Easy teaser. Well, its not really teasing then is it?

[Noticibly F.A.T]

Easy teaser. Well, its not really teasing then is it?

Heres an easy one. Two ducks in front of a duck, two ducks behind a duck, one duck in the middle.

Whats the smallest number of ducks that are there.

 

[Padford]

i'd say 3, as two could be read as a proper noun, thus making it a person, or thing.. 'two' ducks behind a duck, 1; 'two' ducks behind a duck, 2; and one duck in the middle, 3.

 

[recon]

Since you said 'easy', I'm posting the first answer that comes to mind: 5.

 

[gerben]

5??
why not 3?
(A B C --> two in front: B C, two behind: A B, one in the middle: B)

 

[recon]

5??
why not 3?
(A B C --> two in front: B C, two behind: A B, one in the middle: B)

Well, it did say easy instead of tricky!

 

[Noticibly F.A.T]

Answer is in white.



The ducks are positioned like this

X
X
X

Easy.

 

[Mk]

Heres an easy one. Two ducks in front of a duck, two ducks behind a duck, one duck in the middle.

Whats the smallest number of ducks that are there.

Yeah, that was so easy, it doesn't deserve to be a brain teaser, it was awful... also, there could be people named "ducks" Then the number would be zero, since they are people, not ducks. You like ducks don't you?

 

[Noticibly F.A.T]

Substitute the name of someone, like ben, or mitch, or sam, in the place of the word duck. It doesn't make any sense, but i like your thinking.

 

[ceptimus]

There only needs to be a single (animal) duck, as 'ducks' can be read as multiple instances of the act of crouching down, or ducking.

So as a duck flies over a group of chickens, one chicken crouches down twice in front of the duck and another chicken crouches down twice behind it. Or to put it another way...

Two ducks in front of a duck, two ducks behind a duck, one duck in the middle.

Of course, the centre duck can also be an act of crouching down, though that is a little contrived. But then you are back to five ducks, though they are all movements, rather than birds.