The problem itself appears to be nonsensical with no real world value but as long as it is a well defined problem with a concrete solution then it should be fine. Ideally the interviewer should be looking for how you approach the problem and what you do to obtain an answer (whether they do or not is a separate topic)
Granted, the 747 question also technically does have a concrete solution I guess, but I would end up asking things like what's the volume of a 747 and the dimensions of a ping pong ball and then point out there will be gaps as we fill the 747 with balls so it's not simply dividing the volumes, write a program based on these observations, give a disclaimer that it will most likely be inaccurate, and hope that is good enough to pass.
But that blender question... uh yeah... I'd probably spend too much time asking clarifying questions to actually come up with something plausible.
The blender questions relies on knowing that muscle strength scales with the square and body mass scales with cube. This is why insects for example can be so strong relative to their weight. So if we scaled you down you would be strong enough to just jump out.
The problem itself appears to be nonsensical with no real world value but as long as it is a well defined problem with a concrete solution then it should be fine. Ideally the interviewer should be looking for how you approach the problem and what you do to obtain an answer (whether they do or not is a separate topic)
Granted, the 747 question also technically does have a concrete solution I guess, but I would end up asking things like what's the volume of a 747 and the dimensions of a ping pong ball and then point out there will be gaps as we fill the 747 with balls so it's not simply dividing the volumes, write a program based on these observations, give a disclaimer that it will most likely be inaccurate, and hope that is good enough to pass.
But that blender question... uh yeah... I'd probably spend too much time asking clarifying questions to actually come up with something plausible.