Bro, this is by far one of the easiest math questions I've seen. How and why the audience and the contestant both chose A is ridiculous. I'm in middle school and this was child's play, so it worries me that half the audience couldn't do middle school math.

@CHRISTIANNWO I would agree, but squares are common knowledge, so this isn't a lack of memory, it's wilfull ignorance

Most people have no need to remember square numbers, so it's difficult to remember back to your childhood days, in a short amount of time.


Oh lmao I thought it was 2 of the same square number 😢


I paused the video to work it out and I'm ashamed to say this took me way longer than it should have. Rather than just reciting all the low, square numbers and adding them together and trial and erroring it, I started with 49 and was taking away other numbers and thinking ... not a square ... not a square ... not a square ...

I've sat in the audience for this show before, and sometimes it's not that you couldn't work out the answer, it's that they literally don't even show the audience a screen with the options on before you vote (they tell you, and you have to remember what they've said). That's hard when you're trying to do trial and error to work out an answer, especially if they don't give you a lot of time before asking the audience.

I got the correct answer eventually but being in that audience I could easily have rushed or forgotten the options.


2 smaller numbers is 4 and 3
4²:4.4:16
3²:3.3:9
Now sum up them
3²+4²:5²:25


78% of the audience is exactly on the same level.  America.


This answer is surprisingly tricky because the first choice is the SQUARE of two square numbers, not the sum. To get this question correct requires sifting through all the squares that could add up to each option and resting on three and four. Not surprised everybody got it wrong!

"Everybody" didn't get it wrong.  70% of the audience got it wrong.  100% would be "everybody".  I hope you don't get a math question in the future.


Legend says that this guy massacred the whole audience afterwards.


“Professor, when will we use this in the real world?”


technically they are all correct because you can have themselves + 0 squared


Damn not only him, even the audience doesn't know basic mathematics 😂. I feel proud to be Indian

But not everybody is a math major and may have narrowed their education on other things such as marketing or english or history etc...  Many of them may have also been out of school for decades and actually just working for a living.  I don't know @Prakash Pandey

@AL we can see people in the audience are of age higher than 13-15(8th-10th standard) so they already know squares , and they also have higher literacy rate than India. Still 70% gave wrong answers 🌝

But what does that have to do with the people in the audiance.  I don't know anything about these people. @Prakash Pandey

@AL what representation as a whole? The whole conversation is about comparing people who have completed schooling in US vs in India.

I know there are a lot of very smart people in india,  but taking a small cross section of a group of people especially in this situation is not a good representation of the population as a whole@Prakash Pandey

I will bet that a large percentage of Indians would not have answered this correctly in the same situation.

@Ember Hermin same here bro squares are taught here in middle school, but these are squares of some really small numbers.

I don't know about other countries but even a below average Student in India would answer this before 30 seconds, this is literal defination of basics for us. Permutations,Trigonometry and other stuff gets real hard here

@Sanskar Tandel I was NOT taught to write equations like that until middle school

"Basic"??? How fucking advanced do your mathematics get that squares are considered basic?

@Sanskar Tandel I'm in 11th grade still I got confused somehow💀

@Indian chad Satya Nadella studied from manipal institute of technology

@Indian chad forget about him. Even 78% audience didn't knew it 😂😂

@Sanskar Tandel yes it is , they got confused by 2x2 x 2x2 or A part

@Indian chad well isn't that just a 3square + 4 square  ie 9+16=25 ie 5square. That's a 5th grade question.

Maths is really complex in the USA but in higher education(Colleges). we are taught these things in our formal schooling, the reason why India produces world-class engineers(IITians) like Sunder Pichai, Satya Nadella and thousands more. And not only India but china and japan are also very well versed in maths


4, 9, 16, 25, 36....you're there.  And they don't press you on time.  It is funny to watch people's brains when they stop functioning


THIS WAS SOOOOO EASY!!!<br>EVERYONE SHOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS!!!

THIS WAS SOOOOO EASY!!!
EVERYONE SHOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS!!!


If they’d put 9 in there as well you’d be able to work it out without even knowing what a square number is! Man was cheated


Plot twist: Audience knew the correct answer, they just wanted to teach him a lesson for not knowing a simple math.

Nah, Americans just suck at maths (and not only maths).

Basically the audience was a big troll lmao


I know math very well, trig, algebra, stats, long arithmetic, linear programming, all sorts of math. But even I couldn’t understand the question here.  So to the people bashing him saying “he doesn’t know math” he dosnt know this math, you don’t know what math he does know, it’s impossible to know all math. No one does, you only remember the parts that’s relevant to to your career.

You don't need to know any math in order to answer this question. No need to remember anything. This is basic arithmetic, with small numbers.


It is tricky. Easy to look at 16 as the product of 2 squares and not realize the question is asking for the sum of two squares.


Everybody thinks it's easy after they saw the answer.
The reality is, this is a math question and people are not used to them. It requires practice in order to think mathematically.

So the answer is 25 because the square numbers are 16 and 9. You either calculate, which takes time or you know it by heart since is the pythagorean 3,4,5 triple.

15 years old video recommended out of the blue. Idk why...


I actually can’t solve it unless I have a pen and paper. Or ipad


As a maths teacher this genuinely made my heart sink with frustration!

I hope you understand math better than English.

15october91 Imagine your english teacher after that masterpiece?

Random Internet Person
Mathematics.
Math ematic s.
Maths.
Dipshit.

Random Internet Person
Mathematics.
Math -ematic- s.
Maths.
Dipshit.

Why people would think maths teachers aren't the problem is beyond me...

Random Internet Person, they only made one or two mistakes whilst you made five. The second one that the maths teacher had made is only if you carefully attribute specific emotions with the heart. That is most do not talk about a frustrated heart which was caused by a logic error (such equating dollars to cents).

For which it is best to spread tolerance and love!

Random Internet Person In First of all in England we call it maths and not math, second of all you missed an uppercase letter.

15october91 I don't doubt that you are good at maths but I can give you endless combinations of square numbers (with digits after the comma) of which the sum is either 16, 25, 36 or 49. The point of this question is that they have to be ''natural numbers'' with no digits after the comma, but I reject this question as it is very vulnerable for interpretation

Fletchlie you feel every emotion from the brain🤦♂

Random Internet Person Well, math is short for mathematics. He's not totally wrong lol.

How did he not know the triplets (3,4,5)?

15october91 I made it to geometry and I still didnt know the answer.

Hearts don't normally sink with frustration. Sadness, yeah. Loneliness, well OK. But frustration? I don't feel it. Frustration is a brain thing.<br>Your brain sank 👍

Hearts don't normally sink with frustration. Sadness, yeah. Loneliness, well OK. But frustration? I don't feel it. Frustration is a brain thing.
Your brain sank 👍

lol i think your english could use some work...


i am amazed with the american education system


Well, the question didn't specify what type of number they are talking about. So every option can be the answer. eg:3^2 + √7^2 = 16. So they were not wrong after all. Everyone answered correctly.🤠

The question specified that the answer must be a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. A “square number” is a whole number whose square root is an integer. The square numbers up to 49 are:

0,  1,  4,  9,  16,  25,  36,  49

The only number from this set that is the sum of two smaller numbers in the set is 25, which equals 16 + 9.


I would have failed too I have no idea what the question is asking


My math teacher during freshman year showed this to my math class and I was the only one who got the question right. LITERALLY EVERYYONE ELSE IN THE CLASS chose answer A.

@medexamtoolsdotcom Perfect square is the same as square number. 5.76 is not a square number.

@K S What do you mean, "depending on which definition you use"? Is there any other definition?

A square number is (depending on which definition you use) the square of an integer.

But 16 is the sum of 5.76 and 10.24, both of which are square numbers. They're not perfect squares because they're not integers, but they ARE square numbers, having rational square roots. So in fact all 4 choices are correct. 12.96+23.04=36, and 17.64+31.36=49. The game show actually messed up asking this question. They should have said "perfect squares", not "square numbers".

Did anyone ask the people who got it wrong what their two square numbers were?

I think people just mixed up sum and product. Still inexcusable, but there is a reason for it.


The bad thing is not that he got it wrong, but that 50% of the audience chose 16, though 16 is such a SMALL digit, so it takes no time to cover all the squares before 16 since they are just 1,  4,  and 9. Hence 1 + 4 (that's not ), 1 + 9 (that's not it), and 4 + 9 (that's not it). Hence 16 CAN NOT be the correct answer. Doing this only takes a few seconds, with just three possible combinations 3!/2!(3-2)! or 6/2 =3  since order does not matter when adding the two digits. For 25, there are just 6 possible combinations  (24/4); hence  1 +4,  1+ 9, 1+'16,    4+9,   4 +16,  9+16. But if one remembers the Pythagorean triple 3, 4, and 5, then the above is unnecessary and needs to know 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2  or 9 + 16 =25 (Pythagorean Theorem).
70% of the audience got the problem wrong 1:18
So, I could understand if they chose the other wrong choices since they are bigger numbers and may want to go through the different possibilities.


Since there are no conditions specified, all answers are correct.

The specified conditions were that the answer had to be the sum of two smaller square numbers. A square number a.k.a. perfect square is a whole number whose square root is also a whole number.

The only possible correct choice given this condition is 25.


That's something towards a car. I don't know about that after taxes


I was expecting a challenge when i saw $15,000.  I don't mean to offend anyone here  but this is something everyone who completed middle school should know. In fact, it is 4th or 5th grade math. I have 2 high schoolers so i know this for sure. About a quarter of the audiences know 5th grade math, it is shocking. And we claim US is the most power country in the world.


They also gave him so much time to think, still couldn't pull a 5th grade math. Yeeks


English is not my first language, but I was really struggling with this even though I am a programmer and I studied pretty advanced math, lol. Anyway the reason I had a problem with this is because I thought the "two smaller square numbers" had to be the same numbers, which I believe doesn't have a solution as an integer (well except zero of course). But for an english native audience - yes they are probably stupid.

@Big Daddy No, they phrased it perfectly since you have to be specific in "square number" and "smaller". It´s basic English.

@Carson Lawler It basically asked "Which square number (among A,B,C,D) is the sum of two smaller square numbers?". Happens to be = is. This is a perfect mathematical description.

@Queta Arbuste yeah I know what you and the other user mean, It's just that my mind instantly thought the two smaller numbers had to be equal for some reason.

I've studied math for a while and still does. I'm french but also read books in english. To me there was no ambiguity at all in the question. In math when you say 'prove that every even number is the sum ot two primes' you didnt state the two primes has to be the same

A smaller would suggest it would be the sum of 2² and 3².

I would have honestly written "the sum of two <b>different</b> square numbers", as even though I'm not a native I understood the question, but I thought about summing the same squares for some reason.

I would have honestly written "the sum of two *different* square numbers", as even though I'm not a native I understood the question, but I thought about summing the same squares for some reason.

Indeed there are NO perfect squares that match the conditions you thought they were asking for, because that would require the square root of 2 to be a rational number. See if a number is a perfect square, it is of the form x=n^2 for some integer n. But if y=2*n^2 is also to be a perfect square, then y=m^2 for some integer m, and the result would be that m/n would equal the square root of 2, making the square root of 2 rational.

How would other people write this question? It might be confusing but it's the most precise way to ask the question. It's a mathematical way of describing the result they want

By the way, twice a square is never going to be a square because it has an odd number of 2's in the prime decomposition

I was confused af too. Knowing it meant different ones I instantly though 16 and 9 to make 25. I would like to say a stupid person wrote this however it seems logical that they purposely wrote it that way to make it less likely for the contestant to be correct

As a native English speaker I think the question was correctly written. I can understand someone having trouble processing it especially if not a native speaker, but as it's written it's perfectly clear and leads to the one correct answer.

If you're a programmer you should have figured it out knowing that there's one and ONLY one correct answer. You made the assumption these smaller numbers are the same, it's not that hard to check all even answers and instantly see that this assumption is wrong, hence these smaller numbers are different which leads to only one correct answer - 25.

Why would you think they had to be the same number?  The question doesn't even suggest that.

No it was phrased oddly even for a native English speaker.
Ot even to me a second to figure out what the question was asking.
And for a kid with $16,000 on the line and millions watching, the pressure would have forced all math out the window.


Well it can be anything as the numbers aren't defined to be integers, rational ,irrational, or non real

Square numbers are derived by squaring an integer. Therefore, square numbers are whole numbers.


I bet that 90% of people here that have even a college degree in math related things guessed it wrong, at least without reading the question 5 times or really thinking about it. It is just a typical trick question that should be extremely easy to answer but somehow confuses the majority of the people.

Don't be mad if you gussed it wrong and you other people stop circle jerking how you got it right.


Omg i was thinking about it like 2 times 2 is 4 and 4 times 4 is 16... it's not that I don't know math it's that the question was just a tad bit confusing


I'm amazed even 22% of the audience got it. Math is absolute Greek to the vast majority of people..

Math is Greek to you as well, every time you start studying a new math concept. Nobody thinks that math is a piece of cake the entire time - everyone struggles with it at various points.


Shit, I missed the word "sum" there and made the same mistake as the audience.

Cristi Neagu What I first thought it was asking, as I think the audience did, is "which of these numbers is the square of a smaller square". Which would be 16 as it's 4 squared, which in turn is 2 squared.

I messed it up even more and was thinking which answer can be made from adding two square roots together somehow hahaha

Just looked again at the question, and it seems so obvious it's asking which of those numbers is made from two other squared numbers, but it's not how I first read it.

69aussieguy Yeah, I made the same mistake at first.


The question was not entirely understood until the answer was given by Merrideth.  *The question could have been longer, to begin with for clarification.  4^2 + 3^2 = 16 + 9 = 25


It’s an English question. People don’t know what “also sum of these two square numbers” even means. 4, 9, 16, 25 are your only choices here of two squares to sum. So your choices of sums are 13, 20, 29, 25, 34, 29 and 25 is the only square sum.


I think they left some stuff out of the question   in order to solve it.


At first, none of these seemed to be the answer because I was thinking the "two smaller square numbers" had to be the same number. Not realizing they can be different really got me. It's worded pretty trickily.

@Space junk A square number (AKA a perfect square) is the product of an integer (whole number) multiplied by itself. if you are on about decimal numbers being square numbers, then they are technically the ratio of two square numbers.

@ImProBowlesyy HD <br>Is also does so specify it has to be perfect squares so any answer would be correct.

@ImProBowlesyy HD
Is also does so specify it has to be perfect squares so any answer would be correct.

When I see wording like "the sum of two smaller square numbers", nowhere did it state "the same square numbers", so I never thought it would be "the same" square numbers.

I mean, no where does it say they have to be the same


Bruh I have straight A’s in fucking engineering and I can’t do this 💀


I didn't realize the 2 smaller square numbers could be different, I thought they had to be the same, like 9 and 9 or 16 and 16.

Sgt Waffles 09 then the question would propably be worded differently to specify that you can only use the same twice


3 and4 aren't the squares though. If the question was, "which number is the sum of two smaller squares" the answer should have been 9 and 16. Those are squares. Perfect squares in fact. 3 and 4 are the square roots. Am I missing something here?


Alright, this is pretty easy. We'll tackle this via process of elimination. We know 16 is 4 squared. And numbers lower than 4 are 2 and 3 (Not counting 1 since 1 squared gives us 1). 2 squared + 3 squared = 4 + 9, which is not 16. Hence it cannot be Option A. 5 squared is 25. Numbers less than 5 are 4 and 3. 4 squared is 16 and 3 squared is 9, which gives us a sum of 25. And that is why it should be Option B.

Why even think<br>You just know it's 25 just by looking

Why even think
You just know it's 25 just by looking


They’re ALL sums of smaller square numbers, so he was right! 0 squared is 0, so 4^2 + 0^2 = 16. He should protest  :)

Also…I have no idea why this popped up in my feed 14 years after it was uploaded.

A square number is a whole number whose square root is also a whole number. The question asks for a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers.

True, 0 + 16 is 16, but 16 cannot be smaller than itself.

The only correct choice is 25.


Did the audience not even think about it?


stlkngyomom I'm thinking more along the lines of people that seek to win money, rather than earn it.

This is less of a reflection on the US as a whole and more of a reflection on those that watch this show.


Really just draw a line with 2,3,4,5 above the line, and their squares just underneath them below the line- 4,9,16,25. Only one combination of sums is listed as a choice. This is how people who are geniuses at math do so. They visualize the equations.


( oh god im gonna look like a fool but ) wouldn't technically all of them be correct answers because you just take the normal square + 0^2 ( so for example: 5^2+0^2 =25 and so on )?

Note the "smaller" in the question. This excludes answers of the 0^2+x^2=x^2 kind.


Me: What is square number?<br>Pov: non english native...

Me: What is square number?
Pov: non english native...


Beautiful, it's a 345 triangle. A²+b²=c²


When he was asked to think patiently we can tell all he was thinking is “I dont know math”


I hope this guy does not claim to have a high school diploma (let alone a college degree). A 12 year old should be able to answer this question. Let's put it down to nerves


This was definitely a "two coins add up to 15 cents, one of them is not a nickel" situation for me. I thought it would have to be the sum of identical square numbers and was completely tied in knots. Not a very well-worded question tbh. If the showrunners had spent some more time on their grammar skills, he'd likely have had a much better shot at the 15k (ironically enough).

@mambda If you have forgotten what "square number" means, then this question will be confusing even for people who are excellent at math.

Question is well worded and mathematically precise.


Note to self. Never ask the audience when you live in America.


This question can be interpreted in so many different ways

@mambda nvm I didn’t see the two smaller SQUARE numbers part.

@mambda which of these square numbers are  also the sum of two smaller numbers. I’m sorry but it literally just said which of these numbers are the sum of two smaller numbers. They are all numbers that result from a square and can be found from the sum of two smaller numbers. 16 is a square number that can be found when you sum 3 and 14 together.

How? Name a single other way that doesn't result in 25.


he never even seemed to try to work out the answer…..


understanding the question is half the answer.

ya, he clearly didn't know what a squared number is.  There was no math going on in his head, just "WTF is this?"


The square root of 16 is four. The square root of four is two. Therefore, the square root of 16 has also compromise of two lesser squares.

It’s asking for a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. You are simply taking the square root of the square root, which has nothing to do with addition.


You don’t even need the Pythagorean theorem for this one. Let’s take 16 as an example. In your head, you list out all the square numbers that are smaller than 16. In this case, we have 4 and 9, but they don’t add up to 16, so we move on to 25. We’ve got 4, 9 and 16, and obviously 16+9=25.


nah thats actually a hard question i dont blame the guy


I found out the answer but it took like 3-5 minutes just because the wording of the question. If they said perfectly square numbers I think I could have figured it out in a minute or less.

@mambda you should probably go back to whatever shit area your from that doesn't speak English and stop trying to sound smart on a youtube comment section.

@Isazi Sempi They didn't say "squared numbers" but "square numbers". I'm not a native speaker myself and with a handful of braincells left you should be able to deduce that they probably don't mean 1^2 + sqrt(15)^2 but the sum of two perfect squares.
Also in the english language squared number and perfect square do mean the same thing in this context. Assuming the contestant and the majority of the audience are native english speakers this is completely irrelevant.
So even

@mambda precisely and where I'm from people tend to say perfectly square not squared numbers. Because any number can be squared, like the square root of two.

It's not about the math but about the phrasing, incase you haven't noticed that people speak differently all around the world and have different notation and phrasing to match even within the same math department.

A square number and perfect square are the same thing.


tbf it took me a full few minutes to realize the answer lol


The best way to understand this is just listing square numbers. 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49, and on...

The only two numbers that add up to one of those answers is 25. 9 + 16.

Ahhh I thought that you could only use the numbers that were shown. I almost got just was adding the wrong numbers

Or you can remember your geometry and the most common triangle in school. <br>Pythagoras theorem

Or you can remember your geometry and the most common triangle in school.
Pythagoras theorem

that's why the audience should have gotten it, but likely didn't, because they're only given 3 seconds to answer.

I bet they dont even know what a square number is.

ajneufeld762 have you ever heard of the phytagoras theorem?3,4,5 is theost basic one...

nathan perez Ya fuckhead did you just say sum? Any number times itself is a square number.

+Austin McGregor now that rings a bell but I'm gonna need more bells to do it that way

Jesus I kept thinking the two smaller numbers had to be the same fuck. me.

That's actually not the best way especially on the hot seat. The best way to do it is to remember pythagorean triples and see which number could be the hypotenuse of a right triangle with integral side lengths

The numbers which form such pairs are called Pythagorean triplets.

Dr. Sea
No but they won't any longer be smaller than then the sum

You're wrong

Dr. Sea 0 isn't square because you can multiply it with anything and it'll be 0.

I just immediately thought of pythagoras, 3^2+4^2=5^2 is the classic example.
I then checked if either of the others were possible just to be sure. I did that by substracting some square and then seeing if that is another square (eg 49-25=24=/ a sq, 49-16=33=/ a sq).
After about 20 seconds I was so sure it was 25 I'd bet my life on it.

Dr. Sea <br>That is NOT true because the question asked for the sum of squares of two SMALLER numbers.

Dr. Sea
That is NOT true because the question asked for the sum of squares of two SMALLER numbers.

Yeah that's how I did it in my head before watching the video.  Pretty basic stuff.

Actually, all you need to do is use Pythogoras' Theorem. You don't even need to use it to solve it, since the Pythagorean triplet 3 4 5 is quite well-known.

ajneufeld762 oh so you graduated first grade 😁

ajneufeld762  Initially, my mind went straight to 16 as well, for some reason.  As soon as I did the math though, I immediately changed to 25.  It's weird

The best way is to feel it. No calculation needed. No suggested answers required.

ajneufeld762 for this he must know what a square number is.

I took Algebra in high school and <b>I</b> didn't know that!

I took Algebra in high school and *I* didn't know that!

Ghost Mutt Like 2x2 = 4 and 3x3 = 9 and 4x4 = 16 and so on.

There are plenty of pythagorean triple:
3-4-5 and All its multiples (6-8-10, 9-12-15, ecc..)
5-12-13 and All its multiples (10-24-26, 15-36-39, ecc..)
8-15-17 and All its multiples (16-30-34, ecc...)
7-24-25 and its multiples...

And so on

Not the only two numbers. There r other numbers such as 25+144=169 (5^2 + 12^2 = 13^2)

You can square any number. Not just 1,4,etc. What makes it a "squared" number.

ajneufeld762 Every number is a square number yk?

But it said SMALLER square numbers, so 16 being an option to choose from makes me think u cant use 16

I got the right answer B in like 30 seconds I happened to Minor in MATH  in college though

That's all true, but if you are under hot lights with lots of money on the line, you may not think of that.

Dr. Sea nope read the question again
It says sum of 2 smaller square numbers
So if u say 4^2 + 0^2=16
4^2=16 it is not smaller

ajneufeld762 it should say positive square numbers because you can include 0^2=0


Videos like this make me think Socrates was right when he said the population wasn't smart enough to make democracy work.


It's not his fault. He made the objectively best choice for someone that doesn't know the answer. The stupid audience is at fault


nah this is a hard question when under pressure


Math is not about memorizing answers, it's about drawing lines from one concept to another and learning how logic works.

The required knowledge of concepts is this:
All of those numbers are square numbers. Square numbers are numbers resulting from other numbers multiplied by itself.

The question then asks :
Which of these numbers can be resulted by adding together two numbers, each of which can be a product of numbers multiplied by themselves?

If you can't hold onto these thoughts for long enough to answer the question, it is because you are stupid - not because math is useless.

Was it impossible for you to formulate your comment without sounding like a jerk?<br>Or are you one of those people who are always like "I say whatever the hell I want"?

Was it impossible for you to formulate your comment without sounding like a jerk?
Or are you one of those people who are always like "I say whatever the hell I want"?


Wake Forest Mathematics department represent ✊


Regardless of his math skills, remember that he is under a bunch of pressure.

Yes but he has as much time as he needs. He could have done some quick maths....


Which of the sqaure numbers, sqaure is the sum of two smaller sqaure numbers?


I thought the question was asking which square number is the square of a square number as I'm sure most of the audience was thinking the same. They're not wrong √16=4 √4=2 and 2+2=2^2=4
4^2=16.
Were they asking which square number is the sum of two "different" square numbers should have put emphasis on different numbers.  9+16 or 3^2+4^2=5^2 it's the damn Pythagorean theorem 🤔🔥⭕

@LaughingStock55  the point I was making is that 16 is 4 squared or 2 squared times 2 squared<br>Meaning it's just as correct an answer as 25 being the sum of 4 squared plus 3 squared correct? Oh dude whoosh. I just realized that I was multiplying instead of adding. 🌴💀👌🏻

@LaughingStock55  the point I was making is that 16 is 4 squared or 2 squared times 2 squared
Meaning it's just as correct an answer as 25 being the sum of 4 squared plus 3 squared correct? Oh dude whoosh. I just realized that I was multiplying instead of adding. 🌴💀👌🏻

A "square number" is derived by squaring an integer. Therefore, the square numbers up to 49 are:

0,  1,  4,  9,  16,  25,  36,  49

The question asks for a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. Looking at this set, the only number in the set that is the sum of two smaller numbers in the set is 25, which equals 16 + 9.


19% of the audience can work with surds at least


3^2 + 4^2 =5^2 is mathematically the simplest pythagorean triple (set of numbers that satisfy the question's condition), and if I remember correctly, it's commonly taught in north America to students between ages 10-13 lmfao.

In short, this man (and most of the audience) literally cannot do middle school math (and American middle school at that lmao)


They didn’t specify it had to be squared integers, so technically all of them are correct.

Square numbers by definition are the square of an integer.


this is a vocabulary question. If you understand the word "sum" (adding) and the word "squares" (like the first six squares: 4,9,16,25,36,49)

you just look at the first 6 squares in your head and see which TWO of the SIX add up to one of the choices.  Therefore, NOT A.....NOT B.....Yes C.   Done.

With right vocab, you get the answer in about 4 seconds.


This is really shameful for the US.  I would bet the same kid and the audience could answer any question about the Kardashians correctly.


I would have chosen A just in order to see what the girl would say when you explained that 16=4^2 + 0^2  perfectly answers the question as asked.

@mambdaAgreed!  Btw, she did not even mention that the numbers are integers ;-)

Note the "smaller" in the question. This excludes the 0^2 + n^2 = n^2 option.


Answer was 25 cuz 16+9=25. Figured it out in like 2 secs. He was under a lot of anxiety and pressure so maybe he was too nervous to think it through.


Sometimes hosts drop hints whether the answer is right or wrong... She literally told him that he still has lifelines and should probably consider using

The host doesn't know the answer. Well, unless it's obvious to them like in this case. Still though, the answer is revealed after they've locked it in for both of them.


isnt this correct for all options? x^2+0^2=x^2

The answer must be a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. Because a number cannot be smaller than itself, the answer cannot be the sum of itself and 0.


All around the world we watch shows where someone is asking random Americans questions about basic knowledge because their answers are enormously stupid.


It's not a math problem; it's a grammar/logic problem. Your knee-jerk reaction is to add the same factors that make the square, but that doesn't work. It's hard to suss when you're under pressure. That's why they asked it.


His math teacher be squeezing her stress ball down to atoms right now


Just go through the squares, starting with 1 in your head.
1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49.
Now just see, if a pair of those numbers, adds up to one of the answers. 9+16 = 25

So, the squares of 3 (9) and 4 (16) added up, equal 25, which is answer B.

I feel bad for the guy, trusting the audience on this one.


To be fair, I’ve taken every level of math offered at my school for engineering students (which is all of them except a few proof classes) and at first I thought it was 16 because I didn’t fully understand the question, my brain jumped immediately to the square roots of each, then knowing 4^2 is 16 and 2^2 is 4 I was like “oh this is easy”, which is what I imagine the crowd did too. But reading the question again I realized it was the “sum” of two squares which is much harder than just a product of two squares. Although, this question is sort of a Pythagorean triples problem, and a 3, 4, 5 forms a Pythagorean triple, so I already knew 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2, so 25 is the correct answer. This isn’t necessarily “not knowing math”, it’s “not reading the question carefully enough”.

@Kade Nielsen lol you dweeb. You wrote one comment, then deleted it, then wrote an even more moronic comment.

You clearly do spend more time on a YouTube video than you let on - the need to reply to every criticism is a clear indication of the low sense of self worth you have.

Just move on with your life man. People will never stop harassing you about your original comment until you decide to delete it.

Move on man.

@Kade Nielsen lol you dweeb. You wrote one comment, then deleted it, then wrote an even more moronic comment.

You clearly *do* spend more time on a YouTube video than you let on - the need to reply to every criticism is a clear indication of the low sense of self worth you have.

Just move on with your life man. People will never stop harassing you about your original comment until you decide to delete it.

Move on man.

@Kaiser Wilhelm  idk man, I just cited my own peer-reviewed published journal paper from my research in an academic assignment. Doing pretty well, plus I’m in aerospace engineering so I think the US has the unique ability to speak about education in that field (touch the moon, loser)

@prtnrs any sum of two squares forms a valid set of triangle side lengths (as per the Pythagorean theorem) but I guess if it’s an integer then it is a Pythagorean triple lmao, it is not a coincidence. Math is interconnected, like how ANY time you find pi in an equation you can find a circle somewhere in the derivation.

Maybe it'd help your engineering level brain to not jump to conclusions before comprehending the entirety of the question.

@King Kweku You are precisely pointing out the worst aspect of the American school system and somehow called it a positive. It's not a good thing if education is only reduced to the purpose of creating the most efficient workers in the shortest possible time space. The fact that a politician like Donald Trump can win elections in the USA using the most obvious lies to the point where some people even drank desinfection liquid on his advice is a very powerful example for how heavily they are lacking a school system that provides some general knowledge and teaches critical thinking. A good education system has to teach mental skills beyond what is going to be required for work otherwise the population will increasingly not know anything that isn't functional, but yet meaningful.

@Kaiser Wilhelm  not really...I studied in Africa, Europe, the carribean and finally in NY trying to get my Nursing Degree...it actualy depends on the material been taught and the American system of education ...I realised that it's Harder to pass in those other countries but a bit easier to get through the educational system in America...not a substantial difference but it's just a different approach to teaching and learning with its flexibility in some courses...though we also  have lots of tests, quizes, assignments, research, surveys, etc every now and then, just to prepare you for the real world in your carrear goals. So we all have to constantly keep up with the study material constantly through out the entire course as different chapters unfold...other countries may pack up everything you need to know at a early stage with lots of theoretical studies and less practical knowledge, you know alot but how do you apply it in the real world??..All educational systems have their ups and downs and it all depends on the courses one is pursuing,  but I can definitely say that the North American system though may be easier in (Canada and USA) compared to other countries, but they also have a very practical carrear driven approach to education.

@King Kweku I'll concede that this might not be correlated to American schools, but you can't deny that the American school system is bad

@Kaiser Wilhelm  this has nothing to do with American schools...it's all about understanding the question and using the right concepts...I checked it out again and realised the answer is 25...because none of the multiple choice equals to the SUM of 2 small squares, but only 25 does.....and that's why I deleted my previous comment...and this has absolutely nothing to do with schooling in America or elsewhere...it's about reading the question carefully and understanding the math language so  you can apply the right concept or formula to find the right solutions...the square of a number could either be explained as the square root of that number example is (square of 9 is 3, 16 is 4, etc..) or that number squared example is (3)^2 is 9 and (4)^2 is 16, etc...<br>the question should have been more precise in the math language used...they should have used "SQUARED" but not "square"

@Kaiser Wilhelm  this has nothing to do with American schools...it's all about understanding the question and using the right concepts...I checked it out again and realised the answer is 25...because none of the multiple choice equals to the SUM of 2 small squares, but only 25 does.....and that's why I deleted my previous comment...and this has absolutely nothing to do with schooling in America or elsewhere...it's about reading the question carefully and understanding the math language so  you can apply the right concept or formula to find the right solutions...the square of a number could either be explained as the square root of that number example is (square of 9 is 3, 16 is 4, etc..) or that number squared example is (3)^2 is 9 and (4)^2 is 16, etc...
the question should have been more precise in the math language used...they should have used "SQUARED" but not "square"

@King Kweku Clearly the American school and college system is quite a failure to behold. Square numbers are unambiguously defined as numbers that are themselves equal to the square of a positive integer number. If you are talking about the sum of two square numbers, that means you take the sum of two numbers that each follow the given criterion. This is the "sum of two square numbers", that weird thing you described is just the square of a sum and is worthless for this consideration.

@King Kweku Then you misunderstood the question. If you claim 16 is correct, then there are only 1,3,9 that are smaller square numbers. You cannot add those to get 16.

The next option is 25. Then there are 1, 2, 9, 16 that are smaller square numbers. 9 + 16 = 25. Those are the smaller square numbers.

@King Kweku It specifies which of the answers (16, 25, 36 or 49) is the sum of two squares. Not "The square root of these answers is the sum of another square number"

That answer doesnt make any sense at all..I had "A" in both college Algebra 1 & 2 and Calculus...the answer is to that question is "A" = 16...not 25..<br>The square root of 16 is 4 which also a sum of 2 small square roots of 4 each.. so it becomes the sum of  square root of 4 each which is 2 +2 =4

That answer doesnt make any sense at all..I had "A" in both college Algebra 1 & 2 and Calculus...the answer is to that question is "A" = 16...not 25..
The square root of 16 is 4 which also a sum of 2 small square roots of 4 each.. so it becomes the sum of  square root of 4 each which is 2 +2 =4

also...the question wasnt a trick nor difficult to understand..and it should only take 5 minutes to go through the squares smaller than 49 (which narrows it down a shite ton) that add up to anything in the choices....its really bad that he or he audience couldnt figure it out...other countries will def laugh at US, (you and me both) if they ever see this vid..we should delete it LOL

Guy, the pythagoream triple is just a coincidence...the question was asking for the SUM of TWO squares...

True I'm in a uni career too and I had to trial and error all of the possible sum combinations


I guessed every number except 25. I don't know what a square number is. I think I learned what that is a long time ago but I don't remember.

It’s a number multiplied by itself, like 3*3=9. It comes from a square having sides of equal length.


They had not mentioned about integer no. Therefore all answers are correct
3^2+√7^2=16
Similirly all others.

A square number is a whole number whose square root is an integer. The square numbers up to 49 are:

0,  1,  4,  9,  16,  25,  36,  49

The only number from this set that is the sum of two smaller square numbers is 25.


@JereJK That's all right. I just figure sighs or groans won't bring back the money he lost. "Good job, at least you tried."

@OneWeirdDude Now that rewatched the whole thing, I now see the audience clapping after he just lost $15k. Not even a sigh or anything. They started clapping. That’s all I have to say.

@JereJK What can I say, it's not like his life was on the line, or like he was donating to charity, or something. Perhaps if the audience was offered $5 each for a right answer or something?

@OneWeirdDude Well that’s a theory. But no excuse for screwing him over.

@JereJK I dunno. Too excited to abstain from the vote?

@OneWeirdDude I understand the difficulty of the question, as I just saw it before making my comment. I was referring to the audience, who answered the question that they weren’t 100% sure about. They made his chances even worse by giving unnecessary input. Why help someone if you are unsure about it yourself?

They weren't trolling him. The question takes more thought than to regurgitate something you heard in class, or on the radio, or saw on TV, a million times.

The audience was trolling him? They wan’t to lose money?


Answer is B 25. We can solve it by Pythagoras Theorem. 3² (9) + 4² (16)= 5²(25)


Technically, couldn't it also be 16 because 4^2+0^2=16+0=16?

No, because 16 is not a smaller square number<br>Read the question again, I also got confused

No, because 16 is not a smaller square number
Read the question again, I also got confused


It's the most easy Pythagoras triplet...
3^2 +4^2=5^2..
I wish  there should be Asians audience


it appears that room was full of people who don't know the most classic example of the Pythagorean theorem...


U can also say √26² + √23²= 49 so logically all answers are correct

Neither of those are square numbers.

A square number is derived by squaring an integer. Therefore, the square numbers up to 49 are:

0,  1,  4,  9,  16,  25,  36,  49

The only number from this set that is the sum of two smaller numbers in the set is 25, which is 16 + 9.


The old 3, 4, 5 right triangle can tell you the answer.


This was a tough one. It took me a full minute to think it through. Once I remembered that 1, 4 and 5 are square numbers, and 2 and 3 are not, that made it easier. I think the term "square" may be throwing some people off, because they're thinking of the written shape of the numbers.

If people are thinking about the shape of numbers then they will never get any math problem correct!


Audience: gives the wrong ans<br>Also audience after realising that he lost because of them: "let's give him a big round of applause"

Audience: gives the wrong ans
Also audience after realising that he lost because of them: "let's give him a big round of applause"


Well it didn't say squares of Natural Numbers. So if we take 0 into consideration, all of them are correct.

A square number is a whole number whose square root is also a whole number. “Square” number is different than “squared” number.

Also, the solution is a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. Yes, 0 + 16 equals 16, but 16 is not smaller than itself.

The only correct answer is 25 = 16 + 9


25 is 5 squared, 9 is 3 squared, and 16 is 4 squared. 9 plus 16 is 25


Took me a bit of time after pausing i<br>t, but after I figured it was 25 it seemed pretty obvious.

Took me a bit of time after pausing i
t, but after I figured it was 25 it seemed pretty obvious.


Isn't 0^2 also a square? Thus making all answers possible

The answer must be a square number that is the sum of two SMALLER square numbers. Therefore, the answer can't be the sum of 0 and itself because a number cannot be smaller than itself.


Pretty simple if you know the first few squares by heart.  1x1=1, 2x2=4, 3x3=9, 4x4=16.  Adding the last two (9+16=25) and Bingo, we have a winner.  Do it in your head in 30 seconds.  If the MC would just stfu for 30 seconds and let him concentrate...


Super simple if you know Pythagorean Triples.

3, 4, 5 is 9, 16, 25 (squares).

B


The audiance would actually do better if they all typed randomly


@LaughingStock55 Right, I overlooked the smaller part :)

The solution must be a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers.

While 16 + 0 does equal 16, the number 16 cannot be smaller than itself.

The only correct answer is 25, which is the sum of 16 and 9.


What did she mean around 1:27 that they both agree the number isn’t right? I know she’s talking about the two graphs but what number isn’t right?


For those wondering: When added all together, the Harry Potter books contain 1,084,170 words.

Thank you, this information is invaluable

And that can't be a perfect square, since all perfect squares ending in 0 must end with at least two of them

One day that will a £1,000,000 question on WWTBAM.

I was wondering and couldn’t sleep at night. Thanks for clearing it up!


This is a maths question, you are bound to figure it out,  by brute force at worst, since you're not limited by time.<br>This makes him objectively stupid.

This is a maths question, you are bound to figure it out,  by brute force at worst, since you're not limited by time.
This makes him objectively stupid.


The two smaller squares are:

3 x 3 = 9

4 x 4 = 16

The sum of 9 and 16 is 25


Ok I was confused when the answer came up and realised if the question said “the sum of 1 smaller square number” it would be correct, I think so anyway


Why wouldn't a 0 + 36 = 36 (both 0 and 36 are square numbers) be correct? The same applies to all the numbers given.

Because 36 isn't smaller than 36. The question specifically asks for two "smaller" squares.


Everyone out here talking about pythagorean theorem and all that, and maybe my way is just a more intuitive rather than theory-based approach... shouldn't you just start squaring all the lower numbers (just 1-6 would be fine) and then see if any two of the products add up to any of the four answers? 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36. 9 and 16 should jump out right away, easy math. This literally took me one second to solve.


Lesson learned: Don't trust audience poll if you are not in India

Stop this smug "in India people ace math" crap.


So many different possible ways to work this out. I realized that I chose a really long way, I wrote down all square numbers 1-49 and checked whether adding two together would give me the correct answer. I noticed 16 and 9 added them together and I was granted 25.

Take m,n positive integers with m>n. Then the infinite set of Pythagorean Triples (a,b,c) satisfying
a^2 + b^2 = c^2 is given by the generator formula: k(m^2 - n^2, 2mn, m^2 + n^2), for any k positive integer.

Proof:
 (k(m^2 - n^2))^2 + (2kmn)^2 = k^2(m^4 - 2m^2n^2 + n^4 + 4m^2n^2)

= k^2(m^2 + 2m^2n^2 + n^4) = (k(m^2 + n^2))^2

The condition m>n>0 ensures that a,b,c>0 (obvious).

m = 2 and n = 1 gives the basic Pythogarean Triple (3,4,5) in the primitive case k = 1. k simply means that any scalar multiple of a Triple is also a Triple.

@JustinMplayz it's just about practice, I know, it may sound like a long way to solve a problem but just consider he's not used to solve these kind of problems in his daily life, so it's totally understandable that he choose that way

e^πi=-1 y quien diga lo contrario es fan de kunno

@RBT-000 most people are less logical when it comes to Math than you think

You don’t even need to think much. The greatest choice is 49, and since we want the sum, then you only have perfect squares 1,4,9,16,25,36 to consider. Why even consider something greater than or equal to 49?

Well he can’t write things down up there.

I took an even longer approach. I went to school and spent the first 18yrs of my life learning amongst other things basic mathematics. I finally managed to solve this puzzle.

oh yikes 😭 it's okay, choosing different ways to solve a problem is always a good exercise for ur brain

That's the easiest! Also, if you remember pythagoras' theorum and the 345 triangle, that gives you the answer as 3 squared + 4 squared = 5 squared ie. 9 + 16 = 25!


Omg I misread the question and thought I had to find TWO answers. I don't know why because that doesn't fit with the format of the show


To all who may read this comment let me simplify why the question was perfectly fine, and why many comments in this comment section are wrong.
One: A "square number" refers to a perfect square, that is, a number that is the product of an integer squared. No, you would not be able to use square root 5 in an answer
Two: To those of you saying "0^2 + 4^2 = 16", the question specified the two numbers had to be smaller.

Ah no, you're fine. I thought you were someone who didn't know what was going on but acting smug. Sorry

I hope I didn't misinterpret any information. <br>(Basically, I'm not English)

I hope I didn't misinterpret any information.
(Basically, I'm not English)

Julian VH: Precisely, I went in the direction of Cheeze pizza and I showed that even admitting the irrational (whose zero) the result remained 25 (because -4 and -3 are smaller than 0 and 4:)). So even if the question was asked incorrectly, it did not change the result.

@M. Hélazior That doesn't disprove anything though. If anything it further proves the answer.

Cheeze Pizza square root 5 is irrational

Cheeze Pizza:
With the 2 smallest numbers (real number): -4 and -3, the result remains 25.
 (-4)^2 + (-3)^2 = 16+9 = 25

matthew stein omg are you stupid? Look at Muhammad’s comment for explanation

matthew stein 0^2 is zero not one.... 2^0 IS one

Cheeze Pizza hang on, it'something you know from grade 7 or 8 i belive, it' awkard that none of this people was able to give an answer...


I’m stuck between c and b ima say c tho imagine it’s all 😂😂AYO IT WAS B I feel like the audience did that in purpose.


I thought it was 16 at first as well because I misunderstood the question. I thought it meant like, if you square a number and then you square it again you get one of the answers, in which case it would be 16 (2>4>16)....Yeah, I did realize I read it wrong like 5 seconds later but if I was in the audience I may have given him the wrong hint entirely by accident

3*3+4*4=25 why don't Indian question paper never have such question they give complex


Didn't even get the question to be honest


Me:What will I do with math in the future.
Teacher: it's useful.
Me:like in wot?
What Teacher thinks will happen if I don't learn:


Shows the US Education system so we'll... A few learned Pythagoras where the most weren't even paying attention.


This question is NOT poorly worded in any way whatsoever. The fact that the word "SUM" is there clearly shows that the  question is talking about how the 2 smaller square numbers are ADDED and not multiplied. Just because people "tend to think this way" when the question is first heard does not mean it is poorly worded. After all, this contestant (and anyone with a middle school education) CLEARLY had enough time to test out all of the answers. Also, this question was worth $15,000, probably a sign that one should THINK before answering. These people were simply too quick to come up with an answer without thinking critically. That does not mean that the question was worded poorly. It means that they were dumb.

This question is *NOT* poorly worded in any way whatsoever. The fact that the word *"SUM"* is there clearly shows that the  question is talking about how the 2 smaller square numbers are *ADDED* and not multiplied. Just because people "tend to think this way" when the question is first heard does not mean it is poorly worded. After all, this contestant (and anyone with a middle school education) *CLEARLY* had enough time to test out all of the answers. Also, this question was worth $15,000, probably a sign that one should *THINK* before answering. These people were simply too quick to come up with an answer without thinking critically. That does not mean that the question was worded poorly. It means that they were dumb.

K.C. Took me longer to understand the question than solving it lol

This question is absolutely worded incorrectly in that the word “square” is used interchangeably as to mean perfect square number like 4 16 25 36 and also a squared number like 4^2 3^2. The question should read Which of these square numbers (or even more clear perfect square but square is acceptable) also happens to be the sum of two smaller squared numbers.

You do realize underwriters <b>DON'T</b> want people to win, right? That's why simple answers in Jeopardy do their best to throw off contestants.

You do realize underwriters *DON'T* want people to win, right? That's why simple answers in Jeopardy do their best to throw off contestants.

The question is indeed poorly worded. You're an idiot.

CSpan1993 True, I was almost 100 percent certain it was 16 due to the wording.

English isnt my first language thank you verry much

I must agree with you on that bit about coming up with an answer too quickly.  I do it sometimes myself and the reasons why I do it are because maybe I don't want to spend too much time overthinking the problem that I'll get tired and bored and would want to do something else; something which I don't have to think as much but can still do it with no problems whatsoever.  I heard that one uses 10% of their brains and I think that the reason this is so is because if we used anymore, it might result in headaches, migraines, it might damage our health and 10% just seems like the safety point before all of that happens.  Another reason could be silly pride, in that I'm trying to show off and prove something not only to myself, but to the people watching or reading this comment.  Another reason could be that I just decided to give my brain a break and let somebody else do the thinking while I do the watching; take the load off, you know? And when the pressure's on me, I try very hard to honestly answer the question, but not everything is coming to me as quickly as I would like and I'm just going with what I have and hope it's enough.  Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't.  If I think of any other reasons, I'll be sure to let you know.

Tycho van Ravensteijn it's called a product you uneducated fool

If 'Sum' reffers to numbers that have been added up,<br>How would you call the outcome of a multiplication? Isnt that also called the sum?

If 'Sum' reffers to numbers that have been added up,
How would you call the outcome of a multiplication? Isnt that also called the sum?

English is not my first language and even I understood the question and got b.25 as the correct answer... the question is clear to me

But any number can fit that criteria: 16 is root of 10 squared + root of 6 squared
36 is 4 squared + root of 20 squared
Technically should have said rational numbers but considering that would make all the awnsers right this is just fine

Although, if you did want multiplication, you could go with 16 if you prefer them the same ((2^2)^2). If you prefer the numbers different, then go with 36 ((2^2)*(3*2)_

K.C. 9 + 16 is 25. Both of those smaller numbers are square. No need for multiplication.

if it said "any two other smaller square numbers" then I would agree with you. two mentions of square numbers in two different ways, this is why some small paragraphs are the worst to solve in some assignments cause it's easy to misinterpret

I've never heard "square numbers". One would be more familiar with "perfect square" or something similar.


If she had asked which was the PRODUCT of two smaller square numbers, 16 would be the correct answer.


I really read the question completely wrong. By another square I was looking at 4x4 and I noticed 4 is a perfect square as well. I did not think about Pythagorean Theorem at all. This is very embarrassing but good that I now realize I have to learn how to read the question.

noueis the pythagorean ttheorem is based off this concept which is what he was getting at, if you can solve this question you can solve any pythagorean question.

You don't even need to know the Pythagorean Theorem at all to answer this..... you just need to know what a square number is

I have been known to repeat many English class.


The problem was, that he didn't realize what he had been asked about)

Михаил Григорян


If your audience had been Korean, you would have got the answer B in a 100 percent.

First of all my skin colour is neither black nor brown. <br>2ndly stop arguing with Indians.We aren't ur ENEMIES.CHINA IS. China is selling phones and laptops full of spyware in your country. MOREOVER China is kicking your big asses in trade war. U can't easily spy on then coz they have banned Google, Facebook and WhatsApp in their country.

First of all my skin colour is neither black nor brown.
2ndly stop arguing with Indians.We aren't ur ENEMIES.CHINA IS. China is selling phones and laptops full of spyware in your country. MOREOVER China is kicking your big asses in trade war. U can't easily spy on then coz they have banned Google, Facebook and WhatsApp in their country.

Raman Ailawadhi Thank u please cum again

edit: 🙏🏿*

HipHop101Tv India exports software and Pakistan exports terrorists.Women are treated like bitches in Pakistan.So stfu.

If your audience had been everyone in this Comment section, you would have got the answer B in a 100 percent.

Haha thats partly true, if the audience were asians lol, not including the middle east tho!

Tavi Ariton No, not starving south korean teachers

[RS] HJfod  . Starving south Korean  ???

[RS] HJfod  . Starving south Korean  ???

Tavi Ariton Pretty sure you meant South Korean

Jose Flores . And for greater accuracy : not starving north Korean math teachers.

Jose Flores . And also , for more accuracy,  you should say : north Korean math teachers.

Jose Flores . To be more accurate : if the audience had been  Korean math teachers.


I thought (2^2+1^2)^2=25. But anyway my answer was 👍 true


Jeffrey Yang i dont know..but i was looking for this comment

ᴋʀɪsᴘʏ ᴋʀᴇᴀᴍ ᴋʀᴇᴡ What a party pooper you must be eh?


I don't even know what a square number is. English is not my first language so that might have something to do with it. But I have the feeling in my native language I would also have no idea. Math for me is more boring than just watching paint dry.

Square numbers are numbers that you get when you multiply a particular number by itself.
1x1 = 1
2x2 = 4
3x3 = 9
4x4 = 16
So square numbers are 1, 4, 9, 16, etc.

The question is asking which of the numbers given in the answers can be gotten by adding together 2 smaller square numbers. The answer is 25, because 9 and 16 are square numbers, and 9 +16 = 25.


Basically it mean right angle triangle of 3 4 5 side😂


Fortunately, democracy doesn't prevail in math


someone noticed that this video was posted 15 years , litreally when youtube started


2 plus 2 is 4, minus 1 that's 3 quick maths

I trap trap trap on the road, movin' dat corn flakes

Unknown Horse And then there's this. 3^2 is 9, 4^2 is 16, 9+16=25 slow maths.


As a 57 yr old, I'm embarrassed to say that I hated and failed at higher level mathematics. I did however excel in English. Therefore, I cannot solve an Einstein math theorem, but I can aid in explaining it in modern English.😭

ironically, the main difficulty in this question is in understanding the English description of what is being asked

@Alexis Get over yourself. This is Youtube, not 'Look at me, I'm a Harvard grad' website.' So I worded my reply incorrectly. Please forgive me.

I do not recommend putting a mathematical topic into words unless you know how to explain it extremely well, for that you must first understand it.

You can explain multi-dimensional calculus in modern English? I call bullshit.

it's fine, this is just high school algebra and not calculus. even I had to pause and think since I haven't done these problems in a while since high school.

@ShadowGuy no like i can't solve 88 x 2 quickly in my mind, i take time to solve it, that's how dumb i am, especially when i am 14 years old

Just to be clear, this question is not high level math.  Everybody who learned basic algebra has answered this question, which should mean anyone with a high school diploma

don't worry i can't even do basic mental math quickly that's how much of a disappointment i am


Hm. Math studies in this coutnry should definitely be improved…

Валентин Домбровский


I got the right answer.  You can send the money to my paypal account.

😀😀😀 BTW my bank account is always Ready to receive money.


No matter whatbanyone says that's a dam hard question


I'm guessing 16 let's see if I'm right...<br>Ok...

I'm guessing 16 let's see if I'm right...
Ok...


Watching this got me so pissed off. I was screaming B at my screen. A recent report went out, showing that 78% of adults have the maths skills of an year old...

The wording of the question made you think that it was A. When it says the sum of 2 smaller square numbers, it makes you think 2 and 2, because you can multiply and at the same 2 numbers to get the same answer, which is 4. Given the answer of 16, it makes you want to back track it. It it a very misleading question, and If the question was reworded a bit, he and probably the audience would've gotten it. If you replaced A with any other square number, the question might have been a little bit more obvious.

I THINK HE JUST MISHEARD THE QUESTION OR RELIED ON THE AUDIENCE BECAUSE SHE SAID SUM!

lazyweapons<br>No. You can't save yourself. It's too late. Your hypocrisy has doomed you.

lazyweapons
No. You can't save yourself. It's too late. Your hypocrisy has doomed you.

25 is also the sum of two smaller squares. those squares with the side lengths 3 and 4. producing the areas 16 and 9 which add to be 25. get it yet?

exactly a square has the same base and height. now what is the area of a square with a side length of 5? you get 25. therefore the number 25 is a square.

ALLYOUWANTREDHOTS Wait, what? 25 is not a shape. It is a number. While squares DO have the same width adn height, a square number is slightly different.<br>You square two integers and you add them to get one of the answers.

ALLYOUWANTREDHOTS Wait, what? 25 is not a shape. It is a number. While squares DO have the same width adn height, a square number is slightly different.
You square two integers and you add them to get one of the answers.

78% of adults don’t know anything about anything.

it's common sense a square has the same length base and height. all you gotta do is multiply! smh seriously no hope for americans. it's no wonder the world laughs at us..

woops! I typed it up on my phone. The mathematical literacy was that of a nine year old.

And you have the equivalent English skills "of an year old"... THE IRONY.

I understand. I find the mathematical literacy of many adults rather appalling. I also find the sheer ignorance that people have towards math, is disgusting. Loads of people can say the name Pi or quote a basic theorum (pythagoras ect) and act all high and mighty, but very few seem to be able to apply these, or know what they are used for.


bro i’m way younger than him and i knew this


Its insane that the audience vote when they isnt sure... 16 ouh haha? :O


I’m astonished how poorly the audience performed on that question. This has got me really doubting our education system.

Joel Roy That's stupid. If someone wants to drop out of school they should be able to. Their life is in their own hands. The only people that should be able to object are their parents. I

education system lmao.. just by knowing what square numbers are?

And this video is over 14 years old.  Still declining, and rapidly, by the generations imo.

What are you talking about, if I was in the audience, I would try to trick the contestant with the most plausible seeming wrong answer every time. That doesn't make me uneducated, that just makes me a dick.


I love how he pretends for one minute like he was thinking, when he clearly doesn't even know what a square number is :D


Would zombies even eat the stupid 50% audience's brains ?

A. No
B. Absolutely no
C. Definitely no
D. All of the above

Would zombies even eat the *stupid* 50% audience's _brains_ ?

*A. No*
*B. Absolutely no*
*C. Definitely no*
*D. All of the above*

Trick question.  Zombies don't care about brain quality.  You're thinking of ilithids.

I suppose I need a using of the option "audience's help"

That's not fair. 30% of them got it right.

Multiple choice answers only found on SATs

@R. A. and what is the answer for letter E?


How does half an audience not know first grade math

sneakyrabbits It's addition and multiplication...  We learned all the skills necessary to figure this question out by 6th grade.  A+B=C...
A/B= 1/4/9/16/25/36/49
C= 25/16/36/49

A or B can't be 1, not enough slope change. (16-1=15, not a square, ~3.9)
A or B can't be 2, not enough slope change. (16-4=12, not a square, ~3.5)
A can be 9 though. (16-9=7, not a square, ~2.6) (25-9=16, is a square)
As long as the smallest answer available - A/B > square of smallest answer - 1, the projected answer is not large enough.
Tada there is your answer, A and B are 9 and 16 and C is 25

I am not sure what they are teaching kids these days but my Math teachers never mentioned these oh so important pythagoras triples. Do you have any justification for why that should be common knowledge?  It seems like extraneous math trivia that serves no purpose.

Penny Lane why would they need to add up square numbers?

The fact that 3 4 5 is the lowest pythagoras triple should be a common knowledge

It's just a dumb question to ask the audience. Probably the vast majority of them didn't bother to start to try out adding square numbers in their heads until they were suddenly asked to provide the answer and then they had about three seconds. How is anyone surprised they didn't come up with the right answer?

Elementary school math is not standardized.  I can't really see much practical use for this kind of math, so I am not surprised it is not taught universally.<br>Also judging america based on the pool of the studio audience that goes to Who Wants to Be a Millionare post Regis era is just silly.  That would have been a skewed demographic even when that show was popular.

Elementary school math is not standardized.  I can't really see much practical use for this kind of math, so I am not surprised it is not taught universally.
Also judging america based on the pool of the studio audience that goes to Who Wants to Be a Millionare post Regis era is just silly.  That would have been a skewed demographic even when that show was popular.

firecloud77<br> you never answered me? why is that?

firecloud77
 you never answered me? why is that?

They did get a very short amount of time to answer,,,

It was a little confusing. Actually, only 30% of the people knew the correct answer...unless some guessed.

Helps...
1^2 = 1
2^2 = 4
3^2 = 9
4^2 = 16
5^2 = 25

and correction: only 22% of the audience chose the correct answer

american education system forces people to write haikus that they will never use within their life, but does not require elementary level math as portrayed by the level of math in most college entrance exams

If you asked the audience to guess the answer an average of 25% of the audience would get it right from pure luck, and one of the polls got 22%. Hahaha

No 1st grader ( 5-6yr olds ) ever learns square roots - ever
(unless they're math prodigies, in which case they're not even in 1st grader anyways).
The only operations 1st graders learn is addition and subtraction.
Epic fail on your part to suggest otherwise.

Being nervous in a game show is quite common, and especially for math, a clear mind is not meaningless.

People that cant stand the pressure will be quite unable to calculate under stress, its not for everyone.

Its exactly the kind of question people will get wrong much more likely in such a situation compared to sitting in front of your computer without any fear or risk involved, and zero stress.

Even great mathematicians get basic math wrong if they have to make a show out of it, which is clearly not the same as doing your job in a quite working place with no expectations.

So that and the question is misleading, reading it slighty wrong and you simply get it wrong as you didnt understand the question.

If you would write the actual question in math symbols, people would be WAY more likely to get it, so its not really a math problem, its understanding the text and translating it into math beforehand.

Can`t agree more!! This is just like a first grade math problem!! This kind of math already appeared much enough in math calculation of any math problem, but they just don`t know the answer!!

firecloud77
 Hello, thank you for taking the time to answer, i am going to ignore you unnececary hate towards me, i am not a native speaker and i was really tired, when i left the comment. :)

(read for a change? interesting assumptions that you make about me^^.)

1.there is some interesting research on this, and pretty clear numbers.
Google: "Fear of math can cause real pain"
Math is really unpopular for the broad masses, so the assumption less people take it if there is more choice is pretty logical right?

2.I f you are not able to understand what i am saying okay, but you probably just want to hate a little more against me :)
I just say there is a reason why teachers have such secure jobs, i don't say it shouldnt be reevaluated.

3. I asked a question you answered, where is the problem?

4. i added another side to the conversation, i just say there is a reason why the things are like that, if its a good enough reason to keep it like that is another discussion. You make it appear (i read it like that at least) as if its completely irrational to limit choice in education and have some job security for teachers.

Have a nice day, and i hope you don't the people you meet in real life like that :). because then you would come of as pretty arrogant, and making assumptions about someone you don't know at all. (sorry i had to write that :). )

bb

jonas samuel
>>>> More choice in educaton (sic) = less peple (sic) taking math classes. <<<<
Since when? How on earth did you come up with that false equation? And how did you manage to spell two words incorrectly in one sentence?

>>>> The other variable is, if enough people would work as a teacher, if they wouldn't have a secure job like that, <<<<
Huh? What in the world are you trying to say here? That sentence makes absolutely no sense.

>>>> so you want to fire over 70% of all Teachers in the USA to solve the problem? <<<<
Did I say that? NO, I didn't say that. But obviously that is one of the problems with public education. Teacher unions hold so much sway over politicians and administrators that it’s almost impossible to fire a bad teacher. In New York some teachers are paid not to work. Here, do some reading for a change: http://huff.to/1ppD6fj

>>>> The problem is far more multylayered (sic) and complex. <<<<
It certainly is, and you've added no new information to the discussion. All you did was make patently false claims borne of ignorance, complete with spelling errors, horrendous grammar, embarrassing punctuation and flawed logic.

You are obviously the product of public education!

jonas samuel
>>>> *More choice in educaton (sic) = less peple (sic) taking math classes.* <<<<
Since when? How on earth did you come up with that false equation? And how did you manage to spell two words incorrectly in one sentence?

>>>> *The other variable is, if enough people would work as a teacher, if they wouldn't have a secure job like that,* <<<<
Huh? What in the world are you trying to say here? That sentence makes absolutely no sense.

>>>> *so you want to fire over 70% of all Teachers in the USA to solve the problem?* <<<<
Did I say that? NO, I didn't say that. But obviously that is one of the problems with public education. Teacher unions hold so much sway over politicians and administrators that it’s almost impossible to fire a bad teacher. In New York some teachers are *paid not to work*. Here, do some reading for a change: http://huff.to/1ppD6fj

>>>> *The problem is far more multylayered (sic) and complex.* <<<<
It certainly is, and you've added no new information to the discussion. All you did was make patently false claims borne of ignorance, complete with spelling errors, horrendous grammar, embarrassing punctuation and flawed logic.

You are obviously the product of public education!

firecloud77
1.More choice in educaton = less peple taking math classes. (not saying i am against it that linearly)

2.The other variable is, if enough people would work as a teacher, if they wouldnt have a secure job like that,
and by the way the problem is not lousy teachers if 70% of the audience got it wrong,(+ assuming some/many of the 30% were just lucky) so you want to fire over 70% of all Teachers in the USA to solve the problem? good luck with that.

3.Your last statement is just a mere claim.

You should maybe visit a logics class. I don't say the blatant accusations of +theWatchingDog are correct, but its just an empty polarizing political phrase.

Yours on the other hand claims to have content, so i can criticise your faulty logic. No offense intended.

The problem is far more multylayered and complex.

firecloud77
1.More choice in educaton = less peple taking math classes. (not saying i am against it that linearly)

2.The other variable is, if enough people would work as a teacher, if they wouldnt have a secure job like that,
and by the way the problem is not lousy teachers if 70% of the audience got it wrong,(+ assuming some/many of the 30% were just lucky) so you want to fire over 70% of all Teachers in the USA to solve the problem? good luck with that.

3.Your last statement is just a mere claim.

You should maybe visit a *logics* class. I don't say the blatant accusations of +theWatchingDog are correct, but its just an empty polarizing political phrase.

Yours on the other hand claims to have content, so i can criticise your faulty logic. No offense intended.

The problem is far more multylayered and complex.

firecloud77 So where's you proof for this?

Keep in mind these people are the product of PUBLIC EDUCATION. Which political party fights tooth and nail to limit choice in education? That's right, the Democrats.  Which political party makes it difficult to fire lousy teachers? That's right, the Democrats and their sacred teachers unions. Big Government doesn't care about you any more than teachers unions care about students.

Keep in mind these people are the product of *PUBLIC EDUCATION*. Which political party fights tooth and nail to limit choice in education? That's right, the *Democrats*.  Which political party makes it difficult to fire lousy teachers? That's right, the *Democrats* and their sacred teachers unions. Big Government doesn't care about you any more than teachers unions care about students.


With numbers that small, the practical method is trial and error. Just count up squares - there aren't too many possibilities:
1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49. Now, which two of those sum to an answer choice? It's pretty easy to quickly eliminate:
1, 36, 49, leaving you with only 4, 9, 16, 25. The 9 and 16 jump out at that point. I'm really surprised at the audience polls. The average American is worse at math than I previously realized.

Ilan Dor i have intelligence and knowledge but can't hold numbers in my head well.  without pencil and paper this would be hard.

masterkevkev Wrong. By academic consensus, "square numbers" are defined as perfect square integers only. Therefore, there was no need to specify. I notice you have failed to reply to others who have pointed out your foolishness. I suppose all your bravado and pseudo-intellectual failings are humiliating enough to keep you from ever returning to this video again. In your own words: "don't be pointing fingers", you idiotic fuck. ^-^

***** In every comment section there's always someone looking to interpret the question in the most obscure way to sound like a smartass. This question was properly worded, square numbers are generally agreed to be squares of integers, stop wasting time with people who are out to prove something.

*****  - That name.

:3 - It needs to be defined as a Perfect Square Number. Theoretically the first 3 answers are correct but D is incorrect.
But you'll learn that differently past high-school c: ...  I've already annoyed my head with finding out the calculations and fixing what people have said. I am not going to continue pointing out how wrong the question was and why the answer was not the only correct one.

Ilan Dor Then don't be pointing fingers, you stereotypical fuck. ^-^

All of those answers (except for 49... I don't know a combination for that) would've been correct answers. It's just the wording of the question that fucked it all up :l

They should have made the question "Which Perfect Squared Integer can be made by combining the sum of 2 square integers smaller than the number required to make the Perfect Squared Number?"
Although that's a large question - it'd throw all of the multiple possibilities out the window (assuming you placed only one number that fits the question's rules, and the other 3 to be bogus).

masterkevkev Thank you for informing me of the greatness of mathematics, tough guy. Somehow, I managed to earn three STEM degrees without ever realizing it. As for your fractional example, I must admit, I didn't think of that - which apparently makes me worse at math than the 50% of the audience who did. I'm sure it's precisely what the contestant had in mind, too.

Ilan Dor
2.4^2 + 3.2^2 = 16. Both 2.4 and 3.2 are smaller than 4. 4^2 = 16, thus, 16 is a valid answer.
Go take your country-insulting bullshit somewhere else buddy. Mathematics is great :3

(Nowhere in the question did it say that the values had to be whole numbers)


Pythagoras would be very displeased in this video... 'nuff said

yeah but he'd be amazed at the concept of television.   'nuff said.

Also to point out.... people get highly confused with "Square numbers." Square numbers are basically numbers that have roots of an integer, or whole number if you call it. examples of this are 1 (1^2) 4 (2^2) 9 (3^) and 16 (4^2). But then again, you have to figure out what the question is talking about. And that's when not knowing math can cost you $15,000...


@peace was never an option <b>HE'S ASIAN!!!</b>

@peace was never an option *HE'S ASIAN!!!*

@peace was never an option so he's Asian


People: "The question isn't that clear!"<br>Also people: "What is a 'sum' again?"

People: "The question isn't that clear!"
Also people: "What is a 'sum' again?"

@Alex Santos That's not the question, and it was perfectly clearly stated. People keep saying they thought it was a product but it says SUM right in the question. How anyone could possible gloss over the word "sum" in a maths problem worth 16K, I don't understand.

@Alex Santos This is the moronest comment I found under this video. The question was clear and you're not able to question yourself

@Alex Santos That's not a square number. A square number is integer, whose root is also an integer.

"Sum" is such a common synonym for "whole," "group," and "total" that some people do not automatically think of it in its mathematical definition. Including me. 😅

The question is not clear enough. If they want to know X, so that X = A² + B², then any answers is right. 16 = √15² + 1²


It's funny how so many are quick to claim Americans as "dumb" because the country with the most immigrants from foreign countries is the U.S.

Don't be so quick to rudely judge, people. T__T

A great many immigrants to the US from Asia are better at math than native-born Americans.

KingOfParrots I have zero problems with foreigners. The only statement I wanted to make from this video was that Americans should not be perceived as "dumb." I used immigration for a better education in the US as a primary example, but I guess I'm being misunderstood.

Solaniin What your experiences are don't really matter, there's no denying that your first comment was ignorant as hell, and that's why I responded. I don't know what your problem is with foreigners, but you should really widen your views a bit more. You'd consider me a foreigner for example, but I'm not sure I'm the stupid one here because of that...

KingOfParrots Whatever, dude. Call me what you want, but I certainly don't see a shortage of schools being build where I live in America nor do I see a shortage of foreigners trying to enter.

Solaniin Wow, you really are stupid, aren't you? You have to look at percentage, not actual numbers.

KingOfParrots It's right there on Wikipedia. You linked it yourself. o_O

And I got it from usatoday.com

Solaniin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign-born_population

The US has most immigrants? Lol, where did you get that from?

ZyklonB95  I agree with you on every statement except the religion part.

Josh Griebel Two reasons.

Americans will continue to vote against their bet interests, willingly. They eat very poorly, again, willingly and knowingly. Most Americans want socialist policies, but when asked what they think about socialism, they all say it is bad. Uniformed. Then you have one of the highest religious percentages of any developed country, which is a big one for me. Gullible and dumb.

Josh Griebel The people running our country? Dude, tell me one country that doesn't have dumb politicians. I can't believe people take reality TV seriously, it's all scripted.

Solaniin Well we could start with the people running our country and then you might consider reality TV. Two pretty valid reasons to think our country is unintelligent.

And why are Americans viewed as dumb? ZyklonB95

That is a retarded assessment of the reality. Exactly how many first generation immigrants do you think the US actually has? That has nothing at all to do with why Americans are viewed as being dumb.

Mathematics
http://nbclatino.com/2013/07/21/10-uniquely-american-things-created-by-immigrants/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/07/12/ten-ways-immigrants-help-build-and-strengthen-our-economy

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/immigrants-have-enriched-american-culture-enhanced-our-influence-world

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nataly-kelly/immigration-benefits_b_2523562.html

Research before you make assumptions next time.

Immigrants generally don't contribute to anything.


Audience thought that if this guy couldn’t answer such question, then he <b>do not deserve</b> $16,000.......

Audience thought that if this guy couldn’t answer such question, then he *do not deserve* $16,000.......

aliwalyd3 lol DAYUM dude roasted both of em

SwiftAssassin Why would a good grammar <b>even</b> deserve to even take 1$ dollar? Pathetic brat trying to roast the other guy for his stupidity

SwiftAssassin Why would a good grammar *even* deserve to even take 1$ dollar? Pathetic brat trying to roast the other guy for his stupidity

Or they all have same problem as the guy.


The audience did him dirty, even if he knew the answer was 25 see that majority of the Audience chose 16 would make him question himself and chose the wrong answer.

If he knew it, he would have gotten it right.

I can see that happening but not with math.<br>I trust myself and I don't trust randoms with numbers 😂

I can see that happening but not with math.
I trust myself and I don't trust randoms with numbers 😂


Audience clapping after he lost, looks like audience wanted him to lose and they intentionally voted wrong and now they're celebrating their victory... 😂😂


Imagine he being in India and his parents watching this and saying<br>"That's why we asked you to choose maths and do engineering"

Imagine he being in India and his parents watching this and saying
"That's why we asked you to choose maths and do engineering"

The trick is to choose math in grade school.  You can’t skip it as a child and decide to take it up in college, but that’s the American way.

Even i got the answer wrong probably coz of my bad English i thought the question said squaring a no. Then squaring it again to get answer but when i know that it was simple Pythagoras i feel really stupid and dissaponited in myself

I'm too a indian and my name is also Krishna


Should have phrased it "sum of two squared non-zero integers."  All of them are sums of two numbers squared with infinite solutions.  Besides that, 0^2 + 4^2 = 16, 0^2 +5^2 = 25 (in addition to 3^2+3^2), 0^2 + 6^2 = 36, 0^2 + 7^2 = 49.  All are correct with the way this is phrased.

No it shouldn't have and you're wrong. Square numbers are derived by mulitiplying two of the exact same numbers. So you obviously don't know what a square number is

Exactly, im pretty sure that complex or irrational solutions are not an option when questioned about square integers man.

Yeah, but enough people got it wrong without the word "integer" being in the question, if you put that in we'd probably be looking at a mass suicide.

kobeballer Your objection doesn't work.  A square number is the square of an integer.

Even using (-4)^2 and 0^2, the two square numbers you are working with are 16 and 0 (not -4 and 0).  And 16 is not smaller than 16 no matter which definition of smaller you use.

Simon Liljeqvist sorry I meant (-4)^2+0^2=16, original comment has been edited

Simon Liljeqvist How do you define "smaller" though? If you take it to mean an absolute value of smaller magnitude then you are correct. If you take it to mean to the left of the original number on the number line then they are all solutions. This is because (-4)^2+0^2=16 etc.

***** The question doesn't ask for the sum of two numbers squared; rather, it asks for the sum of two square numbers.  This distinction is very important!  The definition of a square number is an integer which is the square of an integer, so the question actually does rule out irrational solutions.

Simon Liljeqvist You're right.  It still doesn't rule out irrational solutions.

Sum of 2 SMALLER square numbers, if you use 0^2 you have to use the same number as the square root of the number itself so the question is phrased right and have only one sulution ^^


Plot twist: his phone a friend was a math professor.


For those who are still confused, 25 is also the sum of 3 square and 4 square. Even a 12 year old can answer this

@dearlantsov bro its a 1 month old comment, so chill. I understand that not everyone can learn at same rate.

@Dragokingprost people with neurodiveragent brains exist too, for them things like this may take some time to process, no matter how easy it is. so your statement sees incorrect "it should take 2-3 seconds"

memorizing isn't doing math, it's just memorizing. it's not a general rule that n^2+(n+1)^2=(n+2)^2 for n...natural number. it holds for n=3 but thats all. still easy even if you try every possible combination.

@TerminatedMist Its a question of 2-3 seconds only, no need to take such long time. I guess you studied pythagoras theorem 2 years ago so it should be easy for you


I don't understand why the audience is voting without knowing the answer. Maybe because they want him to lose or because they stay anonymous and don't care about others. I don't know and I will never get it

Ulaş Aldağ Or maybe its a show where all is planned like 99% of Tv programme...

I'm pretty sure they all have to vote whether they know the answer or not

+Ulaş Aldağ maybe the audience is requiered to vote even if they dont know the awnser?

L. Willis But if they were honest than they would know they are not right. Over self esteem

the question is how did they get to the wrong answer on this simple question, didnt they check if it was correct?

Well, they think they know the answer, so they're voting. Not that hard to comprehend.

I think I know why, 16 is 4sq and 4 is 2sq, makes no sense but I guess they didnt understand the question


It took me a lot of time understanding the actual question, granted English <b>is not</b> my first language

It took me a lot of time understanding the actual question, granted English *is not* my first language

@Tom Ffrench What was unclear about the question?

@AboodXD It wasn’t. People just forgot what a sum is.

English is not my first language and I don't understand how the question was "poorly worded".


I gotta be honest, I did not understand that question very well. It makes a little more sense after reading the comments, but I’ve been out of school for over 15 years and was never great at math to start with.

@Muối  Its a really simple question. The only reason you didnt understand is because you probably didnt know what square numbers meant. If you know what the square numbers, sum, and smaller means answering the question should be a piece of cake.

I'm 29 years old, despite hating math with a burning passion, I didn't used square numbers to anything until now for this video, so I can feel your frustration,

but, no amount of knowledge surpass a good heart, you can be seen as a genius everywhere you go but if you treat everyone with disrespect because they don't have the same knowledge as you, you'll be treated as a fool,

so it's never too late to relearn something you struggle with, you still have time to attain the knowledge that you didn't had in the past, surely it won't turn you into a genius but it'll make you see yourself as one,

you can do it champ 👑

Im calc 3 with all math class straight A. didn't understand the question either.

@JustinMplayz shiii I was tired as hell when i read your comment my b

@Rory Macdonald You seem to have misunderstood what I said, let me rephrase line by line
1 is a square root of 1

2 (is a square root) of 4

3 (is a square root) of 9

and so on

@Bob Bob perfect squares and square numbers are the same thing

@JustinMplayz 1 is not a square root of any of those numbers tf

@Bob Bob yes, 1 is a square root of 1, 2 of 4, 3 of 9, and so on<br>Unless I misunderstood what you meant

@Bob Bob yes, 1 is a square root of 1, 2 of 4, 3 of 9, and so on
Unless I misunderstood what you meant

@Bob Bob every positive number is a square root lol

@0x2A honestly I just thought of square roots when I had heard that which is my bad

@Bob Bob So what term have you heard for square/squared numbers? It's so common I can hardly believe you haven't heard the term.

@Baris Cepni Maybe but I really just haven't heard that term ever

@Bob Bob Square numbers is common terminology in maths, maybe you're giving yourself too much credit.

bro Im taking calc BC and am one of the smartest people at math in my school and I got it wrong. I thought it was 36 because 6 was the sum of 3 and 3 but apparently that wasn't even the question. In my defense, no one uses the term square numbers


All of them.

16 = 4^2 + 0^2
25 = 5^2 + 0^2
36 = 6^2 + 0^2
49 = 7^2 + 0^2

0 is a square number by any definition. They should have specified "smaller square non-zero numbers."

they already said "smaller" and its actually better to have said perfect squares. average person wouldve been scared by the term "non-zero"

Sebastian Bach I hope Connor Weeks doesn't get any troll hate either.  But why do you think he might get some troll hate?

Connor Weeks Well said man :) Hope you don't get to much troll hate for being smart and knowing what you talk about

wrong. 49 is not smaller than 49, so it cannot be a valid answer

Ralph Strocchia
Nonsense. Even by your definition using a geometrical square, 0 qualifies in a vacuous truth.

The only way to call 0 a non-square is if you add some sort of literal exception in your definition.

Ralph Strocchia While some definitions of square number do not include 0, you will find that there <i>are</i> definitions of square number which include 0.  Wikipedia and Wolfram MathWorld, for example, use a definition of square number in which 0 is a square number.

Ralph Strocchia While some definitions of square number do not include 0, you will find that there _are_ definitions of square number which include 0.  Wikipedia and Wolfram MathWorld, for example, use a definition of square number in which 0 is a square number.

they asked two SMALLER square numbers.....wheres as 4,5,6,7 are not smaller ..rather they are equal. only B is the correct answer because 25 is the square of sum of smaaler numbers which are 4 and 3... that's it.

a square is when all sides are equal. in the case of square with length of sides = 0... The square is not there. so saying 0 is a square number is not true.

Connor Weeks I'm doing a Bachelor in Maths and I can say that 0/0 is clearly not defined : it has no definition.

There is a huge problem in your proof : "Let x = 0/0 " has no sense (and therefore your proof too) because it's in the definition of the division that a/b has a sense only if b=/=0. You're manipulating 0/0 has if it was a real number but it's not, it has no sense at all. You're missing something, there are hypotheses and there are conclusions, "for any x, x/0 doesn't exists" is an implied hypothesis when you're using real numbers, it's not a conclusion of any calcul at all.

When you do Algebra you starts to define operation such as + or x and mathematicians have defined 1/x only if x=/=0. Same thing you can't divide vectors, there is no definition, it doesn't exists.

MuffinsAPlenty Right, thanks for the correction.

MuffinsAPlenty May I note that 0/0 is, in fact, defined.  However, we cannot determine its value, so we say it's indeterminate.  For example, if you do the following:
Let x = 0/0
Multiply both sides of the equation by 0/1 to cancel out the bottom 0, since
((x/y)(y/1) = x):
x(0/1) = (0/0)(0/1)
You get the following:
0x = 0
While attempting a similar proof by stating x/0 = y (x ~= 0) will result in a failure, we can surely see that x exists, although it is no specific number; we cannot determine it.  Therefore, it's indeterminate.

Jarrod0067 0 x 0 is very much defined, and it is indeed 0.  I think you're confusing multiplication with division here. 0/0 is not defined.  But 0 x 0 = 0^2 is defined and is equal to 0.

They specified "smaller" square numbers, making the need for the word "non-zero" unnecessary.<br>After all, if you try 4^2 + 0^2, you have 16 as an addend which is not smaller than sum 16.

They specified "smaller" square numbers, making the need for the word "non-zero" unnecessary.
After all, if you try 4^2 + 0^2, you have 16 as an addend which is not smaller than sum 16.


Commenting how the answer was easy from the safety and comfort of home is one thing.

Answering correctly under pressure and on TV is another.

The audience were dumb! They were not under pressure.

How is that even an appropriate question for 16k? Sure, the guy is under pressure but that still shouldn't prevent him from doing a simple calculation. It's not like the clock is ticking. Just take a minute and start doing the fucking math.

Did he even try ? Is that his best excuse, calling it 'pressure' for not even trying to understand and do the math?<br>In other words, he's dumb, and so is the audience.

Did he even try ? Is that his best excuse, calling it 'pressure' for not even trying to understand and do the math?
In other words, he's dumb, and so is the audience.


Watches Prince Ea video about school
Me: School is useless

Watches this video
Me: ok nvm.

*Watches Prince Ea video about school*
Me: School is useless

*Watches this video*
Me: ok nvm.

M V so instead of school we should just give kids a computer and hope they happen to stumble across it? Genius. You will make a great parent one day.

except it's not an actual use for maths, what I mean is that he didn't need to answer that in his daily life, it was a programme in which you can only win money, and lose money that you never had

@Kan Mi I mean, you kinda do. How would you know this without being taught it?

Well you dont need school to know about this

10000 subscribers without any video challenge			.


Dont laugh at him, when you are at such pressure you literally loose the ability to think straight sometimes

easy to say the answer from the comfort of your chair at home, now when there is thousands of $ on the line, and millions of people watching you live

More to the point, you don't "loose the ability", you "LOSE" the ability... Were you under pressure when you wrote that?

Laugh at his teachers.

This man was a COLLEGE STUDENT, and he was utterly DEFRAUDED by those incompetent, corrupt, trough-feeding grafters.

I thought Europeans and Americans are far better at maths than us asians💀