilled, that of the pet in the 4th house. Thus, the coffee-drinking, Prince Cigar-smoking German in the green house owns the fish in Einstein's riddle.

 

[nabki]

OK, since it was written in the late 19th century let's look at the facts available:
marine and brackish water fish were not kept in tanks until the 1960s, so that leaves us freshwater fish.
there are 2 types of freshwater fish: coldwater (goldfish and dojo loaches) and tropicals. at the time the only tropical varieties available were gouramies, which breathe air at all times and are very sensitive to smoke, since all the men we have smoke then that only leaves us with coldwater fish.
dojo loaches, used by many travelers to predict the weather were out of fashion at the time for said use, so they would not be imported. dojo loaches are native to southeast Asia. make that point (1).
goldfish at the time were only kept in parts of Asia, and specific places in the west. the places in the west are :the UK, US and france. please correct me if i am wrong.
since there isint a Frenchman, that means the Brit keeps the goldfish. now the dojo loach needs to be removed somehow...
just adding a new perspective to the argument...

 

[phlegmy]

woo hoo
i can't solve it
The Majority Rules!

 

[nabki]

done some research and i found out that the german army used dojo loaches in jars to predict the weather... they also had access to south east asia which puts them back in.(?)

 

[daveb]

The 2% will get it is a false fact - it sort of has to be. Take 100 people who randomly pick an answer, and 20% of them will get it right!

 

[Kaimyn]

I'm sorry, but I have to say I dissagree with the people who say "The German". I believe it is the British. Let me tell you the part where I went a different way:

The green house is on the left of the white house

That is implying that the green house is on the left of the white house. Drawing this on paper, you instantly assume it is from your perspective, but what if it's not? Say you are standing in front of the middle house, looking out of the sheet of paper. Suddenly, left becomes right and right becomes left. Doesn't it seem more logical that it is from the house's perspective not yours?

So, that's why I believe it should be the British person and not the German.