Even as a math teacher, this question can be very difficult in this situation.

It's very hard to remain calm and think properly under stress. Also, the wording of the problem makes it somewhat challenging to interpret properly.

With all of this going on, now you have to mentally run through your perfect squares (1,4,9,16,25,36,...), keep track of them, and find two of them that you can add together to get one of the answers. Extremely difficult under pressure for most people!

@bowlchamps37 actually all they ask now in 3rd grade is if you want to transition or are non binary.

@bowlchamps37 actually all they ask now in 3rd grade is if you want to transition or are non binary.

@AcidPants Which square number (among A,B,C,D) is the sum of two smaller square numbers? What is so difficult about the wording. It´s whyt teachers ask in 3rd grade.

@AcidPants Which square number (among A,B,C,D) is the sum of two smaller square numbers? What is so difficult about the wording. It´s whyt teachers ask in 3rd grade.

I mean, you only have to go through 4...

I mean, you only have to go through 4...

@ND_IRISH_FAN First of all, what a stupid stereotype. Because I have a PhD I always have to speak like I am Queen of England? What else, can I go to the gym, sir? Because you know I am a nerd with a PhD and I should not go and work out? Second, I really don't care how I capitalize words, I have PhD in Maths not in grammar. And you assume that I am an english speaker, why would I have to know all the rules. I know people with PhDs in many other fields who cant speak english. Shows that you are probably not a teacher because you would have respect for those who pursue the field you work in.

@VojvodaVuk Very had to believe that someone with a PhD refers to "Maths" and doesn't even know to capitalize the word English within its proper context.

@VojvodaVuk Very had to believe that someone with a PhD refers to "Maths" and doesn't even know to capitalize the word English within its proper context.

@Mychael Smith The reason I referenced the wording is that many people have learned the term "perfect squares" as opposed to square numbers. If the question would have been worded perfect square numbers, it may have led him in the right direction while he was stressing out.

It's the wording that hung me up.  Wasn't exactly clear what it was asking for, so couldn't create the formula.  Once the formula was presented though, it became simple.   And yes, I was never great at English, the whole sentence structure stuff never made sense in theory, though it did in practice.

This. People really underestimate just how much pressure can mess you up. The question itself was pretty trivial, but I'm pretty sure I've messed up even easier ones before under bad circumstances. No, the ones who really should have done better here was the audience.

Sawm tluanga Knowledge is useless, logical thinking is the soul of our brain.

Sawm tluanga Knowledge is useless, logical thinking is the soul of our brain.

@Juska The thing is, this is only one of maaaany times that I noticed that people are not on too solid mathematical ground. And usually, they will readily admit that math isn't their thing. Which is fine. There are loads of areas where I am crap and others are much better.
I just related this anecdote because I found it especially shocking, and I think if this occurs in financial institution, just imagine how the situation must be when numbers aren't that important.
Frankly, I don't even fault the audience. I wrote a comment under this video saying that "Ryan's biggest mistake was to ask the audience for a math question". I wouldn't trust a random audience with math questions at all (based on my experiences).
Of course, since Ryan also didn't have a clue he did what appeared to be reasonable, trusting the majority. The better approach would have been to use other lifelines.

@Jens Raab ah, I guess past experiences shape what we believe is more likely to happen, you remembered that while I remembered reading errors, attention deficiency and a past mental suggestion trick, welp.. I find it more believable that they don't know how to do simple stuff now that you mention your experiences

@Juska Frankly, yes, that would be a stretch, and I'm fairly certain it is because English isn't your first language.
I'd bet a lot of money that not 50% of the audience misread this, especially as the term "similar number" doesn't have a meaning in math as has been pointed out to you several times.
Also, the host read the question!

I'm good at math but from experience I know that many people are not. A shockingly high number of people are not. I've worked in a financial institution for a while and there was a scenario where our department and another department had to both greenlight certain transactions before they were initiated. There was a threshold, measured in percentage, beyond which we would want to initiate these transactions for our client. The problem was that our department said, the threshold is this amount plus x% but the other department had the upper threshold as baseline and subtracted that percentage. Anyway, I tried to explain my new line manager that there are situations, not very frequent but they occurred more than once while I was there, that the transaction would be triggered even though it shouldn't have been, or not triggered even though it should.
The issue if you add a certain percentage to a value, and then you subtract the same percentage from the new value, the amount is not the same than the one you started from. For example, you add 1% to $100, that gives you $101. If you now subtract 1% from this new amount, i.e. $1.01, you'll end up with $99.99. The higher the percentage, the more striking the discrepancy. We operated with buffer percentage of 5%.
So, I was trying to explain this, I even made a graph which showed the areas (amounts) in which that discrepancy caused by the different approach of our departments would result in an unwanted action.
This line manager, younger than me, fresher out of school, didn't get it. She talked to me in a condescending way in a manner that showed that she had no clue what I was talking about, just trying to get rid of me.

Then, a couple of weeks later, a trainee who, like me (and unlike her), had been to university joined us for a while and I chatted with him and mentioned this issue. He understood immediately.
Like I said, I was shocked that you had folks in a finance institute where we moved funds worth dozens of millions, sometimes well beyond 100 million dollars, would not understand basic percentage calculation.
So given that, I absolutely believe that an audience in a quiz show would be mathematically illiterate rather than conflate two very simple words of their native language with very different meaning.

@Juska Frankly, yes, that would be a stretch, and I'm fairly certain it *is* because English isn't your first language.
I'd bet a lot of money that not 50% of the audience misread this, especially as the term "similar number" doesn't have a meaning in math as has been pointed out to you several times.
Also, the host *read the question!*

I'm good at math but from experience I know that many people are not. A shockingly high number of people are not. I've worked in a financial institution for a while and there was a scenario where our department and another department had to both greenlight certain transactions before they were initiated. There was a threshold, measured in percentage, beyond which we would want to initiate these transactions for our client. The problem was that our department said, the threshold is this amount plus x% but the other department had the upper threshold as baseline and subtracted that percentage. Anyway, I tried to explain my new line manager that there are situations, not very frequent but they occurred more than once while I was there, that the transaction would be triggered even though it shouldn't have been, or not triggered even though it should.
The issue if you add a certain percentage to a value, and then you subtract the same percentage from the new value, the amount is not the same than the one you started from. For example, you add 1% to $100, that gives you $101. If you now subtract 1% from this new amount, i.e. $1.01, you'll end up with $99.99. The higher the percentage, the more striking the discrepancy. We operated with buffer percentage of 5%.
So, I was trying to explain this, I even made a graph which showed the areas (amounts) in which that discrepancy caused by the different approach of our departments would result in an unwanted action.
This line manager, younger than me, fresher out of school, didn't get it. She talked to me in a condescending way in a manner that showed that she had no clue what I was talking about, just trying to get rid of me.

Then, a couple of weeks later, a trainee who, like me (and unlike her), had been to university joined us for a while and I chatted with him and mentioned this issue. He understood immediately.
Like I said, I was shocked that you had folks in a finance institute where we moved funds worth dozens of millions, sometimes well beyond 100 million dollars, would not understand basic percentage calculation.
So given that, I absolutely believe that an audience in a quiz show would be mathematically illiterate rather than conflate two very simple words of their native language with very different meaning.

@Jens Raab I didn't say it's for sure this I'm just saying if I read something that looks very close to the word that was written, maybe others did too, is that really a further stretch than not passing 1st grade? I don't even have an argument I'm just giving input as to why I was one of the people that got it wrong, and similar vs smaller are honestly alike so its possible, but not everyone has to be the same, they'd have to put their input too, for all we know it could be because my first language isn't even English but it just reminds me of an old trick with mental suggestions too so idk I thought maybe that's why I read it wrong and was giving some input thats all

Why can't my school teach maths this clear to understand 😖

Why can't my school teach maths this clear to understand 😖

Do you know what a perfect square is?  n*n.  So start at 1x1=1, 2x2=4, 3x3=9, 4x4=16, 5x5=25.  Now just decompose the numbers of each answer. Can't be 16, 36, or 49.  But 25=16+9,  Bingo.  Final Answer.

Do you know what a perfect square is?  n*n.  So start at 1x1=1, 2x2=4, 3x3=9, 4x4=16, 5x5=25.  Now just decompose the numbers of each answer. Can't be 16, 36, or 49.  But 25=16+9,  Bingo.  Final Answer.

@Mychael Smith  It's not bad. The problem is that most people learn math in school and then put 90% of it away and quickly forget it. Like the definition of "square number." It has something to do with square roots, one might guess, but beyond that most Americans don't know and can't just Google the term during a quiz show like we can. And for those who do use math enough to know this term off hand, try answering a question of like difficulty that depends on knowing the definition of some literary term pertaining to poetry.

@joku tyyppi  The question says 2 smaller numbers but If you consider your statement  0 is smaller number but 4, 5,6, 7  aren't smaller than itself

@joku tyyppi  The question says 2 smaller numbers but If you consider your statement  0 is smaller number but 4, 5,6, 7  aren't smaller than itself

True...but for $15,000 do the damn mental math. LOL...If this was timed, OK...but he had all the time in the world. The numbers were low enough (16, 25, 36, and 49) to do that math in your head. I don't think this guy knew what a "square" was. He seemed completely clueless.

@Juska "just what happened with me" - Look, this is the problem with your argumentation.
People here keep telling you that it's not a phrasing issue. With all due respect, just because you didn't understand the question doesn't mean that others didn't understand it either. Nobody except you confused smaller with similar.

The wording of this question was unambiguous and not linguistically challenging. The problem is that too many folks have no clue when it comes to math, or at least mathematical terminology if we want to be charitable.

@Juska "just what happened with me" - Look, this is the problem with your argumentation.
People here keep telling you that it's not a phrasing issue. With all due respect, just because *you* didn't understand the question doesn't mean that others didn't understand it either. Nobody except you confused smaller with similar.

The wording of this question was unambiguous and not linguistically challenging. The problem is that too many folks have no clue when it comes to math, or at least mathematical terminology if we want to be charitable.

@Ayush Mishra I mean yea I can't really assume everyone read it wrong and excluded the correct answer right away- just what happened with me

@Ayush Mishra I mean yea I can't really assume everyone read it wrong and excluded the correct answer right away- just what happened with me

@Juska most people don't know the actual definition of square number and that's the problem. Some mess up with the SMALLER part and a few the sum part.

@Juska most people don't know the actual definition of square number and that's the problem. Some mess up with the SMALLER part and a few the sum part.

@Ayush Mishra well I didn't say it's their fault perse, I was saying it's the English/wording/reading comprehension that's making people do this mistake rather than math, because the math required is just knowing simple stuff that I knew, but I already excluded the correct answer due to reading similar instead of smaller, And then I elaborate that it reminds me of mental suggestions, maybe it wasn't one but still the entire problem here was reading not math

@Juska if you are not reading the question properly then it's your fault. The question was framed perfectly

@Juska if you are not reading the question properly then it's your fault. The question was framed perfectly

Who remembers squares? You can easily do it on the spot till 12 atleast.

Who remembers squares? You can easily do it on the spot till 12 atleast.

I only take interest in math topics as a casual amateur and I instantly remembered without calculating that 25 is the smallest square that is the sum of two squares. Ignorance is lack of care to know stuff.

I only take interest in math topics as a casual amateur and I instantly remembered without calculating that 25 is the smallest square that is the sum of two squares. Ignorance is lack of care to know stuff.

You say that under the delusion of math teachers being competent at math. Unless you are a college professor. But I have outright contempt for K-12 math teachers, my 5th grade teacher having asked me to calculate the first 20 digits of pi by using long division to calculate 22 divided by 7. Yes that actually happened, no she was not joking, she thought pi was EQUAL to 22 over 7.

@Juska First of all, if you are going to be a crowd in a quiz show, I highly doubt you went there to play with your phone. From the time this guy asks for crowd to vote, about 10-15 second passes. That is not enough time for any question to be read, along with all answers and then answer it. So if you are there and you are not paying attention, what are you doing then?

I have yet to see an english person confuse same and similar. Contrary to your belief, if they read similar instead of smaller they would still pick squares of 2 and 3 because they can say that 2 and 3 are similar because there is only 1 difference.

This has nothing to do with grammar, saying "Literally" is grammatically correct. The word you meant to use is semantically. Using "similar" when you mean "same" is a semantical error, not grammatical.

@VojvodaVuk Oh I thought no one really would listen if its a math problem because it's often better to read and write with maths, but I guess some do
And the "similar or same" issue are by all means English/wording related we know that 8 is same as 8 but we could also say similar as we aren't often accurate with wording, much like the people who use "literally" all the time, to many people words like similar and same are interchangeable even if grammatically they are not and it would be imperfect wording, by all means it's exactly what I'm saying, the problem you're stating here is our English more than our math

If it was a math problem you would ask them the requirements separately and they'd answer wrong

Difficult my ass 😂 you have 6 numbers to run through and try to add up. It also helps that it’s 3*3 + 4*4, so they are consecutive. You should get it on the first few tries.

Difficult my ass 😂 you have 6 numbers to run through and try to add up. It also helps that it’s 3*3 + 4*4, so they are consecutive. You should get it on the first few tries.

@Juska Similar numbers dont exist they are either same or different. In any case host reads the question out loud

@Juska Similar numbers dont exist they are either same or different. In any case host reads the question out loud

@VojvodaVuk it's not interpretion but a reading problem, similar and smaller are 2 words that are well similar lmao, the question is in any case a kindergarten problem, just depends on what you saw, since the two words are alike, but one is more likely to be seen, by mental suggestion, that's why the audience majority said 16 specifically as the mental suggestion worked on them

@VojvodaVuk eh people don't necessarily solve every question from start without being asked to but even so reading it, but that doesn't change the main concept that the problem the encountered is English reading similar instead of smaller and so excluding odd numbers already

@Juska you think audience is sleeping? Rhey have the whole time before they were asked to think.

@Juska you think audience is sleeping? Rhey have the whole time before they were asked to think.

@Juska I know how you interpreted the question. I just want to explain why it is stupid to think like that. First of all, watch the video. It says sum of two smaller perfect perfect squares. And even if it didnt say that and it was what you thought, why would answers be perfect squares. It could have been: Which of these numbers is a sum of 2 similar numbers? And answers: 16 and 3 odd numbers. But you need to agree that how you interpreted is kindergarden level question.

@VojvodaVuk oh yea it says from square numbers, welp, attention lacking but still reading smaller as <b>similar</b> makes you lean to the 16, cuz it makes you exclude the odd numbers already since it's not often allowed to use decimalized numbers so odd ones would be out

@VojvodaVuk oh yea it says from square numbers, welp, attention lacking but still reading smaller as *similar* makes you lean to the 16, cuz it makes you exclude the odd numbers already since it's not often allowed to use decimalized numbers so odd ones would be out

@VojvodaVuk for a way shorter explaination
I basically thought this:

A perfect square that is also taken from the sum of 2 similar(smaller) numbers

Solve this, see what I meant? If u read it smaller you get 25 (25 is a perfect square of 5 and can be added from 9+16), if you read similar, you get 16 (16 is a perfect square of 4 and can be taken from 8+8, did it say the numbers have to be perfect squares too? If so I didn't notice that's why my requirements always were 2 only).

@VojvodaVuk for a way shorter explaination
I basically thought this:

A perfect square that is also taken from the sum of 2 *similar(smaller)* numbers

Solve this, see what I meant? If u read it smaller you get 25 (25 is a perfect square of 5 and can be added from 9+16), if you read similar, you get 16 (16 is a perfect square of 4 and can be taken from 8+8, did it say the numbers have to be perfect squares too? If so I didn't notice that's why my requirements always were 2 only).

@VojvodaVuk And yea isn't the audience supposed to answer it quickly before they just put up their answers? They can't possibly wait for everyone, plus wrong perception is often just a hit or miss, you don't go back to reread if you already think you got it all right

@VojvodaVuk I meant same not similar, it's said as similar because "smaller" is there and that's where people get confused and read wrong, get it? Also 8 isn't a perfect square we know that, it's not a requirement for the 2 numbers you add up to 16 to be a perfect square themselves, the answer is 16 the explaination is 4² and 8+8 (8 doesn't need to be a perfect square, 16 does, in our wrong perception of the question, get it?)

@Juska hurry where?? Do you see a timer??

@Juska hurry where?? Do you see a timer??

@Juska you keep using similar and its wrong. 8 and 8 are not similar, they are the same. Still the question doesnt say same numbers, but only smaller numbers. And still it says sum of smaller square numbers. 8 is not perfect square.

@Juska you keep using similar and its wrong. 8 and 8 are not similar, they are the same. Still the question doesnt say same numbers, but only smaller numbers. And still it says sum of smaller square numbers. 8 is not perfect square.

@VojvodaVuk And the question doesn't require it, but when you read it in a hurry you're more likely to think so due to the word perfect square before it, making you lean towards it, unless specified otherwise or taking some time you could very well think it's just a number that 1)is a perfect square 2)can be taken from the addition of 2 of the same number

That's why the majority voted 16, it's not by luck, but by suggestion

You know mental suggestions? Like that little trick when they say a few things then ask you quickly for a Vegetable starting with letter A and you say apple like a dummy?

@VojvodaVuk Didn't you read it all? When I said same I didn't mean the same number from the first requirement, again I meant this answer: 16
1)Perfect square of 4² ✔
2)The summation of 2 similar numbers gives 16 (8+8) ✔

Also the 345 thing isn't really the issue here because if you're looking for something entirely different because you though you need 2 similar numbers then it wouldn't matter

@Juska well, we are not all smart. The question does not infer that numbers should be same. I dont know what similar numbers are.

@Juska well, we are not all smart. The question does not infer that numbers should be same. I dont know what similar numbers are.

@Juska first of all, 3, 4,5 triangle is like the first thing you learn in school when learning Pythagoras. When I read first 3 words I knew exectly what question is going to be. Second, same integer cannot be squared , summed and then equal to another integer sqare.

@VojvodaVuk But then again I'm not a native English speaker, still I feel like the problem was just the wording not the problem itself as we would solve it easily if it added "different"

@VojvodaVuk But then again I'm not a native English speaker, still I feel like the problem was just the wording not the problem itself as we would solve it easily if it added "different"

@VojvodaVuk Because I feel like not mentioning that they're 2 different numbers makes you lean towards looking for the summation of 2 similar numbers, just because it's kinda the thing you start thinking about after looking for a perfect square you keep thinking you need similar numbers.. maybe it's just me but yea the entire audience knows how to sum they just thought of
1)its a perfect square, so 16 works
2)8+8 are similar and gives 16
And probably missed smaller in their rush for looking for similar numbers that add up to it

@Juska Why would english be a problem for a guy who speaks english?

@Juska Why would english be a problem for a guy who speaks english?

@VojvodaVuk really? Because I feel like the only problem here is English not math

@VojvodaVuk really? Because I feel like the only problem here is English not math

@ultimate cheese whopper The wording was kinda tough or maybe it's because you keep thinking of squares and such so you keep asking yourself which 2 SAME numbers can be added in order to get that number , idk what made me think that way but just putting the word perfect square in the first requirement probably made me lean that way

You must be a very lousy math teacher then. Like my 5th grade math teacher that asked me to figure out the first 20 digits of pi by dividing 22 divided by 7 via long division and then was surprised when her 10 year old student had to give her a lesson on what rational numbers were.

Not really - there are only 6 square numbers less than 49 ...

Not really - there are only 6 square numbers less than 49 ...

They’re all small numbers. Just start with 1, subtract it out from the four choices, and test to see if the residual is a perfect square (ie 1 + 15, 1 + 48, 1 + 35, 1+24). Repeat test consecutively until both numbers you’re adding are perfect squares. And that’s your answer

@ND_IRISH_FAN<br>That is the proper reaction to this video - it's just too bad that a lot of people seem to take delight in mocking other people instead, and look for any chance to do that.

@ND_IRISH_FAN
That is the proper reaction to this video - it's just too bad that a lot of people seem to take delight in mocking other people instead, and look for any chance to do that.

@Dhruv Pawar please look at the employment rate of engineers in your country and get back to me

@Dhruv Pawar please look at the employment rate of engineers in your country and get back to me

Nah it's definitely not as hard as you're making it. <br>I guess you are the teacher that students complain about lmao.

Nah it's definitely not as hard as you're making it.
I guess you are the teacher that students complain about lmao.

Yeah but there's no time limit. It'd be hard to do in 5 seconds under stress but you can literally take all the time in the world to count it out. Not only could you get the right answer, you could spend an hour double-triple checking and showing all the other answers are wrong too. Dude literally has no idea what a "square number" is.

please look at an engineering entrance exam paper in india and get back to me

please look at an engineering entrance exam paper in india and get back to me

no lol this isn't some complicated question. anyone should be able to solve this with a saw slowly coming at their neck.

no lol this isn't some complicated question. anyone should be able to solve this with a saw slowly coming at their neck.

it's not that difficult. all you have to think about are the ones that are smaller than the original value. for example, 5^2 is 25, so the sum cannot be bigger than 5^2, eg. 5^2+4^2 or 5^2+6^2... you can do that by deduction, testing it on 16, 49, 36 and so on

Even with the wrong answer "that i had got myself" and the right answer in front of me... i still had no idea till i read your post how to get the correct answer. Everyones so high and mighty about this one.. question is worded to mess people up

Even with the wrong answer "that i had got myself" and the right answer in front of me... i still had no idea till i read your post how to get the correct answer. Everyones so high and mighty about this one.. question is worded to mess people up

The wording of the problem is completely fine.

The wording of the problem is completely fine.

@joku tyyppi you are right bro, someone get the money back to the poor dude

@joku tyyppi you are right bro, someone get the money back to the poor dude

Everybody in comment sections are geniuses though.

Everybody in comment sections are geniuses though.

@joku tyyppi The word "smaller" prevents those cases from being correct.

@joku tyyppi The word "smaller" prevents those cases from being correct.

But 0 is also a square so aren't all the answers right? (0+16, 0+25...)

But 0 is also a square so aren't all the answers right? (0+16, 0+25...)

and how did he manage to answer the other questions, which is probably harder than the pythagoras triple question?

and how did he manage to answer the other questions, which is probably harder than the pythagoras triple question?

You should only remember about Pythagorean theorem and Egyptian triangle.

You should only remember about Pythagorean theorem and Egyptian triangle.


Everyone should know about the 3,4,5 triangle and Pythagoras's Theorum.  Elementary school maths.


2nd root of 25 is 5 , and the sum of two square root that it is less than it is 3²+4²=5²


It was college week! Did you hear that?!


Let's hear it for the U.S. public education system, ladies and gentlemen!


Holy smokes, this was uploaded 15 years ago? Wow...


One thing for sure now he'll remember that question for his entire life 😂😂


I'm going to pretend I knew the answer all along and definitely didn't go "Hang on, it's 16 right? That's a square?"

@GalacticLaser to be fair the question is phrased completely fine. It's your comprehension skills which are beyond trash

@The Ultimate Emeralds to be fair the question was worded very weirdly

@The Ultimate Emeralds No I'm just retarded.


In Finland, this life line works very differently: all audience members who think they know the right answer stand up, and the consestant picks three of them.

@Jar Jar Sphinx We are, but I think that particular rule makes perfect sense.


I almost had a stroke because I thought the question was asking which of the square numbers from there was also a sum of 2 other square numbers FROM THE 4 OPTIONS


He : I am under a lot of pressure that 3²+4²=25. <br>Meanwhile : people younger than him solving differential equations.

He : I am under a lot of pressure that 3²+4²=25.
Meanwhile : people younger than him solving differential equations.

Meanwhile, People who study logic and semantics realise the question was ambiguous and technically all answers were vacuously true


I don't know, the boy should feel so bad, 50% of the audience doesn't know math either


I would've given her the answer without even hearing the 4 choices

I thought everyone would. Then I watched this video.

+pcakes Could have been 169 too though coz 12^2 + 5^2 = 144 + 25 = 169 = 13^2.

Dakiller1243 Well I thought the person was an idiot so I felt compelled to explain what a sum is then it was proven that I'm the actual idiot.

Rebecca98463 whats funny is that you even explained what a sum is xD

Yeah, it's a basic sum I forgot about. He/She proved me wrong so the only thing to do is concede.

+Rebecca98463 lol atleast you admitted your mistake.

Joshua Williams You are correct. I will go hide in a corner now.

Rebecca98463<br>Yes it is. It is the sum of 6 squared and 8 squared -> 36+64=100

Rebecca98463
Yes it is. It is the sum of 6 squared and 8 squared -> 36+64=100

+Andreas Lambropoulos No because 100 isn't the sum of any two square numbers. Sum is the result of addition, not multiplication.

Anything which is the sqare of the 3:4:5 ratio would work.

i.e
3,4,5
6,8,10
9,12,15
12,16,20
etc.

There are many answers.  100 is also one of them.

supermarc45<br>It might not be a unique answer, but given that it should be workable for all levels of maths, 25 would be a practical assumption.

supermarc45
It might not be a unique answer, but given that it should be workable for all levels of maths, 25 would be a practical assumption.

+gurkfisk89 169 = 5^2 + 12^2 and 625 = 15^2 + 20^2, so then this question wouldn't really have a unique answer.

+pcakes That edge...

It's so sharp... It cuts so DEEP.

AcidGamingHD Gaming, Tutorials and More! but there's tons of numbers that are the sum of two smaller squared numbers xD

+Lapischicken He could just say the number..

but but... how do you know if it's A, B, C, or D?

Joshua Williams Yeah :D<br>(It's the same as the Pythagorean triple 3, 4, 5, except multiplied by 5. 3*5, 4*5, 5*5 = 15, 20, 25.)

Joshua Williams Yeah :D
(It's the same as the Pythagorean triple 3, 4, 5, except multiplied by 5. 3*5, 4*5, 5*5 = 15, 20, 25.)

+gurkfisk89 <del>it's 625 because it's 225+400 :P</del>

+gurkfisk89 -it's 625 because it's 225+400 :P-

gurkfisk89 25 would more likely be common knowledge and so it's more likely to be a choice than any of those higher ones, but yeah<br>I don't remember if I meant 'before hearing all four' or 'before hearing any'

gurkfisk89 25 would more likely be common knowledge and so it's more likely to be a choice than any of those higher ones, but yeah
I don't remember if I meant 'before hearing all four' or 'before hearing any'

+waawamellon But what if any of the answers wasn't 25 but instead, say 169, 289, 625 or 1681? At that point you whould have looked a bit silly. =)<br>If you meant that you whould have answered before hearing all the 4 choices I totally agree with you that it would have been nice.

+waawamellon But what if any of the answers wasn't 25 but instead, say 169, 289, 625 or 1681? At that point you whould have looked a bit silly. =)
If you meant that you whould have answered before hearing all the 4 choices I totally agree with you that it would have been nice.


also a pythagorean triple, 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2


its not a math question its testing observation skills, the word 'sum' changes everything


"bish 2 nights of hotel and food plus flights rental cars and gas cost me $1000, what you mean at least I won $1000?"


Interestingly, A is the sum of 2 cubes (2^3+2^3).


Bro I did that in like 2 minutes. Funny the graphs showed A LOL. It’s such an easy question how did he not get it. The people made fools of him.


The problem is easy, very easy, the wording is complex, which is probably why question is for $16,000. They must have picked all sorts of dropouts and handed them the devices. Meredith was a great host.

I see English is not your first language. You have mistranslated the world complex, you meant to say simple

@Shintei Choosing simple examples to start with isn't really a "mathematical or logical" approach? Really? It's the most common first approach in math at any level, from elementary to research.

@ε Choosing random number to start with isn't really a "mathematical or logical" approach.
If I remember correctly, it took about 10 calculations to get the answer, and that 8 and 13 are also within one of the calculations. So, it is okay if someone considers 8 or 13.
I suppose the hint is the host said the player can take his time, which indicates this question can take time to calculate different combinations.
Yes, the question is correctly worded. The problem is that there are better ways to word it so most people, if not all, will find it crystal clear instead of only some people.

Maybe it's just me who finds the wording weird, but my background isn't in arts/literature. My background is physics, electronic engineering and computer science. This probably explained why I couldn't understand the question at the start.

@Shintei If you remove the part about the answer being itself a square from the question, you take out a huge hint that screams "Pythagora's theorem" at you. Moreover, the player would have probably started thinking at random sums of squares like 8 or 13 that are not squares themselves. I find this question to be correctly worded and crystal clear, but english isn't my first language.

@Xinping Donohoe Yeah, so it is more about understanding the confusing sentence than a maths question.

@Shintei they can't just give away money, that's why. You have to think about it, make connections, in order to earn the money.

@Xinping Donohoe Maybe. Though, the wording of the question is weird.

@Shintei that's on you then. It was clearly inspired by Pythagoras' theorem.

@Xinping Donohoe  I doubt Pythagoras' theorem or the triangle is necessary here. All I did was just squaring the numbers and add them together.<br>Though, I must admit it that I have taken way longer to understand the question than calculating it.

@Xinping Donohoe  I doubt Pythagoras' theorem or the triangle is necessary here. All I did was just squaring the numbers and add them together.
Though, I must admit it that I have taken way longer to understand the question than calculating it.

@Shintei yet the gimmick is, as I said, that they are square numbers that make another square number.<br>In fact, it's actually easier the normal way because, assuming they received an education, they should have heard about Pythagoras' theorem. If they don't think anything along the lines of a²+b²=c² and remember the most classic of classic triangles, the 3-4-5 triangle, then they weren't going to get it.

@Shintei yet the gimmick is, as I said, that they are square numbers that make another square number.
In fact, it's actually easier the normal way because, assuming they received an education, they should have heard about Pythagoras' theorem. If they don't think anything along the lines of a²+b²=c² and remember the most classic of classic triangles, the 3-4-5 triangle, then they weren't going to get it.

@Xinping Donohoe The point to the question is to find 2 smaller squared numbers that add up to one of the answers.

This question is easy in term of maths, so, I suppose this isn't really a maths question but more about understanding bad and confusing sentence.

@Shintei but the point of the question is to find a square that is the sum of two squares. If you remove that the number is square then you've removed half of the gimmick. Without that sight gimmick it's simply a too easy question.

@Mokshit Sati Yep, my mistake. As Jimmy Neutron said, I need to add the word "smaller", which corrects my sentence to: "Which of these numbers is the sum of two smaller squared numbers?"

@Xinping Donohoe The numbers themselves do not matter since we don't need such information to find out the answer. The wording is unnecessarily complicated.

@Shintei Then you can say 16=4^2+0^2 ; you have to say that they are smaller indeed

@Shintei no, you forgot to mention that the numbers themselves are also square

@Shintei then all your answers are correct by default coz 0 exists and you didn't put a comparison condition

The wording of the question is weird.

I'd reword it to:
Which of these numbers is the sum of two squared numbers?

@pixa1z yeah lmao imagine knowing English and still cannot understand what I, a non-English guy seem to think is a pretty clearly worded question. If you cant read these types of wording maybe math isn't for you since math always is to the point

I’m from south asia and this wording is not even complex like how can a native find such wordings harder than us lmao. Although, I would agree about the music being too intense and pressuring. This man sure became anxious, no wonder he thought the majority of audience was correct.

@Xinping Donohoe You choose, there'll be confusion anywhere.

@Xinping Donohoe You choose, there'll be confusion anywhere.

@Cameraman Matt India, Andorra, Wales, New Zealand, Eswatini.<br>There's your list. Now how shall we conduct this?

@Cameraman Matt India, Andorra, Wales, New Zealand, Eswatini.
There's your list. Now how shall we conduct this?

@Xinping Donohoe That's just racist. Pick a random audience from just about any country and they likely would have struggled with the wording.

@Kamran Dosanjh that’s cause we have the balls to admit it, obviously

There's nothing complex about the wording lol, there's literally only one logical way to interpret this question

@Antares1997 93% of Americans report experiencing "math anxiety"

@Antares1997 You seem to be pretty naive. First of all, the assumption that Americans are dumb is obviously not true for Harvard or Princeton students. Just like not every Trump voter is an idiot, but most of them. And 2nd, most of the top universities are top because of foreign personnel. Americans with a degree are in the bottom 10%, so yes, even among graduates, they are pretty bad.

I guess they should have picked you for the show instead.

I guess they should have picked you for the show instead.

@Antares1997 I'm just glad you didn't say 10 out of 6.<br>My point is that, on average, Americans seem to be rather fatter and stupider than other Western nations.

@Antares1997 I'm just glad you didn't say 10 out of 6.
My point is that, on average, Americans seem to be rather fatter and stupider than other Western nations.

@Xinping Donohoe Every single American is bad at math huh. Nice generalization. Maybe thats why we have 6 out of the 10 best schools in the entire world for mathematics ;)

The wording is super easy "happens to be" = "is". So what is really hard about this?

I wouldn't say it was complex, it just required a little focus.

They picked Americans. That's why they failed. Not even the wording was complex.


Well I actually would have gotten this one right and I don't consider math my strong suite so yay. I think the mistake the audience made was in thinking  (2x2)x(2x2) when it would instead be (2x2)+(2x2).


This video explains America in the shortest and easiest manner! I bet his answer would have been quicker and correct without lifeline had it been about guns! :D


25. 16 plus 9.

Edit: oh crap, they explain it at the end, I thought I was helping people out 😂


The square numbers are: 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49
something + something = 25
The two numbers must be a square number and below 25, so the only options you have got is 1, 4, 9, and 16.
16 + 9 = 25


It sounds like most of the audience also doesn't know math.


He would probably have answered that correctly at home, and quickly.

I doubt it, he couldn't even give a logical (if not flawed) reason for going with 16, except for that's what the audience thought.<br>You're meant to take a little time a ponder the questions, its almost as if he was unable to read, or just couldn't be arsed doing a math question.

I doubt it, he couldn't even give a logical (if not flawed) reason for going with 16, except for that's what the audience thought.
You're meant to take a little time a ponder the questions, its almost as if he was unable to read, or just couldn't be arsed doing a math question.

Maybe, but the average person really is this stupid. Just look at the polls that all slanted towards A. Pretty good sample size of there that illustrates the idiocy of people.

take into account the time, its not like he have all the time in the world to think properly.

@Isaac Swoyer Pressure definitely counts, idk what you're on about

@Isaac Swoyer what? Pressure can definitely make you blank out and forget how to answer trivial problems

Ofc, the guy may just suck at basic math

No because it’s the same question. When taking a test, pressure doesn’t make you forget, your lack of knowledge does. This was an extremely simple question that anyone who went to 8th grade could answer. And there was not even time pressure. How did this guy pass any math class? This guy is dumb.


4,3 and 5. Sides of a right triangle.<br> Used to demonstrate Pythagoras theorem in school. It's so easy....

4,3 and 5. Sides of a right triangle.
 Used to demonstrate Pythagoras theorem in school. It's so easy....


His biggest mistake was trusting an AMERICAN audience to know basic math.


Bro this question was kinda silly you need to probably implicitly differentiate that problem to solve for 25=(A^2)+(B^2) I don't blame him for getting it wrong even though it is pretty straight forward


Once again a simple math problem exposes the public "education" system in our country.


Holy shit, and those weren't children voting either. Those were genuine adults that have sat through hours of math lessons only to come out the other side just as thick as they came in. Jesus America...


This question is basically asking for the square of one of three numbers in a Pythagorean triplet. A Pythagorean triplet is a set of numbers a, b, and c such that a^2 + b^2 = c^2. However, the answer is limited to being a square number (i.e. perfect square) where a, b, and c must be integers.

The first ten whole number Pythagorean triplets are:

3. 4, 5                 9 + 16 = 25
6, 8, 10             36 + 64 = 100
5, 12, 13         25 + 144 = 169
9, 12, 15          81 + 144 = 225
8, 15, 17          64 + 225 = 289
12, 16, 20      144 + 256 = 400
7, 24, 25           49 + 576 = 625
15, 20, 25       225 + 400 = 625
10, 24, 26       100 + 576 = 676
20, 21, 29       400 + 441 = 841

The solution to this problem is 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.

m = 3 and n = 1 gives (6,8,10), or alternatively m = 2 and n = 1 above with k = 2, simply doubling the (3,4,5) ;
m = 3 and n = 2 (k = 1) gives (5,12,13) etc... infinitely many can be generated this way in seconds


I said 16 at first because i thought 2x2 = 4 and then 4x4 = 16. After i noticed the "sum" of two smaller and realized, ix di. Didnt understand question, specially because is in englishg not my main language. I am tard too :P


As some who is a math major, and has performed on stage, yall shouldn't make fun of this guy. If you don't already know the answer, this is a pretty difficult question to do on stage. There's a lot of pressure and that can prevent you from doing your best. You have 2+3+4+5+6+7=27 different possible equations that aren't easy to do in your head. It isn't obvious that 25 is the answer don't clown my man for not knowing arbitrary facts about numbers.

Yeah, I use the Pythagorean Theorem all the time in university courses, and I still found this question a bit weird - it would have been better if they asked "which of these numbers is the sum of two square numbers?".

Another more precise possible version of this question could be "which of these numbers has a square root that is a possible hypotenuse for a right triangle, where both of the legs are themselves distinct whole numbers?".

Somewhat lengthy, I guess, but it makes a lot of sense to people who are familiar with trigonometry.


I’m an engineer and got this one wrong. To be fair, I misinterpreted what the question was asking, and I get it now.

Did you put all the known values on the top of the green lined paper when you worked it?  ;)

we all know engineers can't do math ;')

I'm only joking, Question was confusing at first glance but reading it carefully is key

It would be more unusual for an engineer to get it correct tbh.

I dyslexiced the math around. 3*3+9*9=36. Though I'm not entirely sure that I was firm on what a square number is.

I mean square roots and exponents sure but I obviously got something bassackwards.


The big money is in the complexity of the way the question is presented, not the actual question


It's not just an ordinary audience of Randoms either. These are mostly ppl that love WWTBAM and who therefore consider themselves pretty smart.


This is what Michael Penn is trying to fix


It’s Pythagorean Theorem. Not only that, it’s the most basic beginner level Pythagorean math equation. Three squared plus four squared equals five squared


ngl I read the question wrong and thought it was asking which of these is the product of 2 square numbers


When I was trying to understand this question I realised that it is wrong . I am from Poland and over here we hardly ever us this " square number " term but from what I gathered a square number is an integer that got created by squaring an integer . That means that anwser B is not the only correct anwser . From what I have seen in the coment section everyone says that B is correct because 3^2 + 4^2 = 25 . This is true however A can be correct as well 0^2 + 4^2 = 16 . Both 0 and 4 are integers and the sum of them equals 16 . Looking at every example with this knowledge we can proove that every anwser is correct 0^2 + 6^2 = 36 and 7^2 + 0^2 = 49 . The question should have been formed this way : Which of these square numbers also happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers excluding 0 or something similar to what I proposed .

@Pim Huisman No, since 8^0.5 is not an integer.

@Carson Lawler When looking at English Wikipedia, I see a number is not necessarily an integer. The page gives the square root of 2 as example, so the square root of 8 would also qualify.  Anyway, I read in a different comment "square number" is synonymous to "perfect square", so never mind.

@Pim Huisman it said two smaller numbers

@Carson Lawler Thank you for your reply. I still don't understand why you find that language odd. How would you have expected it to be worded, if it had been a question you encountered at school?

Edit: I did find the language quite odd, myself. I don't really know why they used the phrase "also happens to be", when the single word "is" could have been used in its place. But I don't get the impression that that is what other viewers are finding strange.

I was also wondering if multiple answers are right, since I saw the term "perfect square" in other video's  for squared integers. A number is not necessarily an integer, but apparently a square number is an integer squared. Else (8^.5)^2+(8^.5)^2=4^2=16, is also a valid answer.

@omp199  yes. It uses language that, though technically fine, is unlike what he would have learned in school, such as “sum of two smaller square numbers”<br>(At least, it’s different from what I learned in school)

@omp199  yes. It uses language that, though technically fine, is unlike what he would have learned in school, such as “sum of two smaller square numbers”
(At least, it’s different from what I learned in school)

@Carson Lawler Are you suggesting that this question is framed oddly? If so, in what way?

In Poland we do call these numbers "kwadrat" which means "square".

Gameshow questions are always framed so oddly

@Sharp Edged Well, in the context of geometry, a square is a shape, not a number. But I doubt anyone would think the question was about adding shapes. In the context of numbers, "square" is the same as "square number". It's just a shorter way of saying it.

@Nightmare Court Pictures Nope, it says "square number" which is a number of the form n*n where n is an integer. Note that "square number" and "square" are different things.

@Tan Jun Huan To justify the OP, technically "Integer" wasn't specified in the question either...so any of these answers can have an infinite combination of real or irrational numbers as squares that can add to give you the answer.

Example 2.4^2 + 3.2^2 = 16

@Gumi_Twylit I don’t think you can have the same two squared numbers that are the same that sums to a bigger square anyway, so the word different is probably redundant there

@Haoto 葉音 - Anime on Piano fun fact: adding one more word to a statement could also change on how you can interpret what a person said.

Adding different between "two [different] smaller square numbers" will do wonders.

I understand the math, but I don't understand the English. <br>What's with US math questions being phrased like an archaic literature decipher question.

I understand the math, but I don't understand the English.
What's with US math questions being phrased like an archaic literature decipher question.

@Tan Jun Huan Oh you are right I totally skipped this part of the question

For example in the case of 0^2 + 4^2, 4^2 is not a smaller square number. It's the same square number

It because the question asked "smaller" square numbers. That's why u cannot have those scenerios


I know it's 15 years old but the truth is, every number has this property, its as other people said Pythagorean Theorem. So even a^2 +b^2 is equal to 16. The a and b would be floating point numbers but the theory hold true. I'd say that this question was not precisely formed.

"Square number" has a specific definition in math and includes only whole numbers whose square roots are integers. Therefore, the square numbers up to 49 are:

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

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


36 is also correct because they didn’t say that the square roots of the square numbers that were added have to be adjacent to each other, so 9+16=25

How could you possibly write 36 as the sum of two other square numbers?


"Welcome to America! Let me be your guide!"


They should of had the "call a 4th grader" option; unfortunately most of us forget this math because we just don't use it

I'd still expect more than 22% of the audience to be able to do basic addition.


You immediately know it is Pythagorean, and even if you can't deduce it via algebra, you can always hit and trial it. What I find stunning is that only 30% knew this.

@destinitra yeah of course that’s right but the answer is quite literally a common example used to demonstrate the theorem so it’s much faster to notice the pattern than to systematically go through every answer

A problem of that size is best solved by brute force.

It would be different to offer a demonstration for an algebra exam. Where they surely require a theoretical proof instead of "I tried everything and found this"

@Namaste Hindustan Um...no. Time doesn't suddenly make the point irrelevant. As long as what I said was relevant to what was said before it, it's relevant. What you're trying to say is you no longer care. Which is understandable.

@Namaste Hindustan Does time change the point?

@Namaste Hindustan I can tell that you probably aren't very good at English. To someone else the rules of the language are very clear and easy to remember. But for you, it's obviously a difficulty. So give other people the same understanding I'm sure you'd like to receive for your poor English skills.

toxic not for Me

I never had to do these questions as I had locally developed classes

So as the saying goes, get rekt

Bro stop trying to make it sound complicated this is basic stuff.

I bet a large proportion of that 30% was guessing too

@Rudrodeep Chatterjee That is making assumptions based off flawed logic. If you do not use something you forget it. It is simple as that. That is why people in schools and even out of schools question why they need to learn x or y because it only comes up in rare cases unless if you work in a field that requires knowing it. Also, keep in mind that at least in the United States they cram stuff into your brain for the sole purpose of you passing a end of the year test... There is a entire comment section of people on a video who hated and were bad at topics when taught in schools but ended up getting better at those topics when learning on their own.

Doppelganger D but if you learn pythagorus theorem, you involuntarily realise triplets of single digits when you see them. You don't need to apply it, just the phrase "sum of squares" sparks it.

@destinitra The point is that most students learn the 3-4-5 right triangle.

It literally is just multiplication & addition. It’s simple. You don’t need all this Pythagorean BS everyone in the comments is rambling about. All it is is there’s only 2 square numbers smaller than 16 (not including 1) which are 4 & 9. 4+9=13 not 16 so it’s not that. There are 3 smaller than 25 which are 4, 9 & 16. Just from that thought of “9&16” you realise “oh that’s makes 25” Done ✅

@Good place Reviewer it literally said in the question "sum of two smaller SQUARE numbers", how clear it can get?

@Anonymous Viewer yeah I thought the sum of the two square numbers had to miraculously had to add up (the sum of )  to one of the numbers and was thinking How's that even possible <br>If they had said which number can have to square numbers that when added up can fit into the number would have made more sense quickly

@Anonymous Viewer yeah I thought the sum of the two square numbers had to miraculously had to add up (the sum of )  to one of the numbers and was thinking How's that even possible
If they had said which number can have to square numbers that when added up can fit into the number would have made more sense quickly

It was in how they worded the question, I think. "Sum of two smaller square numbers" also threw me off. At first, I thought they meant that the number's square root had to be square numbers as well. I thought of the two 4s to make 16, not realizing that I had mixed up 'product' with 'sum.' It took me two minutes to finally make sense of the question.

I'm terrible at math, anything beyond basic multiplication, addition, subtraction, and division I go full Herpa derp derp. I forgot what square numbers were supposed to be and I just took a guess when I saw the 25, thinking to myself maybe it means the numbers that multiply off themselves. I was pleased to find out I was correct. x'D

Alot of sheep in the comments section get terribly butthurt one way or the other about these things, but it is what it is. People have strengths in some areas while severely lacking in others. I have a friend whose husband works in oil and brings 200k home every year and they are dyslexic, never graduated highschool, and never been to college.


Based on the pythagorean theorem my guess is that the answer is 25


one guy not knowing basic math is understandable....A whole audience not knowing the answer is hilarious.

Basic math that most people won’t use in their everyday life.


I was thinking 16 is a square number that you can get from a smaller square number 2x2=4 and 4x4= 16. I bet that's what most people were thinking, 5x5= 25 but no square numbers equal 5


This is a $16000 question?? 🤣<br>In india these type of questions aren't even asked in fastest finger first🤦🤦

This is a $16000 question?? 🤣
In india these type of questions aren't even asked in fastest finger first🤦🤦


This is the video that all teachers should show their “when am I going to need this in life” math students.

@Ryan oh dam man they really should’ve. The probs with the education system.

Yeah man, I remember after graduating high school I was getting all kinds of offers from game shows, they never really tell you about that when you graduate


Apparently the dude hasn't heard about the golden triangle - 3, 4, 5 - which is why it is called "golden" because the lengths of its sides form a sequence of consecutive natural numbers, the largest of which is 5. Knowledge at the elementary school level... Nobody don't have to be a math genius to know that.


Thank you, American schools. You did it!


If you have forgotten the exact definition of the term "square number" - which <i>anyone</i> can do! - then this question will be confusing no matter how good you are at math, because your overall understanding of it will have one "missing link".

If you have forgotten the exact definition of the term "square number" - which _anyone_ can do! - then this question will be confusing no matter how good you are at math, because your overall understanding of it will have one "missing link".


His greates mistake was not in not knowing the math, but in thinking the general public did.


After all English is his own mother tongue and it isn't a tough and taxing questions to understand unless he read it properly...


it would be B right since its 16(4²) and 9(3²)


I didn't understand the question until she explained the answer


She knew the audience was wrong. I suck at math and her body language after the audience poll just made me think the audience was wrong.


.... I didn't realize it was asking to find two squares to equal the sum of a square. oh well lol


"I don't know where your head was at before you asked the audience" That was about the best hint ever. Sad he didn't get it.


I have done enough pyth thm at my school to memorise this.


This really shows how much of the American or British people are actually educated...


One guy not knowing is no big deal, but the number of people who got it wrong in the poll is concerning


Half of the answer is literally on the screen. As soon as you 16, then 25, your mind should already clock there's a difference of 9, and bingo! Astonishing!


🤣 It took me a minute to understand the verbiage of the question. Then once I did, I realized it didn't say they had to be the same number. That's when I figured it out. But, that would be harder under that much pressure. Lol

@SincereSinister they can't possibly be the same number. This would directly contradict the unique factorization theorem.

lmao i didn’t figure that out that it had to be the same number until the question was done i was so confused bc none of them are what i was thinking. i was thinking like 25 + 25


I understood the question so that 4 x 4 is 16 and 4 is 2 x 2, while 5,6, or 7 are not a square of two natural figures...

Wish there were a God but i doubt it. ProDeath.


Just think of it as finding the sides of a right triangle. 345 is a solution so 25


This question took me looking in the comments to understand 😅


I paused the video when the question came up. It did take me a while to answer, but I did eventually come to 3^2 + 4^2 = 25.


Study your math, kids. Key to the universe!


I wouldn’t have known the answer either (though it makes perfect sense now that I do)  so I feel for him and the audience! I just wouldn’t have submitted a vote had I been there😆


this shouldn't have been very hard. 4^2, 5^2, 6^2, and 7^2 were already on the screen. The only other choices are 1, 4 and 9 for two smaller squares than the largest of the choices.

So 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49 -- which two of those add up to one of the others? Easy.


This is called a Pythagorean triple, not difficult at all.


Bro has to teach the pythagoras theorm to a matg teacher


Didn't he know the Pythagorean Theorem? 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2. 9 + 16 = 25. Nobody knew it, apparently- easiest way to do it.


I found the answer as soon as i saw the question in thumbnail


Audience claps on wrong answer
wTF
😂😂😂😂😂

They are just doing what the sign says, don't read to much into it.


Trusting an American audience on a mathematics question is a really bad move.


this is what happens when you believe that pythagorean and trigo will be useless in life.


dear lord... this is such a simple question how do so many people get that wrong =,=


Any sum of the sides of a right triangle squared equals the hypotenuse of a right triangle by Pythagoreans theorem: 100 = 10^2 = 8^2 + 6^2 like the 25 = 5^2 = 3^2 + 4^2 (integer multiple of 4 for 25, 100, 400, etc.) sum of all sides of a right triangle.


This must have been American audience 🤣🤣


A square number is not simply a number squared. It is a number whose square root is an integer.

They took the <b>product</b> of two squares instead of the sum. (2^2)*(2^2).

They took the *product* of two squares instead of the sum. (2^2)*(2^2).

read the question bruh. Both have to be smaller, not just one of them.

if u do enug trigo qns u will always rmb 3 4 5 and 5 12 13

Mark Lynch They immediately associated 16 as a square number

Ryder Washington It's not, you just didn't understand it

Ryder Washington It's not, you just didn't understand it

Root of 16 is 4, root of 4 is 2. 2+2 = 4, that's why people thought it was 16, even I did. Badly written question.

***** 4^2  + 0^2 = 16<br>I mean that 4 is not smaller than 4 itself, it is equal but not smaller. So it's not correct.

***** 4^2  + 0^2 = 16
I mean that 4 is not smaller than 4 itself, it is equal but not smaller. So it's not correct.

Mark Lynch maybe sqrt (9) + sqrt (7)? Sum of those numbers to 2 power is 16

MuffinsAPlenty that'd mean that they dont believe 5 has a square root

Kelly He no, 25 is answer bcs 9+16=25. where 9 and 16 r squares of 3 and 4 resp.

Kelly He No, because it says (...) "happens to be the sum of two SMALLER NUMBERS?"

maybe because 16 is TECHNICALLY correct, because 4^2+0^2=16

DerKeineAhnungMann The person I responded to deleted there comment because I destroyed there logic.

no it's not... the first 10 square numbers are, 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49, 64, 81, and 100.

Santiago Ferrari wow... then every answer is correct. but 9+16 are perfect square numbers arent they...

Santiago Ferrari how is 16 correct.  And with 4 answers, any answer will work 25% of the time...

MuffinsAPlenty the Fuck did they get that from lmao

MuffinsAPlenty the Fuck did they get that from lmao

Mark Lynch I think ppl assumed it as (2 sq ) d whole sq. ... Which is 4 sq = 16 😂

I did it cubed and picked A too (2x2x2=8) 8+8=16 don't ask me why lol

I Calarmati "sum" could mean you have to add the two number but I have to commit, this aint easy to remember ^^

RE:"a number that is both real and greater than 0."<br>They wanted positive integers.

RE:"a number that is both real and greater than 0."
They wanted positive integers.

Maybe they did:
2×2=4 and 2×2=4
Then they got confused and they did:
4×4=16 instead of 4+4=8.

Berry They wanted two smaller squares. 16 is not smaller than 16.

debayan sen 0 has no value. but 0 is still a real number.

So then, we could still say that 16 could be the sum of 4*4 and 0*0, since 4 and 0 < 16.

But I guess what they wanted was a number that is both real and greater than 0 to "make sense", idk. 4^2*0^2 could still be a possible answer.

"-_-"

Vratislav Jindra yes but could be the reason why they voted A

...the sum of two <b>smaller</b> square numbers. You suggested that 16 = 16 + 0, but that doesn't fit the requirement that the two summed numbers have to be smaller than the result square number.

...the sum of two *smaller* square numbers. You suggested that 16 = 16 + 0, but that doesn't fit the requirement that the two summed numbers have to be smaller than the result square number.

I don't even know wtf the question was asking

I don't even know wtf the question was asking

John Długosz oh, yeah, dont know why i somehow though about cubes, not squesres :D thanks

Oh, hey, it's Spidercraft, an answer Youtube gave us for a question no one fucking asked.

Bee Movie Memes I mean you are "bee movie memes"

Bee Movie Memes I mean you are "bee movie memes"

Wow you're so smart!  I wish I was amazing as you were, SpiderCraft53 - Who also does 'Redstone and more'

I thought it was 16, based exactly on what Muffin explained.<br>But I'm an idiot when it comes to mathematics.

I thought it was 16, based exactly on what Muffin explained.
But I'm an idiot when it comes to mathematics.

"happens to be the sum" and "two smaller square numbers" says that that is not the question being asked.

not everyone thought it was 16 - only half the audience thought it was 16.

Based on many, many comments, it appears that a lot of people thought that the question was asking which square number was the square of a square number.   And 16 is the square of a square number since 2^2 = 4 and 4^2 = 16.  Don't ask me why they thought that was the question.  I don't know.


Here’s how you solve this in your head:

2x2 = 4

Subtract 4 from each option. Is the result a square number? No. In order, that would result in 12, 21, 32, and 45.

3x3 = 9

This leaves the following in order: 7, 16, 27, and 40.

No pen and paper required. Just simple square numbers and checking four options with subtraction.


Every single number up there was a correct answer because if you add itself and zero (also a perfect square), you could get any of the answers and they are all correct.

The question asks for a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. The answer cannot be the sum of 0 and itself because a number cannot be smaller than itself.


The key word in the question is SUM-meaning two or more numbers added together. Square number: The product of a number multiplied by itself.  So which of the 4 answers is made up of two numbers, which are then squared(multiplied by their selves) and then they are added together to equal the answer.  4X4=16 plus 3X3=9, then 16+9=25.   Answer: C      English skills are the key to solving word problems in math.

Remembering a few math definitions helps too.


so this is where u apply that Pythagoras theorem


The task itself is so easy, so i think most people didn't understood the question or were overthinking


25 is the correct answer BUT... the question should have specified that it was dealing with natural integers greater than zero {N+} (otherwise 4^2 + 0^2 =16 could also have been true or even 5^2 + (3i)^2 =16, as someone correctly said in the comments )

A square number is a whole number by definition. No further specification is needed.


my math teacher linked this in our lesson


70% of the audience does not know math ...


This is why America needs to invest more in STEM education.


The audience response says a lot about the Avg. American I.Q


Dude the most famous square triangle -.-

traingles aren't square moron, they're triangular!

It is A famous triangle because of the diagram used to demonstrate the Pythagorean Theorem.  However, since this triangle is composed of infrequently used angles,  it is hardly the most famous.  The 1-sqrt(3)-2 and 1-1-sqrt(2) are used far more as they are composed of far more referenced angles.

Huge nerds make huge $. Enjoy working at McDonalds the rest of your life though

ultragamer659 I know how, by being a huge nerd.

lmao you're right. Didn't even think of the right triangle, but did solve it pretty quick. Pretty disappointed to see how dumb the audience is

Yep, the equal angles are pi/4. Also the hypotenuse of sqrt(2) is also pretty important, as in this context it is the start of a famous method to calculate pi.

William Oliver and the most famous because it corresponds to pi/4 and has legs of equal length

indrada 3290609 what about it? It is a valid right angle triangle...

correct that the most abused right angle triangle. or just think about the triples

ultragamer659 damn, how did I miss 7^2 + 24^2 = 25^2 = 625.

I went through a phase where I loved triangles. Worked out that for a and b to be coprime, then c-b is either 1 or 2. Also that a^2 =c+b if c-b=1. There are so many other weird things i found, but i won't bore you with them here.

William Oliver <br>Correct. There are more though. Try and find one where at least one of a or b is prime

William Oliver
Correct. There are more though. Try and find one where at least one of a or b is prime

Guessing that since 625=25^2, it is similar to a 3 4 5 triangle, so is equal to 15^2 + 20^2. Although 676=26^2, which makes it similar to a 5 12 13 triangle, so is equal to 10^2 + 24^2.

Lol Ikr. I'd have been lenient if it had been sth like 529 576 625 676, but man... know that 3 4 5. props to anyone who can work out my problem :-)

Anton Kucher i never said 3, 4 and 5 centimeters.

Matko Trupinić the main thing of Egyptian triangle is that the proportional multiplying is the same Egyptian triangle but with different lengths so can't be made with others

No, egyptian triangle has lenght of sides: 3,4,5 (square of 3 is 9, 4 is 16, 9 + 16 = 25), Indian triangle has 5, 12, 13 :P

ProfessorBorax first thing I thought of as well.

ProfessorBorax Yeah , the Pythagorean theorom and this same question appeared twice in our exam.

ProfessorBorax ikr its literally the first numeric example of the pythagorean theorem

Lol. I immediately realized that after I had read the question several times. Something about the repetitive phrasing really confused me at first.


0^2 is also a square smaller than any of the choices, so technically all of those are correct

@LaughingStock55 thanks for the correction

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

0 + 16 = 16, but 16 cannot be smaller than itself. The only correct answer is 25 = 16 + 9.


It's not such an easy question, in my opinion. Your need a moment of time to think about it. I thought the answer would be 16 at first as well as it is the square of 4x4. And 4 itself is the square of 2x2.

But then i realized that it says "the SUM of TWO smaller square numbers". So it has to be 25. As 25 is the also the sum of 16+9. And 16 (4x4) as well as 9 (3x3) are themselves squarenumbers.

Yeah, i think a lot of people thought this because when you hear square you immediately think square root so they probably thought they were dealing with 4,5, 6, and 7. Although 2 isn’t a square number but yeah, most people think it is.


tbh I also think the answer is 16 and when the answer is revealed, I'm confused, so I read the question again, its a smaller square numbers not square root, I didn't think of 9+16. I'm one of those dumbs.


I think this question is more tricky than people who got this correct in the comments believe.  First you have to remember that a square has to be multipliable by it’s own root only twice.  After you take some time to remember the definition of a square you have to think for a second to remember that 8 is not a square number because 2 x 2 x 2 equals 8 but your really doing 2 x 2 first then 4 x 2 so it does not work.  Then you have to understand that the question is not saying that the numbers don’t have to be equal to each other because even though it is technically impossible it makes 8 plus 8 seem to be a really good option.  So if you don’t do these kinds of math problems everyday then it is easy to forget that a number can be cubed from a smaller number and not be a square.  So if you make these false assumptions that are easier to comprehend then it is hard to break out of that trap to think oh they were really asking something else that leads to an understanding that the answer is 3 x 3 =  9 plus 4 x 4 = 16 then 16 plus 9.


I was like, ah its A), easy! Then when I saw it was B) I was like "fudge, I did'nt understand the question" and would've lost 15k arrogantly without usin a lifeline (;.


How the hell is this a $16000 question?? It should be the first question.

Like... what tactic that Rome used to conquer Egypt? Or what Carthaginians work for a living?

A $16000 question should be about history, not basic math.

A $16000 question should be about history, not basic math.

I heard China and India are excellent at math, science, engineering.

debussy84 I learnt it oust side school at grade 2. We learnt it in school at grade 3 sorry for my comment being so confusing

Deva, please provide your reference.  I typed in "math by grade" in multiple different ways into multiple search engines.  In north America, children are not introduced to multiplication or division until grade 3.  I challenge you to provide a single source that shows this is a grade 2 question.  It's certainly above grade 4.

Aryaman Amitabh It's unbelievable that they actually pay people for those kinds of questions. That doesn't require any knowledge besides primary level education, and it's honestly sickening that people actually couldn't answer it

Ok I searched it up, and I learnt it in late 2nd grade

Ok I searched it up, and I learnt it in late 2nd grade

tjbvver231 Are you really sure, I learnt it in year 3 ....

tjbvver231 Are you really sure, I learnt it in year 3 ....

It's a hard question in front of millions of people.   The first question is usually one that requires no thinking whatsoever.

Aryaman Amitabh heck I learned this in like 4th or 3rd grade

then that would make me MLG_Pr0_Elit3_Mast3r_69

then that would make me MLG_Pr0_Elit3_Mast3r_69

C W i can tell you i had an A in 7th grade maths and I probably couldn't have answered this

Well maybe for some nerdy sheltered Indian like you it would be

+tjbvver231 I'm an American, and I knew about square numbers before I attended elementary school. My father taught me up to the tens times tables at the age of four, and that obviously includes 1 x 1, 2 x 2, 3 x 3, etc. By the time I was in seventh grade, I was taking Algebra II. If today's students are still working on basic arithmetic by seventh grade, then something is amiss.

C W they teach squares in 7th grade in Finland

C W they teach squares in 7th grade in Finland

tjbvver231 nigga im from Iraq and we learnt this stuff in like grade 2

Jojo Wilson<br>"The sum of" just means when added together. It's crazy how many people don't know that. Now, the question could have said "when added together" but that would simplify the question quite a bit because it would be telling you what "the sum of" means.

Jojo Wilson
"The sum of" just means when added together. It's crazy how many people don't know that. Now, the question could have said "when added together" but that would simplify the question quite a bit because it would be telling you what "the sum of" means.

Brian Maputra Kurniawan I thought it was 16 in the early.I thought "sum" was the way to produce by any ways.so it could mean multiplier, additional,etc. So I counted it like this : 2²x2²

Well he got it wrong and so the majority of the audience so that's why.

tjbbvver231
BRO SQUARE NUMBERS IN 7TH GRADE U TRIPPING
where tf u from

Aryaman Amitabh that's not india's KBC. That's American lol 😂😂

Pietro Tettamanti
Who said I was smarter? Anyone can learn squares and multiplication at 5. Yes your environment does come into play on how soon you learn something. Frederick Douglass learned how to read at 12. And still became skilled on giving lectures.

I was given the opportunity to learn early, and I took advantage. As should everyone else. Take advantage of what you got. That's the point in my sayings

Marco
There's some difference. I learnt about square numbers about in 3rd grade cuz the concept behind them is simple and my brother explained it to me because I was curious, but it was taught to us only in 6th grade. Learning before other people only depends about your school and the people around you. So, knowing square numbers at an "early" age doesn't make somebody "smarter" (in fact I suck at maths). As soon as you learn to multiply numbers technically you would be able to understand square numbers.

Marco
There's some difference. I *learnt* about square numbers about in 3rd grade cuz the concept behind them is simple and my brother explained it to me because I was curious, but it was taught to us only in 6th grade. Learning before other people only depends about your school and the people around you. So, knowing square numbers at an "early" age doesn't make somebody "smarter" (in fact I suck at maths). As soon as you learn to multiply numbers technically you would be able to understand square numbers.

Marco i was never the best at language arts class but of course i still kept a decent grade in that class thanks to determination.

Emperor Bob
Yes English and Grammer have always been my weakest subject. I averaged and 90 in that class and I would actually STUDY FOR TEST! BUT STILL AVERAGED A 90!! Any other sub. Was izi.
And sure u noticed. I could clearly tell on how you tried to justify that statement to yourself

Shriyansh Tripathi did you take language arts class?

Shriyansh Tripathi did you take language arts class?

Marco seems to me you didn't finish language arts class. Jk please don't kill me.

Marco i know you were doing that it was blatantly obvious

Marco i know you were doing that it was blatantly obvious

Emperor Bob <br>Yes your correct👍 But if you would have examined my comment you could see that I already knew that. The only reason it would be reasonable for me to make this statement is, bc I was trying to show off to boost yourself confidence for some apparent reason. Now examine this comment, and see what am I saying

Emperor Bob
Yes your correct👍 But if you would have examined my comment you could see that I already knew that. The only reason it would be reasonable for me to make this statement is, bc I was trying to show off to boost yourself confidence for some apparent reason. Now examine this comment, and see what am I saying

Marco ?! I think you just learned it early honestly

Marco ?! I think you just learned it early honestly

I learned basic squares when I was 5. Just wondering why so many learn so old

well, I'm in England and we learnt basic square numbers (like this one) in year four, that's the equivalent of third grade in the US.

Julie Ann you are right sorry for assuming things. But in any case this does not seem like a normal 5th grade topic. Sure we may have gone over this but probably not for that long. Anyways i had no right to assume things so sorry about that it's just i have had it with other people assuming things so i kind of blew my lid 😅

Emperor Bob  we learned this in 5th grade at my school. You didn't go to my school so I would love to know how you know what I did and did not learn

Julie Ann funny i don't think you are correct. We learned this in 6th 7th and 8th grade amd my school is fairly educated

tjbvver231  pretty sure we learned this in 5th grade and im from the US specifically Minnesota

tjbvver231 Japan, Singapore, Finland, etc

tjbvver231 Japan, Singapore, Finland, etc

Narbadeshwar Singh In what place they teach squares in 5th grade?

7th grade level question

C W really! $16000 for a 5th grade question.Only If I were the contestant

Aryaman Amitabh because this is an American TV show and our population is horrible at math. If you can do 3rd grade math you are basically elite.


That's not a math problem, it's a word problem. He was locked into "two smaller squares" being equal, and they weren't.

The best math problems are word problems.


There's so much difference between 'Merican averaged person and the rest of the world concerning studies....
If they don't attend private ultra--mega-hyper expensive universities, they seem not capable of getting over the distance of the nose.
Pretty harsh but, unfortunately, too often truer than not.


I think everyone confused the question as "which square number happens to be the square of two smaller square numbers" so they automatically thought "well 2^2 is 4 and 4^2 is 16 so it must be A" So the problem here is not that people suck at maths it's that they suck at english


list of square numbers:
4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49...

start adding any 2 of them add see if you get a third square number
9 + 16 = 25
Therefore 25, a square number, is the sum of two smaller squares 9 & 16


That was the question for $16,000? In Polish edition that would be probably the first question.


Ok for those who did not understand the question: there is a certain number, say a², which can be made by the addition of b² and c², both being smaller, and b²+c²=a². Find the answer<br>The easiest way to do this would be learning the square table since 9 is 3² and 16 is 4² and they can be added to make 25 which is 5², the other way is the not so obvious 3-4-5 side triangle, which ofcourse you would think of as a coincidence but somehow this works too

Ok for those who did not understand the question: there is a certain number, say a², which can be made by the addition of b² and c², both being smaller, and b²+c²=a². Find the answer
The easiest way to do this would be learning the square table since 9 is 3² and 16 is 4² and they can be added to make 25 which is 5², the other way is the not so obvious 3-4-5 side triangle, which ofcourse you would think of as a coincidence but somehow this works too

The question isn't accurate. First of all any number is sum of two squares, 16 is 1 squared plus root 15 squared. If they want to say whole number, we can still use 0. 0 squared plus 4 squared. What this question asking is sum of squares of two natural numbers. Clearly whoever wrote this question has very limited knowledge in maths.

For me, the reason why I don't really understand the question is because English isn't my first language, so it takes time for me to understand what does that question really mean lol, but thank you for your comment, it helps me!

im pretty sure no one even knows what a squared number is in the audience...

yes,pythagorean triplets solved this question in 10 seconds


that question was really confusing. i couldnt even really understand it myself, so i think him losing is completely understandable on the basis that he didn't understand


I honestly think this is a trick question. The way it is worded is the problem. Everyone went with A because the square root of 16 is 4, which is also a square of two smaller numbers, 2*2. Thats a trick question at its finest.

That's exactly what i thought when i read the question


I'm surprised that 3-4-5 triangles aren't as well known as they should be.


How did he have so much time and still get it wrong? This one is so simple because you know if your right. What two squared numbers did he think made 16 I can only imagine he thought 4*4 or 2^2*2^2 but it’s said sum not product.


The relationship between the squares that make up 25 is the basis for the trick you can use to create perfect right angles with only a string and a measuring tape. A triangle with sides of the ratio 3:4:5 forms a right angle.

@Alexis What I put was a deduction that I got from the exercises that I proposed to my little son. I never got to consult other possibilities. Very thankful.

@punakaify

(simple demo for that)

If
a*a + b*b = c*c

Then

x * (a*a + b*b) = x * (c*c)

(distributive property)

x*a*a + x*b*b = x*c*c

(x natural, for those who want to be rigorous)

In right triangles, when one leg is exactly 1/3 longer than the other, the hypotenuses are whole numbers. 3, 4, 5 - 6, 8, 10 - 9, 12, 15 - 12, 16, 20 etc.

@NISHI TEJIYAN (2✓2 + 2✓2)^2   is not a sum of squares.<br>It is the square of a sum.

@NISHI TEJIYAN (2✓2 + 2✓2)^2   is not a sum of squares.
It is the square of a sum.

When literally haven’t learnt much math not even difficult adding it’s hard and you want to make excuses and I have many. I’d only prefer to struggle if someone sat down with me and struggle with me to teach me but too bad that’s a privilege not a given right. To waste someone else’s time.


What about sum of square of '0' and '4' <br>I think option A was correct as 0 and 4 are smaller than 3 and 4 consecutive

What about sum of square of '0' and '4'
I think option A was correct as 0 and 4 are smaller than 3 and 4 consecutive

0 and 4 sum to 4, not 16.

0 and 16 sum to 16, but this cannot be correct because 16 cannot be smaller than itself. The answer must be a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers.


As an indian seeing getting this question wrong even by the audience makes me wonder americans basic knowledge


If you know your Pythagorean triples, this one is easy.


dammit, im never gonna be good at math......


I’ll never forget my 7th grade math teach showed our class this video and we were all supposed to make our guess with our partner, and everyone said 16 and then my partner said she thought I was wrong and refused to answer 25 with me, and then I was the only one who got it right

Unban me Paul And you do realise that intelligence narrowly measured in some outdated test doesn’t correlate in being wise in politics

Unban me Paul And where did you get these “statistics” from? Buzzfeed?

GD SparkerBoy / Sparky_01 Its true I was the teacher

That couldn't have happened with me. I'm 33. Who Wants to Be A Millionaire didn't exist in the 1990's when I was growing up.

how did this get political in less than 15 replies?

HydraLord1221 At least you are the only one that saw through the original poster's Bullshit.

Max DragonSoul generalizing a country of over 400,000,000 people as all inherently dumb, simply for being born in certain region of the world is more ignorant than getting this question wrong

LunnarisLP You're literally doing the exact same thing. Yes, the rare far-right person will do that, but there are also far-left people who think that every single thing coming out of someone's mouth is offensive and think that every child should be aborted. There are extremes on both sides, and you can't judge a side for that.

idk as far as I am concearned the republicans are mostly idiots waving around guns and trying to show how long their dick is while fixing no problems whatsoever, so that doesn't look like being smart to me xD

GD SparkerBoy / Sparky_01 It's fine, sorry if I seemed a little triggered. I probably took it a bit too far too, with the "Civil War" and all.

+Fariz Ali That's retarded America for you.

Jack Rhodes man ur classmates are dumb as fuck


Such confusing question but my 1st language isn't English. I thought they ment: 25 root number is 5, so 5 + 5 is the sum of two smaller square numbers


Anyone who mocks someone who has trouble with math or some other skill is a potential bully.
Yes, they are, because their attitude is very similar to the attitude of bullies - "haha, I am above this person".

Anyone who mocks someone who has trouble with math or some other skill is a potential bully.
_Yes,_ they _are,_ because their attitude is very similar to the attitude of bullies - "haha, I am above this person".


Good KBC is made by getting inspired from here.


The answer is 25, because 9+16=25. 9 is a square number because 3×3=9 and 16 is a square number because 4×4=16. It's easy when you are at your home and have time to think and can see the options on the screen, but I imagine that if you are in a tv show where your answers will cost money this may be too much pressure to handle and also you have limited time to think, this makes things difficult


i think its more likely that he failed to understand the question rather the math


Man was literally so pissed and disappointed at the end that he doesn't even wanna take that 1000$.


Which of these square numbers also happens to be the sum of two smaller "squared" numbers.

"Square" number.

Square number is another term for perfect square.


It's 25 since, 9+16=25 or 3^2+4^2=25. 9 and 16 are square numbers that are smaller to 25. Square numbers are 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49, 64, etc. Most people could instantly solve this but they confuse themselves with the question.


she was pushing not to go with the audience


I can see how the answer is what it is, but I misunderstood the question, which is proof I suck at math.


0:38 "Take your time"

All you gotta do is think about perfect squares and start summing them together randomly till you get one of the solutions (B).

A isn't right since all you have to work with is 1, 4,  9, 16. None of those will sum to 16.
C isn't right since you have 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36 to work with. Quick checks shows none of those add to 36.
D  isn't right by the same procedure.

B is correct since you have 1, 4, 9, 16, and 25 to work with. A quick look shows that 9 + 16 = 25.

EagleLogic He means the square root of 7 being squared + the square root of 3. Squaring the square root of 7 gives you 7, plus the square root of 3, which is 9. 7+9 = 16. You clearly haven't reached high school yet, either that or you forget basic math pretty easily.

The problem was that he didn't understand the question

Imtotallydiggingthis Вот и я о чём говорю! Если спросить меня на русском языке о сумме: квадрат числа "3" и квадрат числа "4", то очевидный ответ "25". :-D

А на самом деле:
Меньшие из квадратов чисел, и никак иначе! А это соответственно для 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7;
будут
1; 4; 9; 16; 25; 36; 49;

Только один момент! Ещё раз "меньшие из квадратов чисел", т.е. из ряда 1; 4; 9; 16; 25; 36; 49; это будут меньшие числа 1; 4; сумма 1+4 = 5 (sic!)

Квадрат числа 5^2 = 25 (sic!)

Перевод для английских ребят ниже.
Smaller square numbers? Serious?

I think smaller square numbers is 1^2=1, 2^2=4.

1+4=5;
5^2=25.

There is 3^2+4^2=5^2=25, sic!
And NO SMALLER square numbers:
3^2=9, 4^2=16.

Hi from Russia! And russian educations! LOL

Imtotallydiggingthis Вот и я о чём говорю! Если спросить меня на русском языке о сумме: квадрат числа "3" и квадрат числа "4", то очевидный ответ "25". :-D

А на самом деле:
Меньшие из квадратов чисел, и никак иначе! А это соответственно для 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7;
будут
1; 4; 9; 16; 25; 36; 49;

Только один момент! Ещё раз "меньшие из квадратов чисел", т.е. из ряда 1; 4; 9; 16; 25; 36; 49; это будут меньшие числа 1; 4; сумма 1+4 = 5 (sic!)

Квадрат числа 5^2 = 25 (sic!)

Перевод для английских ребят ниже.
Smaller square numbers? Serious?

I think smaller square numbers is 1^2=1, 2^2=4.

1+4=5;
5^2=25.

There is 3^2+4^2=5^2=25, sic!
And NO SMALLER square numbers:
3^2=9, 4^2=16.

Hi from Russia! And russian educations! *LOL*

Иван Васильев

Imtotallydiggingthis The terminology is fine. You simply assumed a definition without knowing what the term refers to. Do not get mad at mathematicians or the english language. Just learn from your mistake and move on.

The question is clear.  I honestly solved it in my head before the answer was shown.  It took me like 30 seconds

EX Muslim Mol7ed it said two smaller. The question is clear. Nothing about being the same

Mathematical terms are a subset of the English language. "Square number" is not a mathematical term in Russian or Mandarin.

Also, if square number is a mathematical term, then so are square and number, in the context we are using them in.  The fact that "number" has a different semantic meaning when you put the word "square" in front of it is shit stupid. English speaking mathematicians failed on that one.

Imtotallydiggingthis Square number is a mathematically defined term, not a colloquial English one. There's no ambiguity whatsoever in the question.

Those are the numbers to square. But apparantly, "square number" doesn't mean the same thing as the combined meanings of "square" and "number", so the question wasn't flawed after all, only the English language.

How does √7 + 3  = 16? The solution to that is 5.65 rounded.

The way they worded it, he has a lot more to work with than that. √7 and 3 makes 16 correct. All answers are correct.

A lot of math problems seem tricky from the wording, but is actually very easily executed. It just comes down to attention to detail


25.
3x3=9
+
4x4=16
=
5x5=25
Source: Highschool geometry teaching us the Pythagorean theorem.


The question can be formulated to say:
Which of these numbers can be a hypotenuse to a right triangle squared ?
A 3, 4 5 right triangle is famous


I had to think it for like 40 seconds but I got it right!


📌
🔴4²+3²= 5²
Science students Directly remembers PGT ( Pythagoras theorem) questions


Holy shit the people in this comment section are so smart.

@Azhar Haque the problem with "basic math" is it really isn't basic. this problem is basically asking if you know about the 3-4-5 triangle which is a random fact on its own. if you don't know it, it doesn't mean your dumb but it clearly means you're ignorant/or have forgotten math altogether. I myself am good at math, but had to take a while answering the problem.

KanyeWet I think you're easily apart of that 80%.(:

IKR? Niggas thinking they have 160 iq for figuring out Pythagoras

Because they all have google as friend :)

Nah. We just learned and remember Pythagorean theorem.

When you do enough Pythagoras theorem, it sticks to you. Like 12^2 and 5^2 adds to 13^2. Or 4^2 and 3^2 is 5^2

Because the question is unimaginably easy

I mean I'm not smart but I'm so advanced in math now that I can actually calculate the probability in my head of me being in the situation seen in the video above. It is very low and not actually worth the time I started investing in it back in 2007 after watching this video. Fuck me, I wasted all this time and effort and it's too late now, should have gone for horticulture.

"If its dumb assume its american and move on with your day."
-The United Kingdom

But tbh I can agree I'm not smart lol

"If its dumb assume its american and move on with your day."
_-The United Kingdom_

But tbh I can agree I'm not smart lol

Many people are pointing the finger at Americans as if people in their country were smarter but being smart is not a matter of where you're from. There is only an educational issue. There are some countries where school and studying are the most important things in life and other countries where people don't even go to school

Why would you assume I'm American? I'm not. So we are back again at the point of reasonable thought which you have just proven pretty effectively.

Lol, turns out Americans are insecure as well as dumb. Learn to accept that your country is mostly made of morons and find the humour in it. The UK has a population of imbiciles too, but we know how to laugh at our incompetence. Christ, you guys are touchy...

"And nobody should feel good about knowing the answer to this fuck easy question." Are you fucking stupid. That's exactly what I said. Jesus, you really do have problems comprehending basic English sentences. Going from a room of about 100 People to "the American public" is also such a stupid thing to say. It's funny that people who feel the need to boast online that they where able to solve basic algebra questions and those "stupid Americans" couldn't are unable to have any reasonable thought?! Maybe you are on the spectrum.

Tagæyan Lol @ trying to correct someone's correct use of grammar. The act of people knowing mathematics is the subject of the sentence, not the people themselves...

And nobody should feel good about knowing the answer to this fuck easy question. I only find it hilarious how laughably bad the American public seems to be at primary school-level mathematics.

I didn't say show off, I said feeling good about it. Two very different things. The fact that you couldn't comprehend that simple English sentence makes you objectively a bit thick. Also it's "people [...] are" not "is". That is basic primary school English. If you didn't know that, you are objectively a bit thick.

You think that people knowing basic primary school maths is showing off?? No, if you didn't know the answer to that, you are objectively a bit thick.

Tactical Chunder saying "how stupid people have become" is only something a stupid person would say because the level of education world wide is at an all time high with upward trends. So what is it? Did you stop education after "literally" primary school so you don't have the ability to read statistics but can feel good about solving basic algebra questions? Really makes you think.

It’s literally a primary school level question... it’s sad how stupid people have become.

i honestly thought both square numbers were supposed to be the same numbers and i couldnt find solution, im retarded lol. but picking a is dumb smh 2^3 is cubed not squared

KanyeWet is so smart I can't even handle it. He's above us all, looking down at us dumb peasants like fucking Einstein

thelegend 27 it's really not, it's basic math you just can't be that dumb

Nope. You guys dumb. But no worries at least 80% of the population is as dumb considering the audience results so don't take it bad and be happy with what you have

Holy shit we have the exact same profile picture

Sea Dog Just people trying to feel smart on Basic arithmetic. To be honest I failed too.


A SQUARE NUMBER IS A NUMBER IF YOU TAKE THE SQUARE ROOT COMES OUT TO A CLEAN WHOLE NUMBER. For example:  4,9,16,25,36,49,64….


When skipping Pythagoras' theorem costs $15,000 then how much cost will one pay for skipping calculus?


The actuall problem was very easy, but the wording is what made it difficult.