Skip to main content

The Million Dollar Suitcase - A Puzzle

Sometime back, I encountered a puzzle posted by a member in a LinkedIn group. It was called a Million Dollar Suitcase. A scenario with a challenge was described and we had to find a solution. It went like this:
Three suitcases are all labeled incorrectly, and you must get the labels right in order to find the million dollar suitcase (the one full of hundred dollar bills). 
The labels on the suitcases read as follows:
  • $100 Bills
  • $1 Bills
  • Both ($100 & $1 Bills)

You are allowed one test. You may remove only one bill from a single suitcase, after which you must make your determination. You can’t peek into the suitcases. Can you find the million dollar suitcase?

The Solution

I read about it and devised a solution before checking it out on the site. My explanation was:
Assuming all of the suitcases are definitely mislabeled - we can safely remove one (i.e. the $100 suitcase) from the game and consider only two suitcases: $1 and Both. 
If we select the one labeled "$1" for examination, we have half a chance to get into some trouble. If the bill you remove from the "$1" suitcase is actually $1, then we are saved, since it obviously is both. But if happens to be $100, we have no way of confirming if it is actually the "$100" suitcase or the "Both" case. 
Therefore, we go directly to the suitcase labeled "Both". It can only have two types of bills - either all $1 or all $100. So, when we remove a bill and find it to be $1, then we pounce on the suitcase labeled $1 and run for it. It it is $100, then we just got ourselves a million dollars! :-) 
However, all of this based on the presumption that none of the suitcases are what they are actually labeled to be. If there is any chance that even one of the cases may actually be what the label says, then this method won't do.  
And this solution turned out to be correct! :-)

Check out Innovation Bound for more interesting stuff.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Spiritual, but not religious...

The first time I came across the phrase "Spiritual, but not religious" was as an option for "Religion" when I signed up for Orkut. And I have found this phrase to be quite intriguing since then. As I started adding friends to my profile, I found many of them opting for this option. I doubt if they understood the meaning of this phrase properly. I am trying to understand this phrase too. Like jeans, pizza, coke, google, nuclear weapons, credit cards, gene modification, pollution, communism etc, this is an idea imported from the west. The two operating concepts here are "Religion" and "Spirituality" . And only if we understand what these two concepts really mean, can we understand the phrase "Spiritual, but not religious". When I think of religion these are what spring up in my mind - dogmas & doctrines, rituals & sacrifices, rules & restrictions, faiths & beliefs. These are considered as essential aspects of a rel

Questions

I ask a lot of questions. No, I change a lot of my statements to questions. Why? It induces people to respond. As a rule, questions beget more responses than statements. That way, I'm sure to elicit an answer - from myself or from someone else - most of the time. I naturally do ask a lot of questions - to myself. Even if it were intended to another person, I wait to ask. May be in the course of a talk or speech, my questions will be answered, instead of me jumping the gun. And many a time, I downplay my questions and don't ask them in public. I find it easier to approach someone and ask them questions face-to-face. This is also to create an opportunity to personally know someone. Asking questions crystallizes ideas or problems. It is then easier to express or execute the idea and find solutions to problems. Asking the right question, to the right person, at the right time is an art. It comes to a few people naturally; to a lot of others, with practice. So, if you need som

Are we honest?

These are protesting times. A large number of people have taken to the streets - I don't know the real numbers but I am being assured that there are thousands of people on the streets, taking long marches, holding candle-light vigils etc - protesting corruption. I have covered the movement and the ripples it is creating in my other blog. So, I am not going into those details again here. I have a few basic questions though (as usual). What is it that the people are protesting against, essentially? Yes, we know it is corruption, but corruption does not sustain itself. It is perpetrated by individuals. That raises the next question - who are the individuals that perpetrate corruption. Or to simply state - who are the corrupt individuals? Are only those who take bribes and get involved in scams corrupt and dishonest? What about those who pay to get driving licenses without attending the exams? What about those who encroach upon a few square feet next to their own properties an