Filetternavn

Trump may be stupid, but he's just a puppet. There are far more dangerous people controlling and guiding his decisions. He may claim not to know about Project 2025, and honestly I don't think he has the reading comprehension to understand it, but the puppeteers are the ones who wrote it.

The fun is in discrete logic! There is a whole field of mathematics (discrete mathematics) that analyzes the logic of situations that involve binary (true/false) statements, such as the solution to this riddle.

The riddle can be summed up as the following:

Let Y represent a question asked of the knights.
Let A(x) be a boolean function representing the answer of the truth-teller.
Let B(x) be a boolean function representing the answer of the liar.

B(x)≡¬A(x)

An answer can only be determined if the knights do not contradict, otherwise it could not be determined which knight was lying, for instance when Y≡(A(Y)∧B(Y))∨(¬A(Y)∧¬B(Y))≡T.
A trivial question whose answer is logically true would result in the following form:

Y≡(A(Y)∧B(Y))∨(¬A(Y)∧¬B(Y))
A(Y)≡T
B(Y)≡F
Y≡(T∧F)∨(F∧T)≡F∨F≡F
∴Y≡F

Such a question would allow identification of which knight is lying, but would not provide information on which door is true.

Let D represent a set of m doors where there is exactly 1 correct door.

∃!n∈ℕ:D(n)≡T∧n≤m

The player ideally wants to discover which value n is correct so they can choose a door accordingly.
Let R represent the following question: "What are all the doors the other knight could say are correct?".
Let S represent all possible answers to the question "What is the correct door?" for each knight respectively.
Let P be the set representing the value n where D(n)≡T, and Q be the set representing all values n where D(n)≡F,

P⊂D
P={n}
Q⊂D
Q=D-P

Thus the following properties are true:

P∩Q=∅
P∪Q=D

Consider that the answer S would be either t∈P if a knight is telling the truth or t∈Q if a knight is lying.
Thus when answering question R:

A(R)≡B(S)≡t∈Q
B(R)≡¬A(S)≡t∈Q

Since question R asks for all possible answers, both knights would provide an answer equivalent to set Q.

∴ the correct answer is D-Q; the one door that neither knight says.

I'm a little rusty on my discrete mathematics, as I haven't done it in 3+ years, but hopefully my answer is logically sound! Feel free to correct me.

EDIT: This original puzzle is Knights and Knaves, so to be true to the original, the "truth-telling knight" is just the knight, and the "liar knight" is a knave. I just presented it this way because there was no mention of it in this comic, so I didn't want to be confusing.

https://www.pixiv.net/en/users/24207001

For those interested, ignoring the contradictory presentation of the riddle (as the knights themselves would not say the riddle since one always lies and one always tells the truth), the solution is simple. Ask the knights what the other knight would answer when asked what door is correct, and they will both say which path not to go to. Thus you pick the path that neither Knight says!

Logic:

Liar: Will say the wrong option, as they're being asked which door the truth telling knight would say (and they will lie about what the truth-teller would say)
------------------------------------------
Truth-teller: Will say the wrong option, as they're being asked which door the liar would say (and they'll tell the truth about that)

NOTE: This can be expanded to a case with n doors by asking the knights to provide all the options that the other knight could say, and each will provide n-1 options, so you'd pick the one option that neither knight says. It is possible the liar may not list all options, but the truth-teller would, so the problem could still be worked out regardless (and you'd know which knight is the liar in that case).

For those interested, ignoring the contradictory presentation of the riddle (as the knights themselves would not say the riddle since one always lies and one always tells the truth), the solution is simple. Ask the knights what the other knight would answer when asked what door is correct, and they will both say which path not to go to. Thus you pick the path that neither Knight says!

Logic:

Liar: Will say the wrong option, as they're being asked which door the truth telling knight would say (and they will lie about what the truth-teller would say)
------------------------------------------
Truth-teller: Will say the wrong option, as they're being asked which door the liar would say (and they'll tell the truth about that)

NOTE: This can be expanded to a case with n doors by asking the knights to provide all the options that the other knight could say, and each will provide n-1 options, so you'd pick the one option that neither knight says. It is possible the liar may not list all options, but the truth-teller would, so the problem could still be worked out regardless (and you'd know which knight is the liar in that case).

Unfortunately, one will get nowhere with Republicans by pointing out their hypocrisy; it's the foundational philosophy of their party. Rules for thee, but not for me, as the saying goes.

mcg is a standard abbreviation for a microgram, also denoted by the Greek letter mu (μg).

I'll save you the click as someone with many medical issues myself. The answer requires only surface level thinking: if I'm too depressed, sick, or otherwise impaired, I will have less energy to take care of myself. Pretty easy to conclude that. You know where that money could be better spent? Helping solve the problems causing the issue. The reason these studies exist is to justify ableism. The people conducting and funding this research want an excuse to validate their belief that people with disabilities are unattractive. The real-world value of this research doesn't extend beyond that ableist justification.

There is no need to study the attractiveness of someone in relation to an illness they are suffering. It's a completely inconsequential metric that's ableist by design. Additionally, all 3 things you listed can have cures. Starting with the most obvious, many alcoholics are able to reach long-term sobriety, though studying methods to achieve higher success rates is obviously of importance. "Severe mental illness" is incredibly vague. Let's take one example, one that is notoriously difficult to treat: Borderline Personality Disorder (which I even happen to have). You can cure personality disorders, just not with medication. It requires you to spend lots of time in extensive therapy to essentially rewire the way your brain works. A quick search tells me that despite being classically cited as the "most painful mental illness", and one of the hardest to treat, between 50-70% of those with BPD achieve long-term remission from treatment. Given that it's a personality disorder, the definition of "cured" is not exactly clear, but remission brings patients below the requisite number of symptoms in the DSM to constitute diagnosis. Chronic illness is also a vague category, but there's progress being made on cures for many chronic illnesses. For instance, recent developments in Chimeric Antigen Receptors and inverse vaccines bring potential cures to a wide array of autoimmune disorders. These are chronic illnesses that were once thought to be incurable, but we're here sitting on research showing that these cures can work. That is the research we need, not some ableist BS about how people with chronic illness may be less attractive to other people.

As for your assumption about how funding works, there is only a limited amount of funding that goes into scientific research. The less that is wasted, the more opportunity there is for funding going to research that makes a difference.

I've never used MacOS in my life, but it took about 15 seconds to find a picture online to check what was supposed to be there, disregarding the context clues already given ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Perhaps because they said "download folder preview", and it's in the position of the downloads folder on the taskbar in MacOS. I'd say that's fairly definitive

I hate that the blackboard shows a linear equation paired with the graph of higher degree polynomial (likely just a simple y=ax² quadratic). There's a difference of at least 1 degree of polynomials there. Unless it's an exponential passing through the origin, in which case it's still an incorrect match