[GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Current and recently solved lateral thinking puzzles. Please post new lateral thinking puzzles here.

Moderators: peter365, Balin, kalira, JenBurdoo, Tiger

[GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby GalFisk » Wed Jan 08, 2020 7:37 am

Less mysticism. More dust.
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby WiZ » Wed Jan 08, 2020 9:24 pm

Is this describing an event or trend that happened? Is there a direct correlation between the lower level of mysticism and the increase in dust? Did two separate events or phenomena happen that ended up influencing each other?

Does the 'less mysticism' reflect a change in societal attitudes? A change in the approach of religious professionals or teachers? A changed understanding of a process or concept or the increasing influence of science?

Is the type of dust relevant? Is it naturally occuring? Was the dust previously used for some ritual or other purpose, perhaps pertaining to mysticism? Is the dust in any way manufactured? Is it edible?
User avatar
WiZ
 
Posts: 3154
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 8:19 pm
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby Earnest » Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:12 am

Are we talking about an object? An event? A status quo? Culture relevant? Religion? Is the statement about a book? A youtube video?

Dust due to age? To passing of time? To a collapse? Explosions? Wars? Something dirty? Metaphorical dust? Sawdust (e.g. a tree cut)? Cutting waste? Powder burns? More dust on an object/objects? Dust due to negligence? Is "more dust" added artificially? Does less mysticism translate into: less idols? Less statues? Less prayers? More knowledge/awareness about a phenomenon? Less costunes? More dust (i.e. the more dust is a consequence of less mysticism)?

Are we talking about ancient times? Recent past? Modern times? Industrial revolution? Are chimbeys relevant? Smoke? Trains? Coal?
Earnest
 
Posts: 2829
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby GalFisk » Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:18 am

Is this describing an event or trend that happened? Yes, I'd call it a trend. Is there a direct correlation between the lower level of mysticism and the increase in dust? Yes. Did two separate events or phenomena happen that ended up influencing each other? No.

Does the 'less mysticism' reflect a change in societal attitudes? A change in the approach of religious professionals or teachers? A changed understanding of a process or concept or the increasing influence of science? No to all.

Is the type of dust relevant? Yes. Is it naturally occuring? No. Was the dust previously used for some ritual or other purpose, perhaps pertaining to mysticism? No. Is the dust in any way manufactured? Yesish.Is it edible? No.


Are we talking about an object? Yes. An event? Yope. A status quo? Not at all. Culture relevant? Noish. Religion? Niosh.Is the statement about a book? A youtube video? No to both.

Dust due to age? To passing of time? To a collapse? Explosions? Wars? Something dirty? Metaphorical dust? Sawdust (e.g. a tree cut)? Cutting waste? Powder burns? No to all. More dust on an object/objects? Potentially, but not importantly.Dust due to negligence? Is "more dust" added artificially? Yes. Does less mysticism translate into: less idols? Less statues? Less prayers? More knowledge/awareness about a phenomenon? Less costunes? More dust (i.e. the more dust is a consequence of less mysticism)? No to all.

Are we talking about ancient times? Recent past? Modern times? This. Industrial revolution? Are chimbeys relevant? Smoke? Trains? Coal? No to all.
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby Earnest » Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:02 pm

Is "more dust" added artificially? Yes. --> artificially = through technology? With hands? someone added more dust? Can we assume a single person? More people? All in one time? Pictures/drawings relevant?

Relevant where the ash was added? On someone On a river? On water? On the forehead of someone? Was it a colored ash? Was ash put inside something? Does it feed something? Are fires relevant at all? E.g. what is happening in Australia? Are Vulcan eruptions relevant?

Does the ash hide something relevant? Someone relevant?

Is mysticism in the puzzle statement related and affine mostly to: mysterious; occult; orphic; religious; secret? believe to something which is not true? Is ash used in a process? Has ash been added in years? In a second? In days? In. months? Hours?
Earnest
 
Posts: 2829
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby GalFisk » Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:15 pm

Is "more dust" added artificially? Yes. --> artificially = through technology? Yes. With hands? No. someone added more dust? Yes. Can we assume a single person? More people? This. All in one time? No. Pictures/drawings relevant? No.

Relevant where the ash was added? On someone On a river? On water? On the forehead of someone? Was it a colored ash? Was ash put inside something? Does it feed something? FA to all. Are fires relevant at all? E.g. what is happening in Australia? Are Vulcan eruptions relevant? No to all.

Does the ash hide something relevant? Someone relevant? Same FA.

Is mysticism in the puzzle statement related and affine mostly to: mysterious; occult; This. orphic; religious; secret? believe to something which is not true? Yes. Is ash used in a process? Has ash been added in years? In a second? In days? In. months? Hours? Same FA.
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby Earnest » Fri Jan 10, 2020 9:01 am

dust = acronym? slang? free microscopic particles of solid material? particles in the air?

Is there reverse causality? I mean: less mysticism implies more dust and more dust implies less mysticism? Just the first implication (less mysticism --> more dust)? Would less dust lead to more mysticism? Would more mysticism lead to less dust necessarily? To be sure: are we talking about tons of dust (I mean in total)? Grams? Was dust already artificially produced? Is dust added on a mass scale? is dust added in corners of houses? on shelves? Inside buildings? In Earth? On another planet? (e.g. space missions or shuttles producing dust when landing on a planet)
Dust like the one produced by pinning pencils? Glitter powder? Stardust? "normal dust" as the one found on shelves or on books? Is landing safely relevant (e.g. more dust soften the fall)? Is such dust tangible by the people having added it? As soon as it is added? Is the more the use of a technology the more the dust? Directly? Indirectly?
Is the material of the dust relevant? Is the dust made of a metal? of waste? bacteria? plant pollen, human and animal hairs, textile fibers, paper fibers, minerals from outdoor soil, human skin cells, burnt meteorite particles? Something that can be found in the local environment? Fine dust/ particulate matters relevant? Dust as more granularity?

More people? This --> anyone? Anyone having a certain technology? A certain device? Anyone belonging to a minority? To a certain group? people believing in something which is not true?

artificially = through technology? Yes --> is dust a row material in this case? A production waste? A final product? "added through technology" = technology "produces" the dust? technology attracts more dust? technology
Technology = devices? Means of transport? Electronic? Internet? screens? health related? An appliance? Vacuum cleaner relevant?

FA to all --> ups maybe I said ash instead of dust. Is this the FA? If so may I repeat the same questions as above but with "dust" instead of "ash", please? was the dust "added"? was it added somewhere? does it gather somewhere relevantly? Is dust here considered as a waste? Something to be cleaned?

occult; This. --> is the truth occulted/hidden by someone (e.g. Govern? Private industries? Firms? Lobbies?)? Like a receipt not revealed? Health consequences in using certain technology?

believe to something which is not true? Yes --> something related to science? A phenomenon? Aliens? Something which was believed to be supernatural? Did someone believe in something which was not true? The majority of humans? Relevant the reason why it was believed so? Was the belief supported by science? By rational suppositions? By faith?
Was it believed something about the dust? E.g. that since the technology added more dust it was detrimental for the health? For the environment? Or maybe it was inexplicable from where the dust came?


WAG --> is it referred to data and privacy? E.g. less mysticism about data sharing implies more dust in the sense of more granularity of the data given? Or viceversa: awareness on data importance and lack of privacy lead to more dust in the sense of more censoring on data?
Earnest
 
Posts: 2829
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby GalFisk » Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:52 am

dust = acronym? slang? No to both. free microscopic particles of solid material? Yes. particles in the air? They can be airborne.

Is there reverse causality? I mean: less mysticism implies more dust and more dust implies less mysticism? There was both more mysticism and less dust in the situation before the change. Just the first implication (less mysticism --> more dust)? Would less dust lead to more mysticism? Would more mysticism lead to less dust necessarily? They don't lead to eachother - correlation is not causation. To be sure: are we talking about tons of dust (I mean in total)? In the world, yes. Grams? In the puzzle location, this. Was dust already artificially produced? Yes. Is dust added on a mass scale? What do you mean? Dust is added on a massive scale, but dust is not weighed on a scale. is dust added in corners of houses? on shelves? Inside buildings? No to all. In Earth? On Earth. On another planet? (e.g. space missions or shuttles producing dust when landing on a planet) No.
Dust like the one produced by pinning pencils? Glitter powder? Stardust? "normal dust" as the one found on shelves or on books? Is landing safely relevant (e.g. more dust soften the fall)? No to all. Is such dust tangible by the people having added it? It exists, but they don't often notice it. As soon as it is added? Normally not. Is the more the use of a technology the more the dust? Yes. Directly? Indirectly? Hard to say.
Is the material of the dust relevant? Yes. Is the dust made of a metal? Partially. of waste? bacteria? plant pollen, human and animal hairs, textile fibers, paper fibers, minerals from outdoor soil, human skin cells, burnt meteorite particles? No to the rest. Something that can be found in the local environment? No. Fine dust/ particulate matters relevant? Yes. Dust as more granularity? No.

More people? This --> anyone? No. Anyone having a certain technology? A certain device? Yes to both. Anyone belonging to a minority? No. To a certain group? They're sometimes grouped. people believing in something which is not true? The beliefs of the people adding the dust are irrelevant. The people believing in the mysticism believe in something that is not true.

artificially = through technology? Yes --> is dust a row material in this case? A production waste? A final product? No to all. "added through technology" = technology "produces" the dust? This. technology attracts more dust? technology
Technology = devices? Means of transport? This. Electronic? Internet? screens? health related? An appliance? Vacuum cleaner relevant? No.

FA to all --> ups maybe I said ash instead of dust. Is this the FA? Yes. If so may I repeat the same questions as above but with "dust" instead of "ash", please? Yes.

Relevant where the dust was added? Yes, broadly. On someone? On a river? On water? On the forehead of someone? No to all. Was it a colored dust? Was dust put inside something? Does it feed something? No to all.

Does the ash hide something relevant? Someone relevant? No to both.

Is dust used in a process? No, but it's caused by one. Has dust been added in years? In a second? In days? In. months? Hours? Each addition happens in seconds, bu combined, they happen in years.

was the dust "added"? DOYD of "added". It was deposited. was it added somewhere? Yes. does it gather somewhere relevantly? It's deposited in relevant places. Is dust here considered as a waste? Yes. Something to be cleaned? Sometimes.

occult; This. --> is the truth occulted/hidden by someone (e.g. Govern? Private industries? Firms? Lobbies?)? Like a receipt not revealed? Health consequences in using certain technology? No to all.

believe to something which is not true? Yes --> something related to science? A phenomenon? This. Aliens? Something which was believed to be supernatural? Yes. Did someone believe in something which was not true? Yes. The majority of humans? No. Relevant the reason why it was believed so? Yes. Was the belief supported by science? No. By rational suppositions? No. By faith? Yope - not by any religion AFAIK, but by a belief system.
Was it believed something about the dust? No. E.g. that since the technology added more dust it was detrimental for the health? For the environment? No to both. Or maybe it was inexplicable from where the dust came? No.


WAG --> is it referred to data and privacy? E.g. less mysticism about data sharing implies more dust in the sense of more granularity of the data given? Or viceversa: awareness on data importance and lack of privacy lead to more dust in the sense of more censoring on data? Nice guess, but no.
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby Earnest » Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:36 am

car emissions relevant? Electricity? ozone hole?
means of transport: airplane? boats? trains? cars? undergrounds? others?

A phenomenon? This --> death of people? An environmental phenomenon? a phenomenon that could be explained thanks to the relevant mean of transport? A phenomenon which is normally seen every day? A natural phenomenon? related to gravity? earth rotation? flying? usage of a certain technology? usage of a certain mean of transportation?

Something which was believed to be supernatural? Yes. --> related to changing in temperatures? In changing of weather conditions? To noises? related to quick transportation of people? to effect of such mean of transport on people? was "It" believed to be supernatural before the mean of transport was introduced/revealed (e.g. the end of the world? The belief that certain heights could not be reached by humans? That someone was a God?)? Could the mean of transport relevantly half the times of transportation? dispel a myth? transport many people at the same time? Wars relevant? Can it make relevantly long journeys? traveling day and night? Are Safari relevant?

Flat earth society relevant?
Earnest
 
Posts: 2829
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby GalFisk » Fri Jan 10, 2020 12:15 pm

car emissions relevant? It's sometimes counted as emmissions, but engine exhaust is not relevant. Electricity? Yes. ozone hole? No.
means of transport: airplane? boats? trains? cars? This. undergrounds? others?

A phenomenon? This --> death of people? An environmental phenomenon? a phenomenon that could be explained thanks to the relevant mean of transport? A phenomenon which is normally seen every day? A natural phenomenon? related to gravity? earth rotation? flying? No to all. usage of a certain technology? Yope. usage of a certain mean of transportation? No.

Something which was believed to be supernatural? Yes. --> related to changing in temperatures? In changing of weather conditions? To noises? related to quick transportation of people? to effect of such mean of transport on people? No to all. was "It" believed to be supernatural before the mean of transport was introduced/revealed (e.g. the end of the world? The belief that certain heights could not be reached by humans? That someone was a God?)?No to all, but the basics of the belief are old, but the specifics related to the puzzle came after the automobile, but that's semi-coincidental. Could the mean of transport relevantly half the times of transportation? dispel a myth? transport many people at the same time? Wars relevant? Can it make relevantly long journeys? traveling day and night? Are Safari relevant? No or irr to all (cars can do some of these things, but it's not relevant).

Flat earth society relevant? No.
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [GalFisk] Ashes to ashes

Postby Hobbsicle » Fri Jan 24, 2020 3:27 am

Is there an actual physical change between the mysticism and the dust? If so, a change in technology? In manufacturing process? Or is the change mental? Like, at first they thought it was mysticism, then they realized it was dust?

Is the mysticism related to ghosts? Perhaps more specifically, poltergeists? Is an electrical phenomenon relevant? If so, related to lights? Indicators? Sounds? The radio? AC? Starter? Alternator? Is metallic dust closing a circuit?
Hobbsicle
 
Posts: 868
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 11:42 am
Location: Texas, United States


Return to Active Lateral Thinking Puzzles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Earnest and 3 guests