I've found an oldish book with logical puzzles.
In one of the puzzles I was not able to find a single correct answer - IMO at least two solutions fit - either I miss something or there is a mistake.
The puzzle goes like this:
- there are tree paths - you need to choose one - only one should be right;
- each path has a sign - at least one sign is false.
Now, here are the signs:
A: The correct path is either B or C.
B: If (and only if) this is the wrong path, then the correct path is C.
C: The correct path is either this one or B.
Essentially A and C say the same, so they are either both true or both false.
It is easy to see that path A may be the answer (then all 3 signs are wrong) and path C is wrong (this would make all 3 signs right).
My confusion comes from trying path B:
- if path B is the right path:
- sign A is true;
- sign C is true;
- then sign B must be false:
- as far as I understand the implication on sign B allows this situation - while the answer in the book says that this sign is right as well, hence all three signs are true, hence B cannot be the answer.
Am I right saying that it's not possible to deterministically say that A is a correct path (i.e. it may be A or B)?
If path B is correct sign B must indeed be false and the sign says
"B is wrong" $\iff$ "C is correct".
But in this situation the truth value of "C is correct" is false and "B is wrong" also has value "false" (as we're in the situation where B is actually correct, remember), so the equivalence is true. So sign B would be true, your book is correct, and we again have a contradiction.