particular convention should always be kept in mind. It is frequently
the case that a solution requires the assumption that the hands can
actually record a time involving a minute fraction of a second. Such a
time, of course, cannot be really indicated. Is the puzzle, therefore,
impossible of solution? The conclusion deduced from a logical syllogism
depends for its truth on the two premises assumed, and it is the same in
mathematics. Certain things are antecedently assumed, and the answer
depends entirely on the truth of those assumptions.

"If two horses," says Lagrange, "can pull a load of a certain weight, it
is natural to suppose that four horses could pull a load of double that
weight, six horses a load of three times that weight. Yet, strictly
speaking, such is not the case. For the inference is based on the
assumption that the four horses pull alike in amount and direction,
which in practice can scarcely ever be the case. It so happens that we
are frequently led in our reckonings to results which diverge widely
from reality. But the fault is not the fault of mathematics; for
mathematics always gives back to us exactly what we have put into it.
The ratio was constant according to that supposition. The result is
founded upon that supposition. If the supposition is false the result is
necessarily false."

If one man can reap a field in six days, we say two men will reap it in
three days, and three men will do the work in two days. We here assume,
as in the case of Lagrange's horses, that all the men are exactly
equally capable of work. But we assume even more than this. For when
three men get together they may waste time in gossip or play; or, on the
other hand, a spirit of rivalry may spur them on to greater diligence.
We may assume any conditions we like in a problem, provided they be
clearly expressed and understood, and the answer will be in accordance