current community

your communities

more stack exchange communities

company blog
Stack Exchange Inbox Reputation and Badges
tour help
up vote 16 down vote favorite
3

A Story about a lonely All-Knowing Being

All-Knowing Being kidnapped you and placed you inside its home. You are well fed and have everything you need. The thing is, you can't leave and you must play a game of your choice with the Being each day to entertain it for few hours or more.

As you were about to ask it politely, if you can leave at once, it knew and answered before you even had a chance to speak: "I see, and I knew that that day would've come and will come. The day you manage to beat me at a game, will be your last day here." Then it slowly and sadly returned to its room as the night was falling.

But just before it closed the door, you asked silently: "Promise?" - It replied just a moment before closing the doors: "I would never lie to a friend."

The next morning you wanted to play rock, paper, scissors hoping you can get lucky. But the Being knew every move that you will make and had beaten you each and every single time, since it's all-knowing of course.

You had in mind to play a simple tic-tac-toe since you knew you can't lose at such a simple game. But it would always end in a draw since the Being knows how to play each such game perfectly. But you were smart, and decided to challenge it to a Connect Four since the first player can always force a win if it plays perfectly, and you have all the time in the world to practice.

The second morning, the Being had already sticked a new "fair game rule" on the game board: "If the game is played in turns, a set of rounds should be played where each player takes a role of both the first and the second player. The true winner is the one who can win as both the first and the second player. This is to ensure that the game is fair for both players"
And so you won as the first player yes, but you needed to also win as the second player and thus your plan had failed yet again.

Now as the third morning came, you thought that perhaps it should be a game of pure chance. A coin toss! But yet again, for it to be considered a "fair" game, If one tosses a coin, the other calls the heads/tails or the other way around. When you tossed the coin, it knew the outcome even before the toss so you were helpless. But if it tossed the coin it also knew exactly how to "undetectably" force a coin to land on a side it preferred. And no, it didn't conisdered this a "cheat" since even a powerful slow motion camera could not capture and prove its dirty trick.

You thought, that there isn't any hope. Since it knows everything, it can easily find a way to prevent you from winning. Even if you found a game you can easily win every time, it could know a way to undetectably and secretly make you play a wrong move and you wouldn't even realize you were distracted!

And so as one of the many mornings was rising yet again, you were already accepting your destiny to stay here forever. But you noticed the Being being sad and worried, and then it said: "I knew this day had to come. Of course I did. I had to know. I know everything."

And you stood there confused. "Is this the day I am set free? But how could it be? I haven't even thought of a specific game to play for today." But suddenly your heart started jumping wildly. "I KNOW IT. HOW COULD I HAVE BEEN SO BLIND?"

"Being!" you shouted.
"I CHALLENGE YOU TO A GAME OF..."

The puzzle question is, to come up with the game that had set you free by the end of that final day.


I have a specific solution in mind that is required to solve the puzzle, but if you have your own "thinking outside of the box" solution or a clever way to trick the Being, that would be interesting.

Notes

NOTE: Mithrandir had a interesting possibility for a solution, but in order to "win", you can't just win by the rules of the played game. You need to "beat" the Being in the game overall. That means if multiple "wins" can be achieved, they are merely counted as points. Thus his solution does not quite fit. Also, do not omit the fact that the Being defines "the fair game", but also don't misunderstand that fact either. This note is just to make the puzzle more clear.

NOTE: Philip Schiff also had an idea, but it does not fit. If your game is a set of games and the goal is to lose most games, winning a game in the set will not be considered a win. Problem here is the definition of a win. The true "win" is acquired by satisfying the win condition of the overall game. The overall game here is the set of games itself. Same case as the win as the first player in a Connect Four as mentioned in the story. It does not count since the overall game is being defined as a set of the two or more proposed games to make it "fair".

NOTE: A game is not really a game if you are "not playing it", thus a "Pure chance game" isn't actually a game. You need to have at least some interaction to be considered a playable game. And if there is interaction, being gets a chance to "cheat".

Hint

Since the puzzle itself caused many confusions and misunderstanding and I haven't seen a "valid" solution yet, I decided to drop some HINTS and sleep on it (I actually mentioned this somewhere in the comments I think.):

$(0)$

To beat it you need to use the $2$ things you know about against it.

$(1)$

It can't lie to you, since you are its "friend".

$(2)$

It knows everything, since it is all-knowing.

share|improve this question
    
Such a being breaks all types of rules of quantum physics. Also, surely, such a being would be able to sole all unsolved math problems, so I am not sure I would like to leave the room... – Per Alexandersson 14 hours ago
    
@PerAlexandersson Me neither, but the story assumes an alternate dimension or a branch of reality where you do leave, sadly. Perhaps you already met the Being and escaped but your memory was erased? That means the solution is in your mind somewhere, you just need to remember ;) – Matta 14 hours ago
    
Simon Says "Release me!" – wyldstallyns 14 hours ago
    
@wyldstallyns Again, to be a fair game, both players get a say. It sets you free for the moment, but It says: "return to my home". If you do, its a draw and you are still trapped. If you don't, you actually lost and the Being takes you back for not winning. – Matta 14 hours ago
    
@Matta If it knows you will be released if you win why does it play in the first place? – Zxyrra 10 hours ago

13 Answers 13

up vote 15 down vote

The Game

In this game,

if you think of the Game, you lose. Since the Being is all-knowing, it knows that you will be thinking of it before you are thinking of it, and so it loses.

share|improve this answer
    
I like this answer! Something similar was my first guess! But this is not the answer, sadly. One can argue that knowing something does not necessarily mean thinking about it right now. It can know a way to avoid thinking about the game, since it's all knowing. Also, It knows that you will propose the game so it stops thinking about it as soon as the game starts. And later tricks you to think about it. One can't lose something before that something starts? – Matta 15 hours ago
3  
@matta you are always playing the game... – Mithrandir 15 hours ago
    
Oh I see it now, the being can lose yes, but you need to "win" to be set free. Not just "win" as seen in 2-player turn based game, but BEAT the Being. The key is to BEAT it completely. As it says on the wiki: "It is impossible to win most versions of The Game". But the versions that can be won say that you are winning if you are not thinking about it, so they can both keep winning as long as they stop "thinking" about it. The Being needs to think about it just once in its lifetime to know it so loses once, and keeps "winning" for the rest of eternity. Its wins > your wins = you lose overall. – Matta 15 hours ago
    
@Matta "it can know a way to avoid thinking about the game" if you push that reasoning then there is no solution; you cannot win if literally every event is accounted for. – Zxyrra 10 hours ago
2  
@Matta If multiple people have seen the hints and not posted the solution then it is not as clear as you believe. – Zxyrra 10 hours ago
up vote 6 down vote

Can it be

"Let's play a game consisting of a series of other games. Whomever loses the most games in the series is the winner of the game."

share|improve this answer
    
+1 I encourage all attempts! Sadly, this isn't the solution. I would argue that the Being can lose on purpose or trick you into "accidentally" winning the same way it can trick you into making a mistake as stated in the third paragraph? – Matta 14 hours ago
    
So @Matta does this imply the Being can completely determine my behaviour in the game through "tricks"? – Neil W 14 hours ago
    
@NeilW It can yes, but to some extent. For example, since it has a "fair game board" we can conclude that it discourages cheating, so It can't for example force you to "cheat". The Being itself "does not cheat" by "cheating" since it does it so perfectly that it can't be proven otherwise. You, on the other hand, don't know of such skill to "cheat undetectably". Even if you knew such method, the being would "know" that you did so and you would lose since it holds the "rule board" and doesn't need proof that you cheated. – Matta 14 hours ago
    
@Matta so if there is any way within the rules that I could possibly lose, the Being can trick me into playing that way? – Neil W 13 hours ago
1  
@PhilipSchiff I don't know If I get what you meant or If you get what I meant. "Whoever loses the most games" - the Being simply loses on purpose and you win a game in the series. That win only counts as a "point" as I mentioned already. A negative point by your definition. So by winning a game you actually lost the series and actually lost against the Being in the overall game you defined. You need to BEAT the Being in the overall game, not just acquire something that is defined as a "win". The games in the series aren't considered "The Game" which you need to beat. Check the "NOTE" I added. – Matta 13 hours ago
up vote 5 down vote

I would play

Cheat (Card Game)

The Being can't lie (as it says), so in this game, in which you have to lie in order to win, he can't win.

Anyway I'm thinking right now that the Being could know your lies, so you can't lie neither. ...

I'm a bit confused...

share|improve this answer
    
SPOILER: The fact that it can't lie is the thing you need to use to beat it! But this specific case will never resolve since neither can lie. – Matta 12 hours ago
    
@Matta The player can definitely lie, there's simply no point in it. The Being is the only one that will refuse to lie. – Mast 11 hours ago
    
That is what I meant. Both are forced to pick up the pile once they run out of cards that they don't need to lie with. Since they both have at least two or more ranks in their hand at any given moment, neither can win. – Matta 11 hours ago
    
Now that I think about it, This could actually work with a modified version of the game. But anyhow, it is not the real solution which abuses both facts you know about the being (see hints) – Matta 11 hours ago
up vote 5 down vote

TRUTH OR DARE!

If it is truth ask it: Since you know all, answer this question: "What game shall we play so I'll be released?" If it answers -> you are released, does not answer means either it lies to you -> released, or does not know all -> released (because it is all-knowing being by definition.) If there is no such game -> contradiction -> released!

If it is dare, simply dare it to release you, if it does not, it loses -> you are released.

When it's your turn to play, simply tell the truth and to answer its dare question: "Dare you stay with me forever", go yes.

In both cases you have won the game and you can win infinite alternating turns if you wish.

In fact, you don't need to win in this game more than one time. Once you know the answer to your first question: "What game shall we play so I'll be released?" you can play that game and win.

share|improve this answer
    
I love this idea. But as a point of order, the puzzle states that you play only one game per day, and is asking what game you can play to escape today. That means that even if you use this clever ploy to get the Being to tell you the game you can reliably win, that doesn't help you escape today, because you've already played your one game for today; this strategy only helps you escape tomorrow. – Trevor Powell 1 hour ago
up vote 3 down vote

A Coin Toss isn't exactly a Game of Chance. Not completely, at least. As long as there is a choice involved, or the game rules make it so that there is more than one possible outcome for any action, the being will win, because there's a choice and he will pick the most convenient one.

In a coin toss game, there's choice. That's why it wouldn't work.

Which means that any game of pure chance, and really pure chance (no choice allowed whatsoever), would fit the bill and would give you a fair chance of winning - and you inevitably will, since it's just a matter of trying over and over until luck favors you, and luck doesn't depend on any knowledge.

For example, the Game of the Goose, where you simply roll the dice and move, and there is absolutely zero choice involved (at least in the original version) would give both you and the being the same odds of winning, which means you will win in a short amount of tries.

I don't see why this wouldn't be an allowed answer, since it fits all the criteria required, but in case it doesn't there are only two options left.

1) A game where having knowledge is detrimental and would work against him

2) Don't play at all. To be fair, that's the only way you would win against an all-knowing being if for some reason it decided that games with no choice are banned, even though they are as fair as it gets, since luck favors no one.

Honestly, the last option brings up an interesting point: an All-Knowing Being would know how to make you stay, and since he is lonely he wants you to stay. Actually, he would even know how to not feel lonely.

In other words, this whole puzzle game collapses on itself if we consider its structural integrity.

So there you go, both the answer/s and why this actually doesn't make too much sense (when talking about extreme stuff, such as gods or all-knowing beings, it's easy to make puzzles collapse and crumble under their own weight)

If we want to look past how coherent and logical the entire structure of the riddle is and suspend belief, then the answer should definitely be the first one i provided.

A Game of Pure Chance is as fair as it gets.

share|improve this answer
    
First of all, I like the way you think! +1 But, well the being can "cheat" by finding a way to force a dice or a cube or anything luck related to work in his favor. But if there isn't any choice the game must be "run" somehow. Someone must throw the dice and thus a chance for Being to cheat. But if there is no interaction at all, can it really be called a game? I should include a "definition" of a game as I did with the definition of a "win". But a statement (SPOILER/HINT) : "1) A game where having knowledge is detrimental and would work against him" is a nice hint towards the solution. – Matta 12 hours ago
    
It can know to make you stay, but if it can't be done then it can only know a impossible way to make you stay but can't make you stay for real. Well, to be honest, this isn't a very well defined puzzle and needs more details to make it specific, but there is a unique solution related to the beings knowledge. – Matta 12 hours ago
    
Thank you. That would depend on your knowledge as well, how much can he cheat. For example, there is really only one way to cheat with a die, and that's by using a modified one. If you care about getting out, you would use a fair die. The simpler the game, the harder to cheat. Even if it is all-knowing, some things are impossible no matter what your knowledge is. And technically, problem is that even if you were to win a game using his knowledge against him, he would still know how to win anyway and manipulate you somehow. Teoretically, against an all-knowing being there is no winning. – JustSomebody 12 hours ago
    
HINT INCLUDED: Well, it can still manipulate to win anyway yes. But there is a single unique solution I found that does not allow it to neither cheat nor manipulate you, and also allows you to beat it every single time! It is based on something that if I mention, it will be obvious. Two things actually. – Matta 12 hours ago
    
The biggest problem here is the human element, which is much more important than the objective fact that you win a game. No matter what happens, an all-knowing being would know how to tweak things around and play your mind to stay/think you lost. So yes, that would include games of chance as well, if you include the human element as you did in your reply about him finding a way to cheat. A game with no interaction is still a game cause you are actually interacting when throwing a die. The outcome is uncertain so it can be entertaining. Otherwise the Game of the Goose wouldn't exist :) – JustSomebody 12 hours ago
up vote 3 down vote

There is a famous answer to this question: the game of

Chicken.

In this game, in case you aren't familiar with it,

two players simultaneously choose to be Brave or Cautious. (The traditional version has two cars speeding towards one another on a road. You can swerve aside or keep going.) The worst outcome (for everyone) is Brave/Brave (everyone dies). The best is to be Brave when your opponent is Cautious (you live and get to be known as the brave one). In between those, you'd prefer both to be Cautious rather than for you to be Cautious while your opponent gets to boast of being Brave.

If you play this game against an omniscient opponent,

you simply decide that you will be Brave. Your opponent knows this and (because B/B is the worst outcome of all) be Cautious. And you know this, so you truly can decide to be Brave without being crazy. And then you win.

What's not quite satisfactory to me about this as an answer to the question is that

what happens in this game depends critically on the players' attitudes to outcomes that go beyond who wins and loses, and maybe that's not in the spirit of the question.

share|improve this answer
    
Edit this to be 'The Prisoner's Dilemma', (which is mechanically the same game), and I suspect you have the intended answer. It also explains the "HOW COULD I HAVE BEEN SO BLIND?" comment at the end of the puzzle, as the speaker is literally a prisoner facing a dilemma. – Trevor Powell 2 hours ago
up vote 2 down vote

"List the things and facts that you don't know. Whoever lists the most wins." (For example: "The 100th decimal digit of pi" could be an entry of this list)

The list of facts unknown to the All-Knowing Being should be empty.

share|improve this answer
up vote 1 down vote

Maybe you could play:

Hide and seek, then as the creature hides, you can find your way out. Since it can never be found to win the game, you will never accidentaly run into it and can look the whole place for an exit!

I also thought about some game with:

Guessing quantum states. Since those are truly random and not even the creature would be able to predict the outcome, you'd have a chance of winning!

share|improve this answer
    
I like the out of the box thinking! But in hide and seek it can lose on purpose and then it will be your turn to hide and it finds you since it knows where you will hide so its a draw again. You should specify the game of quantum states but keep in mind that you need to be able to always beat it and it should always lose. – Matta 10 hours ago
    
@Matta true! If he knows your intentions of running away he could force a draw to avoid it.. About the quantum states guessing game, now that you mentioned it I don't think it fits an answer, since you wouldn't for sure win every time (it would only be random) – IanC 2 hours ago
up vote 1 down vote

An adaptation of Robert Mandeville's answer.

Who can stay released the longest?

share|improve this answer
    
Being says: "okay, I am not trapped here with you, you are trapped here with me. You lose because you aren't released." – Matta 9 hours ago
    
What if the rules include that both players must be released in the beginning and can not capture each other nor call anyone else to capture them. – Tuupertunut 9 hours ago
    
It can trick someone to capture you and yet again "cheat" without being caught as I mentioned already. But nice idea, I actually smiled and tought this could work in a way even tought the real solution is very specific. – Matta 9 hours ago
up vote 1 down vote

I'm not sure why nobody's given this fairly simple and obvious solution already, but here you go:

Let's play...

Duck, Duck, Goose

Basic rules of the game:

This is a classic children's game.

In it, one player is 'it', the others sit in a circle on the floor, facing inward. The 'it' player walks around the outside of the circle, aloud calling each other player either "Duck", or "Goose", while passing them. If they're declared "Duck", nothing happens. But if declared a "Goose", that touched player must stand up, chase, and attempt to tag the 'it' player, while the 'it' player tries to run completely around the circle and sit in the 'goose' player's vacated seat.

For the 'it' player to win, they must successfully sit in the goose player's seat without being tagged. For the 'goose' player to win, they must tag the 'it' player.

Adaptations according to the rules of this puzzle:

As this is a game with two different roles for the two players, it must be played twice, according to the special "fair game" rule; once with the Being being the 'goose', and once with the Being being 'it'.

And why the strategy works:

The kidnapping victim is the ghost of a deceased duck.

Being as 'it': The Being cannot call the kidnapping victim a 'goose' as that would be a lie (which isn't allowed by hint 1); the victim is (or rather, was) a duck. Since the Being cannot win without declaring the victim to be a goose, the Being must therefore forfeit this round.

Being as 'goose': After being declared the 'goose', the Being cannot tag the kidnapping victim no matter how quickly they stand or run, since the victim has long since died, and is now just an incorporeal ghost.

Therefore, the Being loses both rounds of the game, and must release the phantom mallard, letting it finally ascend to its just reward and final rest.

share|improve this answer
1  
I probably have too much fun inventing answers for puzzles tagged as "lateral thinking". And presenting them as though they were sensible, commonplace answers. – Trevor Powell 3 hours ago
    
(It's still a valid answer per the rules of the puzzle, of course! The "lateral thinking" tag indicates that we're not supposed to reach the correct solution to a puzzle through pure logic; we're supposed to use creativity, as I've done here. I'm reasonably certain this isn't the author's intended solution. But it does meet all the puzzle's criteria for a valid solution. :) ) – Trevor Powell 1 hour ago
up vote 0 down vote

You say "You'll say a sentence that can be correct or not. If it's correct, I'll get what I want most (get released) and you become an ordinary bug. If it's incorrect, I'll get out now and you'll turn into stone."

Then it says "I'll be turned to stone and release you", so you won't (necessarily) be released.

The roles change after that, but since it's desperate to keep you there, it just replaces "I'll get released" with "You'll stay here", which won't happen. No matter what actual "winning" and "losing" conditions you add for it to be a valid game, they'll be irrelevant.

share|improve this answer
2  
...So how does this answer the question? – Mithrandir 12 hours ago
1  
It's not quite clear to me what the actual game/answer is? – Matta 12 hours ago
    
You have to add "winning" and "losing" conditions for this to be a valid game, but they can be anything. Let's say, if player 2 (or then player 1) answers it at 11:59 PM, he wins. "At worst" you ask for a statement straight away, then the Being waits until that time to answer, losing you the game. Then again, you'll still win your freedom. – Nautilus 11 hours ago
up vote 0 down vote

Let's play a game of

Name all the historical Ottoman emperors you can think of. Whoever names the fewest, wins.

Luckily,

I don't know many Ottoman emperors, and wouldn't even remember all the ones the Being listed off.

share|improve this answer
up vote -2 down vote

Adding another answer because i don't have enough Reputation to comment directly on the author's original post.

I see that now three hints have been added, and one of them is "it can't lie to you".

Honestly, that's kind of very very very odd.

First and foremost, it isn't really specified anywhere clearly, except the "i would never lie to a friend" - which doesn't mean it would actually never lie.

Second thing. After all the talk about how he would cheat to win and always find a way flip around things (which is lying by definition, since he is hiding information from you) now he cannot lie to a "friend"? (a friend he kidnapped and is keeping there by the way - not very friendly xD)

Sssoo, well... take it as constructive criticism if you are the author of this, but this riddle is very wobbly, and too hazy - one critical hint wasn't well expressed and actually contradicted by the answers you gave about cheating and so on xD

share|improve this answer
    
It has a twisted way of seeing things. Knowing too much can make you insane you know? – Matta 9 hours ago
    
This riddle is becoming more and more illogical and you look like a lawyer xD Sorry but you have to admit you are grasping at straws more and more - more than thinking outside the box, you are railroading everyone into the only one possible answer, which in such a context actually isn't even possible. I would try to be more open - and i mean actually open, not just saying "i encourage thinking out of the box but i already know my answer is the only one and i will try to reason every other possible answer away" – JustSomebody 8 hours ago
    
Not trying to pick a fight of course, just trying to be constructive. I actually appreciate the time and thought you put into this, and it's a pity to see this work wasted because it isn't handled the way it should. If i were you, i'd consider every kind of feedback and keep it in mind to improve and do better next time. But that's just me of course, i always welcome constructive criticism, i just assumed you would do the same and i hope i wasn't mistaken. Have a good evening and continuation sir! – JustSomebody 8 hours ago

protected by Community♦ 9 hours ago

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.