School-Safe Puzzle Games

## How old?

A gentleman, in 1930, put forth this question. You may believe there isn’t enough information to come up with an answer, but if you look carefully…

A woman’s age at death was one twenty-ninth of the year of her birth. How old was she in the year 1900?

Answers to this challenge can be entered into the section below; submissions will automatically be revealed when time is up!

### 18 Comments to “How old?”

1. bobg | Profile

Assuming she must have lived through 1900. She was:

64 when she died in 1920.

44 in 1900.

born in 1856. (1856/29=64)

2. Hex | PUZZLE MASTER | Profile

B: year of birth
D: year of death

B and D are integers

D-B=B/29

Since the woman was alive in 1900, then B <= 1900 <= D
B <= 1900 implies that B <= 1885 and D = 1900 implies that B >= 1856 and D >= 1920

2 solutions fit here:
B=1856 D= 1920 age @1900 = 44
B=1885 D= 1950 age @1900 = 15

Since the gentleman asked this question in 1930, then the woman must have died before that date.

B=1856 D= 1920 age @1900 = 44

Nice riddle!

3. engjs1960 | Profile

If she was born in 1856 and died in 1920 at 64, her age would be 44 in 1900. The previous year divisible by 29 is 1827, but she would have died in 1890 and so not reached 1900. The next year is 1885, but she would not die until 1950 so her age at death could not be known in 1930.

You could have set the question in the present by asking what her age was in 2000. She would have to have been born in 1943 and died in 2010 at 67.

4. Shawn | PUZZLE GRANDMASTER | Profile

The woman turned 44 years old in the year 1900.

Year Born : 1856
Year Died : 1920
Age Died : 64
Age in 1900 : 44
1856/29 = 64

The extra bit of information that we need involves an assumption that the woman had already died before 1930 when the question was asked, and was still alive in 1900.

For all ages higher than 65, the woman would have been born after 1900.
For all ages lower than 64, the woman would had died before 1900.

Only at the age of 64 would the woman have died between 1900 and 1930.

5. barftud | Profile

The poor lady in question was born in 1856, died in 1920, was 64 at her death and was 44 in 1900.

Nice puzzle.

6. rkp | Profile

The highest multiple of 29 to be under 1900 is 65, giving 1885, so the woman was born in 1885, was 15 years old in 1900 and died aged 65.

7. Bobo The Bear | PUZZLE MASTER | Profile

The way the puzzle is worded implies that the woman was alive in 1900, but was dead before 1930. So her year of death falls in that time interval

Year of death = Year of birth + Age at death
Year of death = 29×Age at death + Age at death
Year of death = 30×Age at death

Her year of death must be a multiple of 30, which leaves only one possibility: 1920.

Year of death = 1920
Age at death = 64
Age in 1900 = 44

8. Leoandrex | Profile

120×9 = 1080

1900-1080=820

She is dead at 820 years old

9. Falwan | Profile

In 1900 she was 15…

She was 64 years old when she died.

ignoring 65 years old for not living until 1930.

10. suineg | PUZZLE MASTER | Profile

Ok I think there are mathematically two possible values:
1) 15, she died in 1950 at 65 years old
2) 44, she died in 1920 at 64 years old

My hunch: The man is putting the question in past, he formulated the question in 1930 so the woman should have died before that so 44 years old is my answer.

I am feeling that the picture could be telling something but I am too tired to figure something out.

She was 44 in 1900.

12. turner | Profile

The two date close to 1900 are:
(1) 65 in 1885 => 85 in 1900
(2) 66 in 1914 => 52 in 1900 this is the cloest to 1900

This assumes her birth date must be an integer when divided by 29

13. elarman | Profile

I am going with 44 years old in 1900

She’d be 44 in 1900 and 74 in 1930 (the year she expired?).

15. soumen023 | Profile

she died in 1918 at the age of 62. So her age should be 44 in 1900. 1918 is the only year between 1900 to 1930 that should be divisible by 29.

16. tomlaidlaw | Profile

(year of birth)+(year of birth)/29 >1900
it doesn’t take many tries before we come up with:
1856+64=1920, so she was 44 in 1900.