logoalt Hacker News

gpderetta • 12/09/2024 • 2 replies • view on HN

Let's say that saying 'all my hats' implies that the set of hats is non empty, then you have the two following statements

    my-hats is not empty
    for every hat in my-hats, is-green(hat) is true
We know that the speaker always lies, so both statements must be false: my-hats must be empty, and it must be that it exists at least one hat in my-hat that is not green. This is a contradiction. So either the speaker or the puzzle is not consistent (and uninteresting), or the 'my-hats is not empty' is not a valid assumption.

Replies

rcxdude • 12/09/2024

I was initially thinking that, but you can parse it as one statement "my-hats is not empty AND for every hat in my-hats, is-green(hat) is true", in which case it's still consistent for that single statement to be false, and it can be false by my-hats being empty.

➕ show 1 reply
nailer • 12/09/2024

But ‘my hats is not empty’ is not a statement being made by the liar.

➕ show 1 reply