+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1
    Gothel's Avatar
    Gothel is offline Skip the drama, stay with Mama!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Stressame Street
    Posts
    6,515
    Thanks
    2,368
    Thanked
    2,113
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts

    Default who's a maths wiz? Help me out!

    I'm puzzling over this problem, can any clever clogs on here work it out? And explain how?

    In a group of horses and riders, the number of legs was 84 more than twice the number of heads. How many horses were there?

    (I think you have to assume there's one rider per horse)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    65
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked
    26
    Reviews
    0
    i get 14 horses...
    if each horse has 4 legs and each rider has 2 legs then there are 6 legs per horse/rider unit.
    so divide 84 (total numbr of legs) by 6 (total number for legs per horse/rider) = 14 horses and 14 riders.
    so 28 heads and 84 legs...
    does that work?

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to phoebebebe For This Useful Post:

    Ngaiz  (20-08-2014)

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    2,251
    Thanks
    449
    Thanked
    1,534
    Reviews
    3
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    300 posts in a week - week ended 11/9/14200 Posts in a weekBusiest Member of the Week - week ended 11/9/14100 Posts in a week
    Ah what!? I googled the answer and still don't get it.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    125
    Thanks
    141
    Thanked
    142
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by phoebebebe View Post
    i get 14 horses...
    if each horse has 4 legs and each rider has 2 legs then there are 6 legs per horse/rider unit.
    so divide 84 (total numbr of legs) by 6 (total number for legs per horse/rider) = 14 horses and 14 riders.
    so 28 heads and 84 legs...
    does that work?
    No because the number of legs needs to be 84 MORE than twice the number of heads.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    65
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked
    26
    Reviews
    0
    i could be making sh*t up, that makes sense in my pregnant head.....but it could be complete rubbish...

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    1,914
    Thanks
    364
    Thanked
    1,502
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Assuming one rider per horse, the number of horses is 42.

    X = horses
    2X = heads (one per horse and one per rider)
    6X = legs (four per horse plus two per rider)

    The equation given is Legs = 84 + 2 x Heads

    Therefore:

    6X = 84 + 2 x (2X)
    6X = 84 + 4X
    6X - 4X = 84 (+4X - 4X)
    2X = 84
    X = 42

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GM01 For This Useful Post:

    Cheese Please  (20-08-2014),HappyBovinexx  (20-08-2014)

  9. #7
    Gothel's Avatar
    Gothel is offline Skip the drama, stay with Mama!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Stressame Street
    Posts
    6,515
    Thanks
    2,368
    Thanked
    2,113
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    No, I don't think that works @phoebebebe, because 84 isn't the number of legs.
    This is the equation I *think* but I'm stuffed if I can remember how to solve it

    legs = (heads x 2) + 84

  10. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    65
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked
    26
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Cheese Please View Post
    No because the number of legs needs to be 84 MORE than twice the number of heads.

    oh i totally invented a comma in there, "84, more than the number of legs"
    in which case, i got nothin!

  11. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,933
    Thanks
    15,322
    Thanked
    11,534
    Reviews
    14
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the WeekBusiest Member of the Week - week ended 5/2/14Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 31/10/14Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 24/10/14Busiest Member of the Week
    Is it 21

    21 horse plus 21 riders is 126 legs.
    Minus 42 heads is 84 legs .

    I am hopeless at this

  12. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,521
    Thanks
    1,318
    Thanked
    1,574
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by phoebebebe View Post
    oh i totally invented a comma in there, "84, more than the number of legs"
    in which case, i got nothin!
    That's how I read it too haha

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Ngaiz For This Useful Post:

    Gothel  (20-08-2014)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Maths (??) help. Lottery winning systems
    By 2BlueBirds in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 13-08-2014, 21:33
  2. Help with maths homework.
    By waterlily in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 24-07-2014, 20:00
  3. Khan Academy - free online maths lessons for kids
    By sweetseven in forum Home Schooling
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 30-08-2013, 20:34

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
FEATURED SUPPORTER
Maternity ClothesLooking to buy maternity clothes? :: Check the bubhub directory of local & online maternity clothes shops :: Find ...
FORUMS - chatting now ...
No idea pleas helpConception & Fertility General Chat
Pregnant???Pregnancy Tests & Help / Support with Results
IVF babies due March/April/May 2017#2pregnancy and babies through IVF
My mum may have breast cancer :(General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
REVIEWS
"Pigeon teats rule!"
by Alex
Pigeon PP Wide Neck reviews ›
"Wonderful natural Aussie made product!"
by Mrstwr
Baby U Goat Milk Moisturiser reviews ›
"Replaced good quality with cheap tight nappies"
by Kris
Coles Comfy Bots Nappies reviews ›