Quid pro quo, bro.
“You haven’t provided any insight as to what “know”, “eye”, or “perfect logician” mean in this context.”
The definition of ‘know’ and ‘eye’ are beyond the scope of this discussion. It’s also bullshit that you first mention your objection to them on page 42.
The definition of ‘perfect logician’ is given in the statement of the problem.
No it isn’t. What it states is merely one attribute, hardly a definition.
And you are the one belligerently avoiding the obvious and direct question, “what does ‘start with’ mean???”
As I said, “Quid pro quo.”
I agree with Carleas that you’re being more vague than you realize, and if you put in the effort to make it more clear, it would probably become more clear what’s wrong with your idea.
You’re also just playing games, and as he said earlier, not really arguing in good faith anymore.
So you seriously don’t know what “number to start counting from” actually means in this context??
Start counting what from? Is there a thing that they’re counting?
Well since the ONLY thing anyone has been counting and it has been said many, many times that they count the DAYS, I think it is fair to say that it is “days” that they are counting.
So they’re counting the days, and adding the value of days counted to some arbitrary value. No, I don’t think counting the days and then adding that value to 50 can tell them anything, other than “If I added 50 to the number of days it’s been, what number would I get?”
Well it tells them a lot of you divide by Pi… since you are inventing non-sense here.
That’s what you’re talking about. Day 0, they count 50. Not 50 days, of course, but 0 days + 50.
Day 1, they count 51. Not 51 days, of course, but 1 day + 50.
So they’re not just counting the days, they’re counting the days and adding 50.
No. YOU decided to “add 50”, apparently just to makeup and argument. I never said anything close to that.
And if you can’t figure out how to count 50 days and deduce that no one left the island, I am not interested in your responses.
Well, I guess that leaves you interested in the responses of Fixed Cross and no one else.
Well yeah, if you are merely trying to win an online argument, not the slightest interested in the truth of the situation and perhaps learning something, then I am truly only interested in the others.
Anyway ‘deducing that no one left the island’ is completely separate from ‘counting 50 days’. You deduce that no one left the island by looking at them at seeing that no one left. You also just happened to have counted 50 days. Two not apparently related facts.
So, yes, I CAN count 50 days.
And I CAN look at other people and notice if no one left.
What I can’t do is use those two facts to deduce my own eye color.
Well maybe that is why you aren’t a “perfect logician”.
Mm, good one.
Nothing has been said since my presentation of the correct solution 2 pages ago. I suggest not saying anything if you have nothing to say.
It’s basically just been Carleas trying his level best to draw a more precise solution presentation from James (well, since more than just 2 pages ago), yet being met only by distraction, diversion and accusation. You can’t just accuse others of being “imperfect logicians” just because they don’t accept solutions that won’t be presented in a detailed enough way such as to uncover their faults more clearly.
I think it’s pretty safe to say that we’re never going to get that from him, so there’s nothing left to say. His answer will be that he’s already done it, nobody excepting it on the grounds that he clearly hasn’t aside - that’s our fault for not understanding and not his. Whatever.
You’re either one of those who protest that there “must” be a better solution than the correct one “because the islanders are perfect logicians” and everyone else is accused of not being so because we don’t agree, or you’ve long accepted the correct solution and understood why it is the only consistent solution based on nothing but certain knowledge and deduction - as is all the puzzle asks.
And we all know who belongs to which group so… 
If the islanders care about getting off the island as quickly as possible and if we want to complicate the simplicity of the puzzle then …
The islanders could accelerate the process by mentally skipping the days that don’t contribute ‘useful’ information. They know that nobody is going to leave on day 4, 5, 6, … 96 so they deduce that they can consider night one after the guru speaks as the night when 97 blues would leave if there are 97 blues. Being ‘perfect logicians’, they realize that they don’t need to wait.
Uncomfortable problems with the idea:
It bypasses the logical path that was open by the guru. Without that path, the browns can think exactly the same thing. Both brown and blue islanders leave on day 4, but how can any individual know their own eye color? They can’t. The ‘solution’ is inconsistent.
It requires a leap of faith based on the concept of ‘perfect’ logician to start from day 9x.
There aren’t any days that don’t contribute useful information. Every day raises the base, and without each day’s raise, the next day’s isn’t possible. You can’t raise the base case to 97 before you raise it to 96, or to 96 before you raise it to 95, or to 95 before…
This doesn’t depend on whether or not they want to get off the island, but on the common knowledge they use to deduce their eye color.
The problem with common knowledge is that they already have it. Everyone can already see 99 people with blue eyes. They know that nobody will leave on day 1 … 97. That’s why the problem seems so artificial. It prompts a search for ‘faster’ solutions.