I outrage. I protest.

[plonq]

My online page-a-day Mensa calender posed the following question today:

"Pat has four more brothers than she has sisters. Her brother Jim has two more brothers than he has sisters. How many siblings in all? (Hint: There are fewer than 10.)"

My answer was 5 boys, 2 girls for a total of 7 kids.

Pat has 1 sister and 5 brothers, meaning she has four more brothers than she has sisters.
Jim has 4 brothers and 2 sisters, meaning he has two more brothers than he has sisters.

Their answer?  "9 (There are six boys and three girls.)"

I should note that it also works for 5 kids - 4 boys and 1 girl.

Pat has 4 brothers, but no sister, meaning she has four more brothers than she has sisters.
Jim has 3 brothers and 1 sister, meaning he has two more brothers than he has sisters.

I'm probably missing something obvious that renders my answers invalid.  I'll just give my head a shake and get back to work.

Comments

[gedrean.livejournal.com]

It's a calculatory combination. The difference is that there are always three more boys than the number of girls, and that the number of total siblings always increases or decreases by one boy and one girl at a time. It can actually work if Pat is nonexistant, for jim has 2 brothers and no sisters, pat has 3 brothers but no sister and does not even exist.

Having fun yet?:)

[dakhun.livejournal.com]

It'd be even more ambiguous if they didn't tell you what gender "Pat" was.