Missing Square

The video says that the shapes are arranged in the shape of a triangle. It does look like a triangle, but it really isn't a triangle. The angle of the blue piece is NOT the same as the angle of the red piece. To understand this better, carefully draw it out on a piece of graph paper, (and this part is important) NOT by drawing a large triangle and filling it in, but by drawing each piece individually and making sure each individual piece is accurate. Now, make your eyes flat with the paper and look down the long side of the "triangle" you will see that in the first diagram it is "bowed" in a little bit, and the other diagram is "bowed" out a little bit. This difference in area is equal to, and therefore is compensated by, the one "missing" square. If you can't understand it from this, finish Jr. High

...

the top shape is not a triangle. its a quadrehedrin. ( 4 sides ) the second shape below is not a triangle either, but an octihedrin. (8 sides ) the angle is fucked, but not enough to notice. we finally figured this thing out, after years of mind trama, and the solution, sadly has demystified the entire puzzle. it really is just an illusion. mathmatics is solid, and when its not, we enter the multidimentional world of superstring theories, but only the super nerdy even care enough to read this and smile.

I love these new math and shape videos. I don't go to school anymore but I love any brain teaser brought my way! Intrigue should be never ending.

we have 2 triangle(blue & red) which is ture and 2 other shapes (yellow and green) but the problem that they are all together doesn't present the big triagnle as we think at the first. becosue the blue and red triangle diffreant angles.
we can got that from calculating the shadow of each.
let study the left angle of each triangle
the red 3/8
the blue 2/5
so becouse 3/8 not equal 2/5 so these 2 triangle does not present a straight line when we put like this...so as a result they the 4 shapes does not present a big triangle.... they present another shape .....

3:8 = 13:5

The angles on the red and blue triangles have to be the same in order for this to be true and there is in fact a missing square. So we have that:
tan-1(2/5) must be equal to tan-1(3/8)

tan-1(2/5)=21.801 degrees
tan-1(3/8)=20.556 degrees

So the two triangles are different varying by only 1.3 degrees and thus explaining the missing square

The red and blue right angle triangles are different sizes! pretty cool illusion though!

coastlines have an infinite boundry length

there are a few puzzles like this, at the end of the day, count squares

FAKE

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/441990/cool_math_trick/

i found this out in grade 2

oke... think of this...
red covers 12 squares
green covers 8 squares
yellow covers 7 squares
blue covers 5 squares
meaning... it will fit perfectly in 32 squares

in the second triangle.. you miss 1 square...
meaning it willbe 31 ive you count it as no color so you do 32-1 = 31
or ive you count it as a color.. it will be 32 plus 1 = 33
so that means you CAN fill it up with a random color, but he didnt... meaning he has 31.
but you can go to 2 differents way... according to math calculatings when you can go 2 different ways... you need to do situation 1 plus situation 2
meaning: 31 33 = 64
but since you can go 2 ways you need to divide 64 by 2 = 32

wheres my blankie...

Iwould rather nail my head to a PLANK OF WOOD rather than try to figure out this S**t

Only one question about it .....why did u post this

The pieces that make up the triangle are not polygons (consisting of straight sides). The pieces that make up the hypoteneuse (did i spell that right?), or the longest side, are ever-so-slightly curved. In one configuration, the curve is concave (curves inward), and the "triangle" is whole. In another configuration, however, the curves of the pieces bend outwards and away, leaving an empty space. CORRECTION: Sorry, but I just remembered that ALL the pieces are curved.

Thales therorem, not
aligned points.

It is a triangle cuz it has three sides!
He inverted the first pice ,therefore all pieces should have been inverted ! But he did not!
SIMPLE!

hey budyd if u count number of full square...they r 25.... n they r still 25 if u change the pattern... hope u got tat

who gives a sh*t.......

The blue triangle has a different slope from the whole "triangle", so it's not a triangle at all...

nenek aku pOn leh buat!!!... trick jek lebih!! uppercase!!!

Add some sugar in a glass some fruit and water and drink ! What's that ? Just water and sugar ... thats the same with the square that disappear! we just need to add some sugar because the fruit (red triangle) dont mix with the water if you don't "blend" it (blue triangle).

but boring

Exactly what he said.... also there is no spoon

Its got nothing to do with triangles its to do with how u arrange the shapes

ther aint no missing square tho. wots the point to the experiment

Has anyone asked "the others"

I think Jack knows more than he's letting on too

back in high school, what i've learned about triangles is that, eventhough how many times you cut it, when you join the pieces back together, you could still form a straight line (like a straight edge as shown on the second triangle). SO WHO GIVES A DAMN F**k ABOUT THE MISSING SQUARE!!! TO HELL WITH IT!!!

and he told me never to bring him any more puzzles like this again! Personally, I think the missing square inch is lost in the gaps between the elements in the set.

red triangle base is 8, height is 3, blue triangle base 5, height 2.there is no ratio between triangles

on every figure that the triangle contains some milimeters missing. the missed milimteres when we add gives you that one blank square.

If this were a true triangle its area would be 32.5 squares (13*5/2).
In the first case the 'shape' only covers 32 squares (black 5sq, red 12sq, green

it was you all along..

the square probably went up your intriging ass ya nerd

If You look at the top triangle, the gradient of the small red triangle is 3/8, and the blue triangle above it is 2/5.... therefore, these shapes arent actually triangles, but 4 sided shapes. This is how the missing square may be formed. WORD...

if you work out the angles in the triangles using san/cos/tan (sohcatoah) or something, youll find that the big triangle isnt actually a triangle, but a four sided shape.

Only math -discapacitated people would say this trick is stupid or boring, cause it's a very creative trick.

You have to add another square to match the top one, It never went missing

but i hope next time they tell us what the catch

,=more math lessons on mc

a

the missing square is at the red triangle as u can see after rearrangement the 2nd triangle is one square higher than the first one...

El amarillo esta en el lugar del verde y vice versa

the sum of partial areas is not equal to the total triangle area, so the overall shape is NOT a triangle.. THE trick is the intersection point of the blue and red triangles which will not be exactly at the edge of the right angle of the square grid. the use of paper presentation rather than computer drawing is a must to wrap the paper at position ( -5, -3) so that the exact joining points of blue and red triangles as they are. besides the blue and red trgs. are not similar..

why the F**k would u post math problems? there should be a filter for this kind of bogus edutainment.

WTF

The polygons made by arranging the two triangles (blue and red) and the other L shape areas (green and yellow) are NOT TRIANGLES. The agles of the red and blue triangles are different (except for the straight angle, of course), so their hypotenuses are not collinear. Therefore we're comparing two 4 sided polygons, not two triangles. This becomes more obvius if we calculate the area of the starting shape first by admitting it's a triangle (5x13/2=32.5) and then doing the same calculation by adding the area of each surface (5+12+7+8 =32). Obviously the starting shape is not a triangle, nor the second shape is and while the "hypotenuse" in the first case is concave, in the second case is convex.

Anyway, nice trick!

I'm amazed... I didn't believe in majerk before now,,,,derp.

DID YOU FIND ALLAHS NAME IN THERE? I SWEAR IT WAS, THAT MISSING SQUARE IS PROOF THAT ALLAH IS REAL!! WOOOOOW!!

Why didn`t Einstein think of it.

13+5=18
18-13=3
3-3=0 therefor, this equation is totally fucked up.LOL

aha...

In the first condition, We cannot make such triangle.
If we look at the yellow & green area (the rectangle) in the first condition and use them as a base, the angled line should stop at (5 , 12.5) instead of (5 , 13).
Because these are how the angle works:
(1 , 2.5 ) ; (2 , 5); (3 , 7.5); (4 , 10) ; (5, 12.5) END!
Other than this, the yellow-green (rectangle shaped) area will get distorted, and we will have either more area or less area than we’re supposed to.
Sorry about my English..=)
Nice trick btw..;)

the angles of the red square and the blue square is not equal.This leads to the hypotenuse is not a straight line in the second picture.But it's straigth in the first one. However with your eyes you'll see both hypotenuses are straight.

The hypotenuse of second picture is a convex line <--- the area of second picture increase along the hypotenus.But the area of the picture is constant.The result is the missing block.

there was never another square in the first place its not that hard to do
it's simply re making it but it just doesn't fill out the original way

Obvio que no falta un cuadro (unidad) si se supone que son las mismas figuras, el área total es la misma nadamás que las unidades estan acomodadas de otra manera y la figura parece que le falta algo pero los pedazos del cuadrito faltante se acomoda en la parte de la hipotenusa fijense!.... aburridooooo!!

coz the hypotenuse is not a straight line..
the area that is missing, was put at the area excess of the hypotenuse..
(imagine a straight line hypotenuse side)

I like getting something from nothing for free

Hey Dude (submiter)...do u think That this is a very Cooooool .....12 y old boy with no Brain can do this..and Notice What you have just did

thats gonna make me up all night .

when you reshape the triangles the way he did it, it is possible that you are losing one spot because you are compensating the loss made by the two Red and Blue triangles... as there is now more space below the Red Triangle than it was before making up for reshaping it in length rather than in height....

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/526271/if_you_are_intelligent_click_here/

think of it as area... now you have a certain area given in triangle 1 above, now you can know for a fact that when you split it and rearrange it, that the area did not change.... it is solid paper, the shape changed. not the area. You don't make things disappear by rearranging it. it change how it looks only.

the only reason this happens is because the hypotenuse of triangular shape are on different angles.... sry for the big words children =]

The two "triangles" are not both true triangles. The "hypotenuse" has a kink in the middle that accounts for the extra area covered by the potton one compared to thje top.

.. a triangle is not a triangle???? lol. What happened is that the two triangles in the top figure leave a volume of 3X5 squares which equals 15 squares ( 3x5=15). By swapping the triangles, in the bottom illustration, you then have a missing volume of 2x8 ( 2x8=16)or 16 squares.(16-15=1) This is just one of those things that makes math fun. (Have you ever poured one liquid from one container into another and found out you had less than you started with? its called displacement of volume.... Come on , somebody comment on that statment....lmao, and confuses all you others.) lol... never heard anyone say the triangles are not triangles before
made my day. ( whats really neat is the person who first discovered this ages ago, and used it to confuse the masses.)

If you notice you will find that the height and the length of the second square have become longer… the height become more than five and the length become more than 13