PringleMan Female, 1317, Canada 1364 Posts

Saturday, October 09, 2010 7:57:46 PM does this work? don't you have to separate with the units whole? 

atm Female, 1317, Midwest US 127 Posts

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 2:02:59 PM I Understand this. But 64 cant be 65, or 64 would be 65. But 64 is just 64. And thats all. 

happygrass Male, 1829, Western US 86 Posts

Thursday, February 18, 2010 2:08:42 AM basic algebra.


OldOllie Male, 6069, Midwest US 15860 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 10:23:55 PM The easiest way to explain this is that in the final configuration, the two lines comprising the tops of the green and orange shapes do not together form a straight line. The slope of a line is the rise divided by the run. The line atop the green triangle has a rise of 3 and a run of 8, and therefore, a slope of 0.375. The line atop the orange shape has a rise of 2 and a run of 5, and therefore, a slope of 0.4.This results in a gap in the shape of a very thin parallelogram with an area, as MrRubik explains, of 1 unit. The width at its widest  in the center between the green and red triangles  is approximately 0.117 units. (1/sqrt(73)) 

Dfaulted Male, 1317, Canada 1932 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 5:24:24 PM whoever thinks this works is dumb, when you multiply something it wont make the same answer as something else, 8x8=64 5x13=65 

davymid Male, 3039, Europe 12144 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 12:53:31 PM this one works because its assumed that the lines are all perfectly straight, they aren't.
They are. That's not how this works. Read the comments. 

MrRubik Male, 1317, Europe 69 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 10:31:50 AM @TKD master the gap in the middle DOES matter it's very thin, but long so it makes 1cm^2. check out murderous maths.co.uk if u dont believe me. 

Xutar Male, 1317, Midwest US 158 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 8:07:14 AM this one works because its assumed that the lines are all perfectly straight, they aren't. 

TKD_Master Male, 1829, Midwest US 4827 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 8:05:01 AM "The two "triangles" are slightly concave, so the second square has a minuscule gap in it."a gap in the middle wouldnt matter, it'd still be 5x13. they very slightly changed every slope, very very very freaking slightly. with many different slopes, they can change each one by just a hair and make it all fit. 

Kalkin Male, 1829, Western US 44 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 7:24:28 AM The two "triangles" are slightly concave, so the second square has a minuscule gap in it. 

neosophist Male, 1829, Eastern US 137 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 7:20:51 AM a simply tangram messed up everyone. love it. 

panth753 Female, 1829, Midwest US 8964 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 6:45:24 AM If that doesn't make you feel dumb, then nothing will. 

IQover Male, 1317, Europe 1046 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 5:56:48 AM Lolwut? Why do we even try to understand math? 

MisuriX Male, 1829, Europe 514 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 5:54:25 AM 1/3*3 only = 1 when 1/3*2 is put to decimal places.i.e. 0.33333' + 0.33333' = 0.66666', which is deccmalised to 0.66667, so + 1/3 = 1 so this video is mathematically wrong as generalizations are being used to solve it.


pui Female, 1829, Canada 3550 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 4:35:08 AM I hate math. 

MissDaae Female, 1317, Southern US 19 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 3:24:24 AM Ngeh.... Nyeh.... Geh... Grr...GYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.... *head asplodes* 

ohthedrama Male, 3039, Midwest US 162 Posts

Monday, February 15, 2010 3:01:44 AM Here's what is happening. http://www.cuttheknot.org/Generalizati... 

LazyMe484 Male, 1829, Canada 10503 Posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010 11:23:14 PM well .99 equals 1 because 1/3 equals .333 (repeated). 1/3*3=1 and .333(repeated) * 3 = .999(repeated).
Yep. 0.999(repeated) does equal 1. Its called math. 

gatorade777 Male, 1829, Eastern US 1201 Posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010 10:04:39 PM well .99 equals 1 because 1/3 equals .333 (repeated). 1/3*3=1 and .333(repeated) * 3 = .999(repeated). 

hi2pi Male, 3039, Canada 738 Posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010 8:43:46 PM this is one of the original, preinternet fakes. 

thelonious Male, 4049, Southern US 3268 Posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010 8:01:27 PM Old geometry joke that requires you to assume precision that the experimenter is counting on you assuming. Slopes of those areas do not align. 

davymid Male, 3039, Europe 12144 Posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010 7:54:17 PM There is no sliver of a gap  It's because when the pieces are changed around, the slope gradually takes away more white space
No. Just no. 

Faramir13 Male, 1317, Canada 31 Posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010 6:57:03 PM @dooflotchie, you dont understand this? tough... 

WakkaWakka Female, 1829, Canada 27 Posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010 6:43:03 PM There is no sliver of a gap  It's because when the pieces are changed around, the slope gradually takes away more white space (the space in the little squares)... Wasn't there another similar post like this one? 

fatex52986 Male, 1829, Western US 1135 Posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010 6:31:51 PM again the slopes arent the same so it wouldnt match perfectly 
