Yes, but no.

or

Not yes.

or

Only if No means Yes. If Not then No.

But seriously...
It looks like the answer can have two states simultaneously like in quantum superposition. So is the state of the answer a kind of "cognitive superposition"? What does this say about the law of excluded middle?

You can subjectively "collapse the thought wave" by deciding to simply settle on one perspective. It also feels like what happens when you look at the image of the young girl that turns into an old lady when you shift internal perspective or focus differently.

Is this an old lady?:


Edit:
When thinking of the answer, or looking at the picture it appears that there is a "flip rate" between the two perspectives. I wonder if this "flip rate" has different cognitive effects at different rates.

Can this headline be answered by the word "no"?

NYEOS

or

YNEOS

Is Hinchliffe's Rule True?

Yes, but falsely.

Yes, but falsely. — unenlightened

But, also "No, but falsely."

For it to be true it must be false, and for it to be false it must be true. It's a something that's a nothing, its some kind of something that exists as nothing.

The answer is probably orthogonal to yes and no. If yes and no can be seen to represent 1 dimensional vectors (true yes, and true no), then the 2nd dimension would include vectors that represent false yes, and false no. It is possible then to imagine even more complex ratios of yes and no complexes. Potentially an infinite amount.

Yes, but falsely.
— unenlightened

But, also "No, but falsely." — punos

There is an asymmetry, I think. The answer "No." is a performative contradiction, while the answer "Yes." is not.

It is a matter of interpretation, but i suggest that a yes/no question can always be answered by yes, or by no. Usually, one answer is true and the other false. So under this understanding the correct answer is "Yes, it can be answered by "No.", but that answer would necessarily be false.

Pedants of the world unite, you have nothing.

You are not wrong i agree, but i don't think its entirely correct.

Only one answer can be true at a time, at least for it to make intuitive sense to us. When one is true, the other has to be false. It is a "one OR the other" situation (similar to the Pauli exclusion principle or the law of excluded middle). That would be the actualized answer, while the situation of "one AND the other" relates to the superposition of potentials concept i mentioned previously. This condition is also reminiscent of the Bose-Einstein condensate concept, which, unlike the Pauli exclusion principle, allows for a "one AND the other" situation instead of a "one OR the other" situation. Also, it would appear that in this kind of situation, the law of excluded middle does not apply. Things both are and are not simultaneously.

Folks, I think Michael was not expecting replies at all because the headline is not worth replying!
This is the point—or even solution—to this puzzle.