A Conundrum.
Ask a Question
I know a man who was born in a leap year in that same year his father became forty four years of age - the man's father however was not born in a leap year, the man and his father were born in different centuries.
In which years were the man and his father born?
There is a logical answer to this conundrum, if no one comes up with the answer - I'll give a few clues.
"I've posted a conundrum where a knowledge of history might help" - clue number 1 
Being born 44 years apart logic dictates that both their birthdays should fall on a leap year. The answer must have something to do with centurial leap years which must be divisible by 400 just as leap years must be divisible by 4. Therefore 1900 was not a leap year but 2000 was.
Are you sure the man you know is both a man (being at least 18 years old) and is still alive (you know him or you knew him)?
Yes the man is definitely over 18 his father is no longer alive though.
The mention of a clue regarding history I gave Lyn elsewhere will, when I give it - virtually solve this conumdrum.
I'll start with the clues either at daily intervals or when this drops off the first page,
1900 and 1944 *typo.
1900 not a leap year as not divisible by 400
The 20th century didnt start until after december 1900
Not quite correct BW07 (check question) - but nice try 
ADDED BY EDIT To avoid confusion BW07 had initially given the sons year of birth as 1940,
CORRECT saintsmoney BW07 Was so near - but had missed the 44 year separation, This actually was a very watered down version of a conundrum I made up, the more involved version involved giving the mans actual birthdate or that of his sister. Nobody ever got it. EXCEPT ME - because I was (and still am) that man.
BW07 deserves the credit for realising that 1900 is technically part of the 18th century. I was on the right track with 1900 not being a leap year. It was a good thought provoking conundrum.
Now get a good nights rest, tomorrow is lateral thinking question day
saintsmoney I'm in a very pedantic mood and must correct you - 1900 was not part of the 18th century - but the last year of the 19th century. Now don't go editing your post (I've screen grabbed it) we're having no more cheating (I'm confused enough).
The father was born in 1900 but is still only considered born in the 19th century because the 20th century didn't begin until January 1901.
You are correct - the last year of the 19th century.
Lynibis I was going to give a clue that I'm sure would have revealed the answer to you - it was that the man's father was born a few weeks after the only member of the Royal Family who lived in three different centuries.
Join for free to get genuine deals, money saving advice and help from our friendly community
Chief Bargain Hunter
