Who knows about the problem of three people staying in a hotel?!!!! 15

Three people lived in a hotel, ten yuan each, a total of thirty. On the same day, the boss said that the big organizer would refund a total of five yuan and asked the waiter to find a way to give it to the three people. As a result, the waiter took two pieces for himself and returned one for each person.

The problem is that after each person gets one yuan, it is equivalent to spending nine yuan, three nine hundred and twenty-seven, plus the waiter's two yuan, a total of twenty-nine. So, there's still a dollar, where did it go? I'm struggling.

Let's think about it together.

30 yuan can be divided into two parts: 3 yuan and 27 yuan. The three actually paid 27 yuan.

27 yuan is charged by the boss, 25 yuan is charged by the waiter.

27 yuan + 2 yuan = 29 yuan, the logic does not make sense, 27 yuan is income, 2 yuan is expenditure, how can income and expenditure be added? This algorithm does not follow the principle of two lines of income and expenditure.

Actually, it's very simple, what it says is 10-1=9, so I don't need to say it, 10 is equivalent to saying that all the money, the room fee plus those two dollars, there are ah, so it's 27-2 = 25 + 5 = 30

Do you understand? In fact, the 1 yuan was not lost, but the decimal was infinitely looped.

In fact, it took an infinite loop for each person

You just shouldn't multiply, you have to add it up, you know.

What do you mean, be more detailed.

The hotel room rate is 30, three people pay 10 yuan each, and then the boss discounts it, charges 25, and asks the waiter to refund them 5 yuan, and the waiter steals 2 yuan and refunds them one yuan per person....This means that the three of them paid 9 yuan each, 3x9 27, plus the waiter's 2 yuan, which is 29. In addition, the one yuan is in: one yuan plus the 2 yuan in the waiter's hand is also theirs, in fact, it is divided into their one dollar.

Specific reasons: 1. The house price is 30, and the boss only charges 25 yuan for a discount and returns 5 yuan. That is, 30-5=25, and the actual room fee is 25 yuan.

2. The boss asked him to return 5 yuan, but the waiter only refunded 3 yuan, and he stole 2 yuan. That is, 5-2=3, and the actual three people only received 3 yuan from the boss.

3. Room fee 3 people 3 people + 3 yuan returned by the waiter + 2 yuan stolen by the waiter = 30 yuan 25 3 3 + 3 + 2 = 30

4. The actual room fee shared by each person is: (25+3) 3=rounding).

I feel that this algorithm is wrong, in fact, we shouldn't ask that one yuan in **, our assumptions at the beginning of the solution are wrong.

First of all, three people live in a hotel, each of them has 10 yuan, and this 10 yuan is equivalent to an asset, and in the process of consumption, it becomes an expense. The money returned by the boss to the customer is actually present and an asset, and the 9 yuan spent is an expense, which has been exchanged for the right to stay in a hotel. And it makes no sense to add the cost and the actual assets now, the ingenuity of this problem lies in the setting of the numbers, hiding its contradictions, we can change the question, and it will be self-defeating.

There are three people who go to live in the hotel, 10 yuan per person, a total of 30 On this day, the boss was happy, so he let them stay for free, and asked the waiter to return 30 yuan to the customer, but the waiter loved to take advantage of it, and concealed the matter, and did not return the money to the customer, but stuffed it into his own pocket This is good, everyone spent 10 yuan is 30, plus the 30 yuan on the waiter, isn't it 60 yuan, may I ask if this extra 30 is **? In fact, we double-counted the expenses of the customer and the assets of the waiter.

Therefore, in response to such a topic, it is necessary to figure out the direction of assets and expenses when calculating, and pay attention to the distinction.

27 already includes the 2 yuan that the waiter stole from, which is equivalent to saying that they paid a total of 27 yuan, 25 yuan was given to the boss, and the remaining 2 yuan was hidden by the waiter. So it should be 27 yuan plus 3 yuan for the three of them, just 30

This question has changed the concept, 27 already includes the 2 yuan that the waiter stole to, which is equivalent to saying that they paid a total of 27 yuan, 25 yuan was given to the boss, and the remaining 2 yuan was hidden by the waiter. So it should be 27 yuan plus 3 yuan for the three of them, just 30

The three of them paid 30 yuan. Not three points, but four people. The waiter didn't pay at first, and later stole 2 yuan from the 5 yuan refunded, that is, he got 2 yuan.

The waiter's 2 yuan includes that one yuan. If 5 yuan is divided between the three of them, it will be combined.

The hotel room rate is 30, one pays 10 yuan, and the boss charges 25 yuan at a discount, and asks the waiter to take it back, but the waiter swallows 2 yuan privately, so the actual three people each called 9 yuan, which is 27 yuan, and the boss actually received 25 yuan, and all 27 minus 25 is the two yuan that the waiter takes.

This is equivalent to the three of them going to the hotel together, one person paid nine yuan, a total of 27 yuan, the boss took 25 waiters, and charged two yuan in tips, so they traded a total of 27 yuan, and there was no such thing as that one dollar.

There is also such a problem in the ** trading of small shareholders! As the following people say.

Quite simply, how much money should we be looking for, is it 5 divided by 3? But how did the waiter find it? (2 3) Divide by 3 is also right, but how is it wrong? He said that three dollars is pushed to everyone, which means that the wrong algorithm is 2, 3 divided by 3 equals 2, plus one dollar per person, so one less piece, and the other 5 divided by 3, in You know.

27+2, it doesn't mean anything, these two numbers can't be added together at all. The reason is very simple, what is 27, is the sum of 25 yuan of the actual room fee and the 2 yuan hidden by the waiter. It already contains 2, and adding 2 doesn't make sense.

Correct calculation: the actual room fee is 25 yuan, and the waiter hides 2 yuan, which is a total of 27 yuan; "The remaining 3 yuan was distributed to the three people, and each person was given 1 yuan", 27 + 3 = 30, which is the money paid by the first three people. In this way, there is no contradiction.

One consideration is redistribution: 30 (the money that the three people gave to the boss and the money that the boss redistributed) = 25 (accommodation fee for the boss) + 2 (the waiter's tip) + 3 (returned).

The second consideration: each person paid 9 yuan, and then the accommodation fee was 25, and the 27+2 in the question of tipping the waiter 2 yuan is meaningless, how can you spend and then spend?

I went to the supermarket and bought something for 27 yuan, one for 25 yuan, and the other for 2 yuan, and then people asked you how much you spent, and you said that you spent 27 + 2 = 29 yuan ......

Suppose the problem changes: 1 robber robbed three people at the same time 30 yuan change, when he ran away dropped 5 yuan, was chased by passers-by, the three people saw the spirit of righteousness and courage of passers-by decided to give passers-by 2 yuan to buy water to drink, and finally the three people only got 1 yuan, they thought they were unlucky, each person was robbed of 9 yuan, so 1 yuan went to **?

The answer is that you know to go!

Known: return 5 yuan, three people paid a total of 25 yuan, the administrator hid 2 yuan, there are 28 yuan left, solution: 28 3 = cycle), loop) rounded to keep one decimal place =, plus the administrator hidden 2 yuan = yuan, yuan rounded to an integer, 9 is greater than 5, into one, yuan = 30 yuan.

A: So it's exactly 30 yuan.

It can be assumed that the boss gave Xiao Er 6 yuan, Xiao Er was greedy for 2 yuan, and there was 4 yuan left, and the three of them each had 1 yuan, and there was 3 yuan and 1 yuan left, and Xiao Er returned it to the boss.

Hello, this topic is like this, it is our fixed thinking that is doing weird, we have always thought that the waiter and the boss are doing the opposite, and the default is that the waiter and the customer are on the same side, so there is a customer's money plus the waiter's money.

As can be seen from the title, there are two types of money, one is for the customer, three nine twenty-seven, and the other is for the hotel, note, it is the hotel, the money of the hotel is composed of two parts, the boss's and the waiter's, of which the boss's is twenty-five, and the waiter's is two yuan, which together is also twenty-seven, which is just equal.

If you replace the customer with your three brothers, the boss with the neighbor's father, and the waiter with the father's son, it will be easy to understand, your family's money is given to the other party, and the father asks the son to return it to you, but the son does not pay it back, then no matter what, the two of them are a family, then the money deducted by the son is still considered his family, and does not belong to your family, right. Do you think you can use the money his son withheld? If it's not yours, don't add it up.

Hehe, too much, in fact, the waiter's money theoretically belongs to the customer, but in fact, it is not the customer's, it is the hotel's. What is theoretically yours is not necessarily yours in reality, got it?

It can also be seen from this that the enemy of the enemy is not necessarily a friend

In fact, it is very simple, you just need to think about how to divide the 30 yuan, the boss has 25, the waiter has 2 yuan, and the passenger has 1 yuan each. That's still 30 yuan.

This question is a problem, because the 2 yuan in the waiter's hand is included in the total cost of 27 yuan. You can't use this 2 to add 27, but you should use the $27 spent plus the $3 you didn't spend.

I'll tell you, that's not the case at all, it's not that no one spent nine yuan to live in the hotel, but first gave the boss 30 yuan, and the boss refunded 5 yuan to them, and then the service took two dollars, and three people, each got a dollar, which is 25 + 2 + 3 = 30 The question is just disturbing your logical thinking!

9 yuan for one person for three people.

A total of 27 yuan.

30 is out of three.

Returned them $3.

It's still 27 yuan.

As for what you said.

27 + 2 = 29 is not true.

27 is their net expenditure.

This 27 includes 25 for the boss and 2 for the clerk

I don't understand, I don't know how to read it again.

There were 30 guests in total, 3 waiters, 2 waiters

Boss 25

Where did that one yuan go, you think, they spent 25 to stay in a hostel, plus 3 yuan in each of their hands, 2 yuan for the waiter is exactly equal to 30

What is it called being at the boss's place? It's actually a very simple math problem, and everyone is misled. In fact, the money that everyone pays is not 9 yuan, but 25 divided by 3, and everyone actually spends not 9 yuan but 25 3, that is, blocks.

In this way, the room fee for three people is 25 3 yuan, multiplied by 3, or 25 yuan. Add one piece to each person who came back, and two pieces to the waiter, for a total of thirty.

（10-1）×3

27 So 27 should add 3, not 2.

The top that I understand.

This question itself is misleading, 25 yuan, two people spent 8 yuan, one person spent 9 yuan, and the waiter returned three yuan, so instead of three people spent nine yuan each, but two nine yuan and one ten, and then plus the two yuan that the waiter hid, it was thirty yuan.

Add 50 points! Let's make an equation and you'll understand! Turnover is equal to the expenditure of three people! So three people 3x9 = boss 25 + 2 waiters! Don't fall into the misunderstanding, three people also add waiters!

The thesis itself is a paradox that steals the concept of the whole. The answer is that there is no such thing as this 1 dollar. Because the questioner pushes the 30 yuan as a whole, and then pushes the question backwards.

When pushing forward, the whole is 30 yuan, but when pushing backwards, the whole should be 27, because everyone has 9 yuan, not 27+2=29 as the questioner said, because the 2 yuan is included in the whole of 27. Of the 27 yuan they paid, 2 yuan went to the waiter and 25 yuan to the boss. So there is no question of this 1 dollar at all.

In fact, the problem is too simple and complicated, even the children who haven't read understand it, I really don't know how the university was opened in the years, how to teach some brain-dead, it is really the "pillar" of the country; There is no piece at all.

Your topic seems to be wrong.,Get a full question I'll ...

Question: Three people went to the hotel, 10 yuan per person, the boss asked the waiter to get back 5 yuan, the waiter was greedy for 2 yuan, only found 1 yuan per person, a total of 3 yuan, equivalent to spending 27 yuan, plus the waiter was greedy for 2 yuan, a total of 29 yuan, one yuan less.

Answer: The 27 yuan already includes the 2 yuan that the waiter is greedy for, and it can't be added again. $27 is less than $30 and $3 is in the hands of three people, one dollar each.

Find a piece per person, "per person" includes the waiter...

The first is that there are three people to live in the store, the store wants thirty, each person made up ten yuan, and then the boss discounted, cheap, as long as twenty-five is good, let the shop two send them five yuan, who knows that this little two greedy for money, greedy for two yuan, the remaining three yuan to one person a piece, as a result, each person out of nine... Three-nine-twenty-seven, plus the two pieces that the shopkeeper took are only Erling Xiaoying nineteen, why is that one not there?

Second, someone took a 100-yuan bill to the store and bought a 25-yuan item, and the shopkeeper took the 100-yuan bill to the next street vendor to exchange it for 100 yuan and found the person for 75 yuan in change.

The man walked away with 25 yuan and 75 yuan in change. After a while, the vendor next door approached the shopkeeper and said that the hundred-dollar bill that the shopkeeper had just exchanged for change was a counterfeit banknote. The shopkeeper took a closer look, and sure enough, it was a counterfeit banknote. Shop.

The Lord had no choice but to take a real hundred-dollar bill and give it to the vendor.

Q: How much money did the owner lose in the whole process?