It's a purposefully worded question. I did not see an answer until I thought about it a second time. It's a clever way to drill home word problems. Not sure about the people who committed to 16 though.

John Mista true. I thought they had to be the same at first before I realized it didn’t matter lmao. I got it right but it’s kinda a dumb question that’s not very specific

Honestly I also picked 16 at first. The question at first made me naturally think about the square root of the number twice. Like square root of 16 is 4 and square root of that is 2. Thhen the second part asked for the sum of that. If this question was laid out like an equation it would be way too easy, but I can see how under a time limit we just went with the first natural assumption we had in mind and went with it. Hard to explain the thought process but I can totally see why people thought of it like that.

They committed to 16 because they are americans

Because they don't understand the definition of SUM.

The King<br>I know. It's just that I never learned maths in English and most of the time when I heard the word "square" it was when I heard "square root", so I guess I just associated the words with each other. 😓

The King
I know. It's just that I never learned maths in English and most of the time when I heard the word "square" it was when I heard "square root", so I guess I just associated the words with each other. 😓

Ben Fisher I mean It doesn't even say roots...

I picked 16 because I'm not a native english speaker and thought the question meant square roots instead of square numbers... 😓<br>(√16 =) 4 + (√144 =) 12 = 16

I picked 16 because I'm not a native english speaker and thought the question meant square roots instead of square numbers... 😓
(√16 =) 4 + (√144 =) 12 = 16

Like, who did NOT learn an example of the Pythagorean theorem as 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2?

@Peter Brunton Yep, right on. But my original assessment of the question I wasn't thinking low to high. I simply ruled out 16 and evaluated all the numbers. Then a couple seconds later I realized go low to high.

@Unknown Unknown Because of the way the question is phrased, you don't have to rule out the higher numbers. The rules of the game are that only one answer is correct, so you're not being asked to identify all solutions, just the first viable solution. As soon as you find an answer that works, you can stop, because logically the remaining answers must be wrong. So you test 16 and eliminate it, test 25 and discover that it satisfies the criteria, and then 25 is your answer because you already know that there can't be more than one option that works.

It took me about 30 seconds but 16 was an easy choice to rule out. The higher numbers were trickier to rule out.

John Mista I know! If not careful, the question can confuse you with its diction, especially under tremendous amount of pressure. I can’t blame him.


something close to 80% of the audience got it wrong!! Crazy....


I'm sorry but the audience must be 1st graders


If only this could be held in Asian, he could have answered it correctly


People need to understand the difference between sum and product.


Sourav I know you've probably had some bad experiences with Americans or something, but America is a diverse place. Calling Americans stupid is calling every other ethnicity, culture, and religion stupid, including yours.. Also, compared to 65%, 35% is not a large number. Also, you said Java and Python, which are popular programs here, I was just wondering if there are selectable language options, or does someone have to recode python but in Hindi?

I'm pretty sure they are as dumb anywhere else. The world is just too stupid IMO

Sourav, we all know you only hate America because it's so relevant to the rest of the world and no one gives a shit about your country. I hope your country gets invaded so your country will beg for Americas help.

Charles Remande never rely on the u.s. public

Sourav and to respond for nightmare's comment, so India is the best contributor for all the space junk? Thanks, now I'll know which country to blame. 😂 You're point about Bill gates holds literally no value to your argument, you want to know why? I'll tell you anyway because you're probably too incompetent to know why by yourself: India DIDN'T invent microsoft, and they didn't invent it first, an american did and WITHOUT the help of India 😂 you want to know what else america did first without the help for your second world country? Invent uses for electricity like the lightbulb, create the first infrastructure for telecommunication (that means invent the telephone and the means to implement it since you probably don't understand what you are reading), invent motorvehicles, and a slew of other things, but you are probably lacking in the history department as well as english so you are most likely too ignorant with your head so far up India's shit filled ass, that India literally wouldn't be anywhere without the U.S. How about next time your fat virgin ass reaches for a world history book before you waddle over here with your ignorance? 😂

Sourav I am laughing my ass off fo real 😂 dude, your roasting game is fucking weak 😂 I think you're better at receiving shit that spewing it 😂 Like no one in america uses weak stuff like "there's more toilets in india than there are people in the U.S" like that were an insult 😂 well no shit you dolt, India has an overpopulation problem, and yet you STILL lack enough toilets for everybody, about 55 million in shortage, thats why there's so much shit in your streets 😂 I think I really must have struck a nerve to make you shake that pathetic roast 😂 the reality is there is such high rape rates in India,  if nothing else you might actually not even know your own father 😂 but in any case you refuse to listen don't you? Thats why you are such a dumbass, I already told you i'm not American 😂

Sourav Oh my gosh, you actually consider those two as seperate languages! 😂 How fucking brain dead are you for real? 😂 You dont put python or java under languages in a resume you fucking donkey 😂 but if you want to get that technical then I can speak 7 languages. 😂

Sourav god damn your indian nationalism is fucking appalling. You dont have any success of your own, so you just claim any success your "group" of any Indians have made.

Sourav Also, you're not one to talk about changing subjects when you ignored Alex eng's question you fucking hypocrite 😂 I can answer the question, I understand all the concepts you have been stating 😂 but for me to even bother to answer your silly question, tell me, why should I even care to entertain you when I don't even care about you or who you are? 😂 Who the hell even are you for me to try to prove myself to? You're nobody 😂 you're just one out of the billion street shitting Indians on the planet, who feels a lack of individuality that you feel the desperate need to try to impress people on the internet as if we were you're alchoholic father 😂 you must REALLY be new here if you genuinelly believe that how you have been dealing with me is how things work here 😂 why dont you just stay in your shit stained country and continue working as a taxi driver before you try to come onto people from other countries 😂

Sourav English is not mine either as stated previously 😂 And its not so hard, I speak Spanish, but I doubt you could make proper sentences in a secondary language like me either since you admit that you're english is weak 😂 It takes a particular brain capacity to be able to know two languages which you just proved you lack such a basic skill 😂, have you been using google translate to help you this whole time? 😂 If you can't even speak english properly, then I highly doubt you could even answer your own  question 😂 you probably just looked up math problems on google while you looked up how to translate your probably just as poor hindi into english. 😂

Sourav 😂 Learn how to structure a proper sentence first, and learn basic punctuation. 😁 An american first grader can form a better sentence than you, 😂 is english too hard for you? Is it so difficult for your small mind to grasp proper punctuation? English isn't even my first language and yet I speak it better than you. 😂 Try again, and this time, use proper english. Though I know that that is too difficult for you. 😏

Sourav kid, who the hell goes "hahahaha"? When I have nothing to talk about? I'm actually stating REAL facts, not talking out of my ass like some child who can't even fact check what he's spouting, like how 35% of indians dont really work in NASA, look at hyperfoxie's link, that's why its there 😂. You're just looking more and more like a genuine idiot, because you just automatically assume im American, but in actuality i'm not 😂, typical pompous prick 😂. Sure I can tell you about trigonometry, why, do you need help with your high school non advanced math homework? 😂 How about your basic, elementary level english? You look like you could use some help with sentence structuring. 😂

Sourav https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-NASA-employees-are-Indian. Oh yeah and theres the private space sector thats growing, with leaders like SpaceX that are drastically cutting down costs to make spaceflight efficient

Sourav, you didn't answer my question. You were just talking about how people in India are better again.

Sourav, Harvey's number has nothing to do with intelligence, it has to do with random knowledge. Intelligence is about figuring things out and being able to easily grasp new concepts, not just memorize dates and formulas. Truly intelligent people will not memorize the random information but actually figure out why that information is useful and makes sense. You seem to already know Harvy's number so tell me, what does it mean and how can you use it? I am not only asking for formulas but am also asking for why the formula's make sense.

Sourav are you asking a question or making a statement?

Sourav yeah, that the other 65% arent indians, despite the fact that the US is a melting pot of people from other national backgrounds, making those 35% of indians part of the group you just called stupid. Got any more shit you wanna spew by belittling an entire population just to make your little wounded ego sitting atop your ivory tower feel superior?

Sourav Thats funny how a country who is weak in math and science is also the only nation to ever put a man on the moon, as well as having the largest GDP in the world. I’m not saying we’re perfect, but don’t generalize a country of over 400 million people and not expect me to call you out on your bullshit.

navid sgs <br>Yeah especially if you already remember some triplets

navid sgs
Yeah especially if you already remember some triplets

GD SparkerBoy / Sparky_01 In Britain here there are so many students who are so good at maths, but then you get the people who are so below the standard. I kid you not someone thought 1--1 equalled 0 (and these are 13 year olds I'm talking about) while a kid in our class can easily do his A levels( not sure what the name of your exam taken at 17/18 years is called)

GD SparkerBoy / Sparky_01 <br>There are infinitely many  triplets so do not try to memorize them all 😊.

GD SparkerBoy / Sparky_01
There are infinitely many  triplets so do not try to memorize them all 😊.

GD SparkerBoy / Sparky_01 the answer is instantly obvious, being part of the most famous pythagorean triplet. I learned this in ~7th grade.

GD SparkerBoy / Sparky_01 don't get demotivated
Intelligence has nothing to do with immediate answers.
Intelligence = More thinking

GD SparkerBoy / Sparky_01 <br>60 sekonds is not a good time for such an easy question -_-

GD SparkerBoy / Sparky_01
60 sekonds is not a good time for such an easy question -_-

doesnt even take 10 seconds if you deal with math often


That question needs to be rephrased I'm confused to what it's asking.😅😅

I find this question kind of confusing myself, and I have studied fairly advanced math courses at university, so this has almost nothing to do with being "bad at math", or whatever.


Best way is to try and eliminate the wrong answers, starting with small numbers because they require the least calculation. (A) can be eliminated with 2 calculations, namely 3^2+2^2 = 13 and 3^2+3^2=18. Then just move onto the next smallest number.


If I were American, I wouldn't ask the audience for anything

What an underrated comment and reply..both So true

Uvuvwevwvewve Ossas you could ask them which celebrities are dating. That they know.


the question was worded a bit weird but it took me a whopping 4 seconds to see how obvious the answer was lmao

@Peter precisely. Don't forget hypotenuse.

@Peter are you serious? That's like a million times more complex.

What's weird about the wording? Not a native english speaker here and I found it clear and precise. Genuinely asking.


It's fairly easy to get it wrong when  you're up there. Lots of pressure. Just a honest mistake

I was wrong too as I multiplied the numbers and not added them and then it's 16

You don't know that lmao. Stop trying to make yourself feel better. The audience is something else. But being up there is a different story

No... He simply didn't know math.<br>And 50 % voted A too.

No... He simply didn't know math.
And 50 % voted A too.


bro i was over here thinking abraham lincoln-


Bullshit question, who said the squares had to be integers?

GengarTheTroll common knowledge twat! Pick the best answer. It was clearly 25.

OverLordGoldDragon e^(-pi/2)

Nice try though. Not that you need such an advanced understanding of mathematics to answer a question about what a square number is...

I bet 99% of the self-proclaimed math-heads in here don't even know what i^i is.

ServentsofSauron Yeah I was the one who said the square of a complex is real, not OverLordGoldDragon. It was a rookie assertion I made without thinking it through.

Obviously there's plenty of complex numbers with complex roots.

OverLordGoldDragon
I know this is a week old but I think you should know what you get when you square 1 + i.
(1 + i)(1 + i)
=1 + 2i + i^2
=1 + 2i - 1
=2i
The product is complex, therefore i + 1 is not a square number

You're wasting your breath here. Everything has already been clarified, and there isn't a need to argue anymore.

MrSupdup Well, first of all, I admire you not using a single cussword in your reply (unlike 3/3 other comments I've made around here).

So, yes it doesn't seem to make sense. And, also, be careful with "complex" - complex means a + bi (and a could = 0 - but it could also not). If you take 1 + i and square it, see what you get.

But regardless, they could be a bit more specific and replace "numbers" with "integers" - otherwise who the heck knows what might happen (just like we saw with the complex example).

And really... to be honest... who the F*@! cares?? These people have nothing better to do than to rant over a definition over a YouTube video, huh? Blah.

OverLordGoldDragon

Lol what? My education on the topic stems from 8 years of study and a doctorate. Citing the definition of a word isn't an appeal to authority. There would literally be no point to square numbers if it encompassed the set of real numbers. And it couldn't encompass the set of complex numbers...the square of a complex number cannot be a complex number, hence no complex numbers can be square numbers. Just think about it. i = root(-1). i^2 = (root(-1))^2 = -1. -1 is not a complex number.

But that aside, what would be the use of square numbers if they could be the squares of all reals? With the formal (and only) definition I posted above the square numbers would be: 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49, 64, 81, 100 etc.
Under your definition the square numbers would be every single number. 2 is root(2) squared. 3 is root(3) squared. Pi is root(pi) squared. -1 is i squared. -2 is 2i squared, etc.

What would be the point of square numbers if every number is a square number. Why not just call them numbers?

MrSupdup Nonsense.

What you classify as a "formal definition" is of no relevance here. There are many "formal definitions" and Wolfram Alpha simply uses the one given by the commonsense assumption. In mathematics, a "number" is defined as any finite constant quantity not possessing surreal or hyper-real properties - that includes irrational numbers and complex numbers.

Please don't cite "fundamental mathematics" and ask others to educate themselves before arguing if you're the one lacking proper education about the topic.

Your false appeal to authority ends here.

Pierre Stöber Yes, it has been clarified now...

GengarTheTroll here is what wikipedia says about square numbers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_number

PizzaPyromancer What he said was extremely simple.. I'm taking AMC 10's now.. I know what he means..

It was a bit unnecessary to mention Wolfram, mention the set of integers, Z. Overall, I thought that it was a great explanation, but there wasn't a need to go into that amount of detail..

A bit rude on your part..

GengarTheTroll It's funny that the person who doesn't understand what they're talking about is trying to correct the person who obviously knows. Your question of "who said squares have to be integers?" warranted MrSupdup's explanation of the formal definition, so it actually wasn't too complex; it was what you were asking for.

MrSupdup Okay, thank you for the clarification. It has been a while since I have encountered someone so intelligent on the internet. A bit too complex an explanation though. Would've been a lot simpler to say "By the fundamentals of mathematics, all square numbers have to be integers." XD

The fundamentals of mathematics say so. Its formal definition is S_n = n^2 for some n in the set Z.

Z is the set of integers. From Wolfram a square number is "An integer that is the square (i.e., second power) of another integer". Key there being the word integer

The fundamentals of mathematics say so. Its formal definition is S_n = n^2 for some n in the set *Z*.

*Z* is the set of integers. From Wolfram a square number is "An integer that is the square (i.e., second power) of another integer". Key there being the word *integer*

Danilo Alamillo I'm sorry, but I don't think you understood my original comment because that wasn't relevant in any way.

He didn't hear it right apparently. She said sum of two smaller square numbers.


I didn't think about the fact that is was a SQUARE number, so I said 16 because 2^4 = 16 and 2^3 + 2^3 = 16. My brain just went "square number = a number raised to the power of something", but 2^3 is a CUBIC number... :(

♫ hello darkness my old friend ♫


i haven’t seen the full video yet but i think it’s 25 (9 + 16)


When not even the audience knows the answer:
Tell me you're in America, without telling me you're in America

When not even the audience knows the answer:
*Tell me you're in America, without telling me you're in America*

The classic “America bad+dumb” comment to farm likes. Very clever thinking, supreme leader

The people who live in my country don’t have many restrictions for guns which is pretty worrying since a lot of them shouldn’t be allowed guns

There you go

@Ai dono oh;; so 16 = 4*4,
therefore numbers like 3*3, 2*2, 1*1, or 0*0 need to be used because it says "two smaller square numbers"
I'd still approve that answer tho lol

@Ai dono *two smaller square numbers,<br>although 16=4*4, apparently it has to be smaller than 4 . . . BUTTTT I thought that was a cool answer too XD

@Ai dono *two smaller square numbers,
although 16=4*4, apparently it has to be smaller than 4 . . . BUTTTT I thought that was a cool answer too XD

@Kim Jong-un    You can't even launch a missile... gtfoh..... LMAO XD

You’re acting like you’re a god at math lmao stfu it’s not like they said what’s 2+2


The Youtube comment section should have been the audience lol


I feel so stupid for not knowing the answer...<br>Either that or the question's wording confused me.

I feel so stupid for not knowing the answer...
Either that or the question's wording confused me.

TwisterLord The wording confused me as well.

TwisterLord it's the way that the question words it. Let me explain it simply. What square root number (of the multiple choices) is he the sun of two smaller square root numbers.

The answer is A. The square root of 16 is 4, and the square root of 4 is 2, thus making 2 a square root number. 2+2 is 4.

Never mind this shit is impossible to explain simply. If you see what the answer is, you'll get it

@BenjiTech
"Can you elaborate? Because I don't see another interpretation."

Some people thought it was asking which square root (from the listed numbers) was also a number that could be gained by adding the sum of 2 numbers multiplied together, which gets the square root of the number picked. In that case, it'd be 16. I thought it was that too, because I thought there was a typo or something in there, lol. This question reminded me of a completely different problem, so I went off that memory. But I realize what it really meant, now.

Mychal Moser "lose the the redundant words"

Redundant words make this question confusing to me and distracts from the meaning of it. Better wording would be:

"Which of these is the sum of two small square numbers?"

Lose the the redundant words, ie "square numbers" "happens to be" "also".

TwisterLord It depends on how much you value your pride.

TwisterLord i also didnt knew the answer, because english isnt my first language and can only do math like that in german

+BenjiTech - I was replying to +Casaj Ion

Whilst yes the famous triangle 5^2 = 3^2 +4^2, even if you don't know that then you can work it out through guessing and checking. 2^2 = 4, 3^2 = 9. 9+4 = 13.  4^2 = 16. 16+4 =20 but 16+9 = 25 and that's an answer so go with it.

TwisterLord The wording of the question is screwing me up. I know my square roots and arithmetic but I'm interpreting the question in two different ways.

BenjiTech i'm not american, but I don't remember learning this at school — but math was by far my worst subject…wish I got it

TwisterLord i thought it was 16 as well because 2 squared is 4 and 4 squared is 16. I didn't understand the question.

bkmbkmbkm12 that's not a square number, that's a number to be squared.

bkmbkmbkm12 Do you not know what an integer is? It's a whole number with no fraction/decimal. For example, 32, 46, 12, and 15 cannot be square rooted into integers where 25 and 36 can.

bkmbkmbkm12 No, you're wrong. Square numbers refer to numbers that can be square rooted into integers.

"Which of these square numbers also happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers." I'm not calling anyone stupid or anything but I don't get how that question is confusing.

John Morales <br>Yea, I get it now. It's just the question was vague asf

John Morales
Yea, I get it now. It's just the question was vague asf

I thought it meant 2 of the same square numbers, and I thought there were no no correct answers

John Morales I get it, but the question is confusing IMO.

It's complicated first reading it but you just go step by step each square number and then the answer is easy
1 square is 1
2 square is 4
3 square is 9
4 square is 16

9 + 16 is 25


i thought i it was going to be bad based on the thumbnail, but oh my was it somehow much worse than i couldve imagined


The host ,by the way, warned him ("You have other lifelines")....<br>Seems like he doesn't have common sense.

The host ,by the way, warned him ("You have other lifelines")....
Seems like he doesn't have common sense.

He should have backed down and take his winnings. Right?

@Name Less I'm not being rude when I say this but maybe you should reread the whole comment thread involving me. He didn't know where to start when trying to figure it out. Also even though A isn't the right answer it was still the most popular even adding the other two up still doesn't equal 50%. Using up all your lifelines on one question is guaranteed that you won't make it pass the next two questions.

@Daisy The thing is- the host warned him and let him know that he has oyher lifelines. Even if he didn't use any more lifelines he should've taken the signal and understood that at least A isn't the right answer. Then may be try to figure out the answer out of the remaining 3...

@Daisy <br>Well you'll get the money at least.

@Daisy
Well you'll get the money at least.

@Abhinav Singh I agree but what's the fun in cutting your loses? It doesn't really make good tv.

@Daisy I think you're correct.
By the way, in your second reply, you said he would anyway lose his money..... But I think that there would be an option to QUIT the game.
That would have atleast got him a 1,000$ more.......
Dont you think so???

@Abhinav Singh because it was the older version im assuming that the lifelines are

Ask the audience
50:50
And phone a friend

50:50 would not help because it would still have been A & B

Phone a friend may have helped but the person could have been thinking in favor of the audience.
So unless he felt he had something to loose then in retrospect using up your lifelines is dumb.

@Daisy hmmmmm......
But if you are not sure about the answer, you should use those lifelines.
The audience poll was also not clearly on the side of Option A. There were many who supported Option B.
So, he should have used the other lifelines.

Using all your lifelines for one question isn't all that smart though

wow mean. he just asked the audience because he trusted them


took me a solid 4 minutes to solve my self lol.

It took 2 minutes to understand Ques else super easy.<br>9+16

It took 2 minutes to understand Ques else super easy.
9+16


Shit man, if I was on that stage with all that pressure I would probably fuck it up too.

Maybe, that doesn't justify more than 70% of the audience getting it wrong though.


How can it not be A? It does not specify that the numbers must be different.

How can it not be A? It does not specify that the numbers must be different.

Burlap Sack your actually so dumb, the jons tho!

Burlap Sack your actually so dumb, the jons tho!

***** No, a douche would be insulting him because of his illiteracy. I simply stated he was wrong because of his illiteracy. See the difference?

***** No, a douche would be insulting him because of his illiteracy. I simply stated he was wrong because of his illiteracy. See the difference?

MrSteven334 yes you were trying to be a douche

MrSteven334 yes you were trying to be a douche

Alicia Embrey i agree, i said in the pparentheses "if they are the same" meaning if there were two exact same square numbers. 9 and 16 do add to 25 but they are not same values.

Aayam Sharma 9 and 16 are both square numbers that add up to 25.

Aayam Sharma 9 and 16 are both square numbers that add up to 25.

Burlap Sack<br>Its funny that when I started working in Switzerland and my spoken French was 'basic' at best, there were more communication issues with our US colleagues speaking English than the French-speaking Swiss. There were sometimes huge differences of understanding of simple sentences. I'm no slouch at maths but I misunderstood the question completely. Would be interesting to see how many UK-English speakers interpreted the question.

Burlap Sack
Its funny that when I started working in Switzerland and my spoken French was 'basic' at best, there were more communication issues with our US colleagues speaking English than the French-speaking Swiss. There were sometimes huge differences of understanding of simple sentences. I'm no slouch at maths but I misunderstood the question completely. Would be interesting to see how many UK-English speakers interpreted the question.

Burlap Sack I completely misunderstood the question, too, and went with 16. Weird.

Burlap Sack I completely misunderstood the question, too, and went with 16. Weird.

Daniel Sharples<br>difficult howwwwww? :s

A=16
4 squared is 16.
Granted, 1 squared would be 1, but you add that to 4 and get 17.
With 25, it's 4 squared, which is 16, and 3 squared, which is 9, to make the answer.

It's understandable that he wouldn't know this, it is a difficult process.

punkatux  Technically knowing the meaning of the word "sum" is not an endeavor in mathematics, but rather one in vocabulary.

CSmyth89 In what ways is the country fucked?

This comment and this video shows why America is fucked lol

This comment and this video shows why America is fucked lol

How is "Which of the following numbers is the result of adding two smaller square numbers."
easier or even different to read than "Which of the following numbers is sum of two smaller square numbers."?

Guy who claims he has no problem with math should know that a sum is actually result of adding numbers.

The question is so simple how people say that the answer is A ? 8 + 8??? the square root of 8 is 2.82 in that logic then the correct answer is all of them why should it be A?

Jonas0291
No there's a difference. A troll would pointlessly offer a reply that is inconceivably stupid.

You offered a reply that wasn't stupid, it's just been stated multiple times. If you want to claim you weren't trying to act smart and weren't using the concept of "trolling" as a crutch, then I suppose you're one of the most unoriginal trolls I've seen.

In either case, it's pathetic.

Jonas0291<br>You can't possibly expect people to take your comments seriously when you use "trolling" as a crutch for your own stupidity. You weren't "trolling" anybody, you were just being a whiny fuck who wanted to prove to random people that you understood how to answer this question.

Jonas0291
You can't possibly expect people to take your comments seriously when you use "trolling" as a crutch for your own stupidity. You weren't "trolling" anybody, you were just being a whiny fuck who wanted to prove to random people that you understood how to answer this question.

I already won. It's completely over. It's like you got knocked out in a fight, but you think if there were a few more rounds maybe you could turn things around.

It's done, loser. You lost.

You don't get to pretend you're not upset about being made to look like an idiot AND keep trying to defend yourself. You're pretending you said stuff wrong on purpose AND insisting it's not actually wrong AND that you're "trolling," but ALSO you clearly genuinely care what I think of you because I've so handily defeated you and shown you how smart I am and how stupid you are. There's a difference between trolling and not being able to let something go because your feelings are hurt.

So I'm not gonna waste my time talking in circles explaining over and over again how fucking dumb you are until you figure it out. Hire a fucking tutor.

And go ahead and keep responding. I know you can't take losing, so you wanna keep dragging this on to try and dilute the pain you feel from the merciless intellectual asskicking I just put on you. Or say nothing. I win either way. I win if you respond or if you don't, because I'm smarter than you.

Which way do you wanna keep losing?

Dan Nolan I can't avoid seeing the notification. And every time I see one, I'm intrigued to see what the next idiot said. Eventually I decided to say something. It takes maybe 15 seconds of my day so who cares?

If I honestly cared about what people were saying, I wouldn't have left the comment up. But this just gets more entertaining for me.

People are actually idiots if they don't understand how one could make the mistake. It's a very simple mistake to make, and if you didn't make it then bully for you, but if you're actually too ignorant to consider how it might be possible for someone else to, then you're a lot fucking dumber than they are.

I'm a fairly successful adult, and I've accomplished a lot of pretty great things in my life that make me more than secure enough to know that no one with a clue could tell me I'm not smart, and I made the same mistake of thinking it was 16 at first, too, before I thought about it and realized, "oh, shit, it's 'sum,' not 'product...'

16 is the PRODUCT of two smaller square numbers ((2^2)x(2^2)). It's a VERY easy mistake to make. My mind just went immediately to cube roots. It's a difference one word that you have to think back to eighth grade math class for, but I guess that's pretty recent for a lot of these stupid little fucking kids who wanna feel smart but aren't capable of accomplishing that in the real world, so they come here.

On the other hand, I will also say that it IS weird that you keep coming back here to respond to these criticisms...

Jason Elting For me, for whatever reason, I thought it was product not sum. So I thought, 4x4 is 16 In which case it wouldn't be B and it wouldn't be C and it wouldn't be D. So I immediately wondered why it wasn't A.

And then of course, everyone freaked out and assumed I was incompetent of math.

MrSteven334 Ill have to side with poor wording, I admit that you still can solve it, and pretty easily, but I thought it was (A) for the longest time, until Pythagoras got in my head, been so long since I have used that, yet yesterday I watched a video fermat's last therom.

Sai  There's about 50 comments on here all explaining the very same fact that I figured out the day I posted this. I'm not defensive, I'm annoyed.

blacket8743
I don't have a choice, I get a notification. I could ignore them, I've been doing it for the past month, but eventually I get sick of it.

Jonas0291 Danke. You haven't taught me shit.

Burlap Sack I love how you keep checking back to see what some idiot commented.

Burlap Sack I love how you keep checking back to see what some idiot commented.

Jonas0291
Go fuck yourself. This has been resolved probably 10 times in this thread. Not to mention the very day I posted this.

"I guess folks in the show is stupid."
"is stupid."

Seriously, did I tell you to go fuck yourself yet?

But the point of the question is that all the answers are square numbers. It does not have to be worded better to make the question easier, the point of the wording is to confuse people like yourself so they get it wrong and don't win any money.

Hello there, hopefully I can explain.  A square number is a number that is produced by taking any integer times itself (ie 1 (1x1), 4 (2x2), 9 (3x3), 16 (4x4), etc.  the question was which of the square numbers listed was the sum of two smaller square numbers.  16 is not equal to the sum of any two of 1, 4, or 9 so it is out.  we can knock out 36 and 49 in a similar fashion.  25 happens to be the sum of 9 and 16, which are both square numbers, thus the answer to the question.

Source: I'm about to graduate with a B.S. in mathematics! (yay!)

L.M
I Agree for the most part. But what I want to display it's that's not trivial and have room for bad luck as opposed to direct stupidity. An example : the "also happens" look to me as a hook for shortcutting the question and the first answer have properties that respond to it : 16 = 4^2 = (2^2)^2 = (2+2)^2. I've done worse in exams.
As we say in tabletop RPG anyone could roll a fumble on a stress die.

For the second part I knew I nitpick. The choice of 0 and 1 as square is not a so trivial choice and may cause problem later when doing other thing, like their status in primes numbers. They may also be some philosophical nitpick like the fact that I was already I before being the square of I ( and nothing is nothing :)  ) but I suppose that's mostly for laugh nowadays.

Speaking of nitpicking I'm nor sure the not so innocent bystander will get that n^4 (also a n^30 but not n^(2*i); (i=√1) ) is still a square :P

Hugbiel Yes i think i do understand what you are trying to say in your first part. But regardless the question was a correct question and there was not much room for ambiguity. Every question ever posed will offer ambiguity to someone out there, for instance, if i asked what colour is the sky? One would say blue, another would say light blue, another would say which planet does the question specify? etc. The answers give you a clue to what the question is asking and it is your job to use logic and reasoning to answer any question.

As for the second part, when you say a square number that means you must use the power of 2. So 0^2 and 1^2. This is where the basic level of maths comes in. You are not required to use any other powers apart from 2. Doing so will not achieve a square number in this case.

Hugbiel Zero and one are not different from their squares, true, but that's not important.  Since 0 = 0^2 and 1 = 1^2, both are square numbers.

Hugbiel Zero and one are not different from their squares, true, but that's not important.  Since 0 = 0^2 and 1 = 1^2, both are square numbers.

Meiryousa it does not make a difference. no two square number added together(if they are the same) will equal 25. so, that is impossible. meaning, it has to be different number.

OneWeirdDude<br>The square of 0 and 1 is themselves, so they are not different from their square. It's the consequence of their property in multiplication. So the fact that they obey the rule is trivial and don't give more info. It may be or not be a problem depending of what you trying to do ultimately. Not a problem here, but caution is needed. For example you cannot tell the difference between 1^5 and 1^2.

OneWeirdDude
The square of 0 and 1 is themselves, so they are not different from their square. It's the consequence of their property in multiplication. So the fact that they obey the rule is trivial and don't give more info. It may be or not be a problem depending of what you trying to do ultimately. Not a problem here, but caution is needed. For example you cannot tell the difference between 1^5 and 1^2.

OneWeirdDude Thank you for starting this bitch fest.

OneWeirdDude Thank you for starting this bitch fest.

Hugbiel What's questionable about 0 and 1?  The square of 0 is 0 and the square of 1 is 1.

Hugbiel What's questionable about 0 and 1?  The square of 0 is 0 and the square of 1 is 1.

L.M As an engineering student who have recently a "lecture?" (not sure if the correct English word here) in clarity to speak to non technical person, I suppose you use correct instead of clear. The question increase the reading complexity by stating first a non essential property and using a more complex coordination between them. It also increase difficulty by separating the question and the propriety associated with it to the max.
But the correctness of the question is indisputable and the difficulty not that much.

Also 0 and 1 are questionable square numbers because 0 is the multiplication "??? (something in English maybe)" where 0*x = 0 for all x who is a normal number and 1 is the multiplication neutral point (1*x = x, x number) so depending of the domain or application these property may be dominant and prevent them to be other thing.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with this question. Which of these square numbers also happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers".

Ways people could be tricked by this question:
1) You did not know what square number meant. The square numbers are 0,1,4,9,16,25,36,49 etc. They are the product of some integer by itself. E.g. 2*2=4, 3*3=9, 4*4=16
2) You didn't know what the word 'Sum' meant. Sum in maths means addition. So you add the two numbers together.
3) 'Two Smaller square numbers" - Even though 0^2 + 4^2 = 16 would seem correct, you have not understood that the question clearly states that both numbers must be smaller square number that the answer. Therefore 4^2 is invalid because it is equal to the answer and not smaller. By understanding this, we must exclude answer A and proceed with Answer B which is 3^2 + 4^2 = 25 (5^2).
4) If you said that (-4)^2 + 0^2 =16 could be accepted - this wouldn't work because the question states that the answer must be smaller than the other two SQUARE numbers. The question does not say that the square root of the square numbers must be smaller than the square root of the answer. Basically the square numbers must be smaller than 16,25,36,49. Not the square roots must be smaller than the other square roots. This means we cannot use -4 because it still makes 16 which is not smaller than Answer A.

So clearly the question couldn't have been worded any clearer. Just admit, you got confused and move on.

Aayam Sharma Sorry, let me rephrase that.  0 + 16 = 16, but 16 is not smaller than 16, and BOTH numbers have to be smaller.

Aayam Sharma Sorry, let me rephrase that.  0 + 16 = 16, but 16 is not smaller than 16, and BOTH numbers have to be smaller.

Michael Mischko That's clear enough: 0^2 + 4^2 = 4^2, but 16 (=4^2) is not smaller than 16.

Michael Mischko That's clear enough: 0^2 + 4^2 = 4^2, but 16 (=4^2) is not smaller than 16.

Michael Mischko It was formulated in a mathematical way.

Michael Mischko It was formulated in a mathematical way.

Jon Frego Alright.

IlluminatiMember666 About a month late, nice work. I figured it out literally a few seconds after I posted the original comment.

"Which of these square numbers also happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers?"<br>The key word in that question is SUM. That means you have to find two square numbers that ADD to one of the answers. (3^2) + (4^2) = 25 or 9 + 16 = 25

"Which of these square numbers also happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers?"
The key word in that question is SUM. That means you have to find two square numbers that ADD to one of the answers. (3^2) + (4^2) = 25 or 9 + 16 = 25

Easy: If the numbers are the same, and add up to 16, then they are both 8, which is not square.

Easy: If the numbers are the same, and add up to 16, then they are both 8, which is not square.

Burlap Sack You are so mad... The question is fine, you just didn't get it. That's fine, maths is hard for some people.

Burlap Sack You are so mad... The question is fine, you just didn't get it. That's fine, maths is hard for some people.

drfeelgud88 Wasn't being a douche. Merely stating that because he was reading it wrong is why he got the answer wrong. Not because it wasn't worded properly. It was worded fine.

So he can feel emasculated all he wants because he didn't get it, not my fault.

It's really funny cause i was like the audience with that one, but for some reason I was doing 2^3 + 2^3 = 16.... why the hell I cubed 2 is out of me.... too much numberfile video....

MrSteven334 You don't have to be a douche about it either. You got it, good for you, but you don't have to bring people down just because they couldn't understand it. I too was confused by the wording of the question, but I got it. Does it mean "I don't understand how math works?"

*****
Hah... you're simply wrong. Please don't assume anything. Before you call someone out on something, find the proof. When stating 'non-reality', "were" is the proper usage. Although it is worth noting that according to Merriam Webster, both can be used interchangeably but that doesn't make "was" the correct use.

http://www.englishforums.com/English/UsageOfWereVsWas/gvmb/post.htm

Also, cool, you read it twice. I'd believe you if you weren't such an idiot. E.G. You called me "dude" then proceeded to make a formal (and incorrect) correction on my word use.

Skyi Cowboi
Thanks, but English is my native language and I speak it better than the vast majority of my peers.

My point, and maybe you agree, is that the question (although for all intent purposes is grammatically correct) is not worded the best it could be. The show is not about trick questions and there's extra words in the sentence that don't need to be in there. It's a redundant sentence.

By the way, your English is fine, better than most people in America at least. It's hard to tell online, so unless you have a really heavy accent, it might as well be your native language. Either way, you're not a blatant prick like Sherlock up there, so you have that going for you.

MrSteven334
"Don't understand how math works."

Shut the hell up, miss reading a question doesn't mean I don't understand how math, in general, works. It means I miss read the question, which is a matter of English, not fundamental mathematics.

I can easily blame it on English as the question is a bit confusing upon first reading. Even though I know you're going to say you didn't, I'm sure you and everyone else had to read it a few times over. IF the question were, clear, that wouldn't be necessary.

An easier way to word it would be something like, "Which of the following numbers is the result of adding two smaller square numbers."

It's the same question but removes redundancy. Making the question more clear.

Burlap Sack<br>Umm, no, it was worded perfectly fine. If you don't understand how math works, that's fine, but don't blame it on English.

Burlap Sack
Umm, no, it was worded perfectly fine. If you don't understand how math works, that's fine, but don't blame it on English.

Felix Müllner
Took me like 6 read throughs but I finally get the question now. I was thinking 4^2 is 16 and 2 + 2 is 4.

But, now I get it. Could have been worded much better honestly.

How could it possibly be A?<br>(Serious question, how do you get to that result?)

How could it possibly be A?
(Serious question, how do you get to that result?)


Do Americans not go to school? I'm not even an adult and I was screaming this whole time.


there is nothing to misunderstand if you know what a square number is (speaking of natural numbers and squared natural numbers).
everyone who knows, knows square numbers below 49: 36, 25, 16, 9, 4, (0)
how difficult is it to combine some?

the only explanation is that people don't know what square numbers are. it doesn't surprise me though. the average person doesn't know shit about maths and (natural) sciences. not only in america.

inappropriately aligned metaphorical nourishment

***** Theorem doesn't imply that its unproven. A conjecture is something that is postulated but unproven.

***** They effectively mean the same thing, although there is a slight difference in semantics between the two. Square numbers (more specifically perfect-squares) refer to the numbers (0), 1, 4, 9, 16, etc. in their natural form. The term "squareD" number, on the other hand, refers to the root of a squared number (e.g. 9 as a squared number would be 81, which is a "square" number). In the case of 81, 9 is the squared number, and 81 is the square (of 9). With all that said though, people will generally understand either term by the context of the sentence it is used in.

Maybe he assumed the two smaller square numbers had to be the same and 25 can't be divided by 2 whole numbers. I think that threw him off idk

***** I was trying to explain it in a way that wouldn't require mathematical proofs. I was basically trying to say that there is more then just a limited number of answers for "What two square numbers add together to form another square number"  and using the fact that there would be an infinite number, albeit smaller than other infinites, of such combinations.

That would be an infitite number of answers because pythagorean theorem and triplets have no bounds or limits that have yet to be found, thus why its still a theorem. The question showed the 3-4-5 and if you multiply each number by two you get another triple 6-8-10 and you can keep adding constants to it and get an inifiate number with just that ratio not to mention any others.

Only 1/4 of the people knew the right answer.... That's kinda sad

I know I'm not a maths genius. Also I don't think it's necessary to be. I'm more vised in the educational and linguistic fields... yet basic maths is something anyone should know.


@Vikram Tete 16 = 16 + 0 is not a sum of two <i>smaller</i> square numbers.

@Vikram Tete 16 = 16 + 0 is not a sum of two _smaller_ square numbers.

@Vikram Tete cause there is a 0. 25 is a way better answer

I mean it is. It’s like a 3-4-5 triangle.


Yea I don't understand that question lol


The title of the video should have been: when not understanding the question can loose you $15000. The math is not the issue.


It took me a minute to understand the question lol

It took me a minute to understand the question lol

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge

@Dan Tudor i think you're dumber cuz u judge people too fast

@Dan Tudor i think you're dumber cuz u judge people too fast

@Dan Tudor Just because someone suck at math doesn't meant their dumb

@Dan Tudor Just because someone suck at math doesn't meant their dumb

@__ with that wording all answer are correct  example: 4^2+0^2=16. And both are squared numbers.

@__ with that wording all answer are correct  example: 4^2+0^2=16. And both are squared numbers.

So what they are saying is 25 is a square number that also happened to be the sum of two small square numbers.?? How so?

For the people who says it's poorly worded. it's a quiz, you expect them to blatantly says PHYTAGORAS NUMBER, of course not, it's suppose to use your brain (which you should do sometimes :D)

I was thinking that the square numbers had to be the same, completely threw me off.

I was thinking that the square numbers had to be the same, completely threw me off.

@Anonymous Person The question wasn't worded weirdly at all. Could you tell me how the question could be incorrectly misinterpreted? It said everything just fine. "Which square number is the sum of two smaller square numbers." It was actually a pretty well worded question.

@Piterixos people can forget things they were taught in school

@Piterixos people can forget things they were taught in school

@Dan Tudor oh. How so? The question was worded weirdly. You have to reread it slowly to understand it

@Dan Tudor oh. How so? The question was worded weirdly. You have to reread it slowly to understand it

I used the Pythagoras Theorem tactic and it worked.

I used the Pythagoras Theorem tactic and it worked.

@florin you surely would have been the millioner

@florin you surely would have been the millioner

Why tho. I instantly figured both questions and answer.

Why tho. I instantly figured both questions and answer.

I got it in 10 seconds cause im asian HAHAHAHAHA

I got it in 10 seconds cause im asian HAHAHAHAHA

Then you are a greater fool than them!!!😂😂😂

Then you are a greater fool than them!!!😂😂😂

@The END lol its fully said "square root" actually

@The END lol its fully said "square root" actually

Me too lmfao but I was like okay it's obvious once you understand it

Me too lmfao but I was like okay it's obvious once you understand it

If you haven't taken a math class in a while or been around math people I could see you not understanding the question.

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge me too lmao

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge me too lmao

@The END I doubt you call it root in your country. Math terminology is the same worldwide. You probably mix it up.

Fiddle nah, dude chill. <br>It's fine, people often make mistake

Fiddle nah, dude chill.
It's fine, people often make mistake

I thought it said a square number made by MULTIPLYING two square numbers, making me originally think it was 16.

english is not my native language  and your coment is useles anyway . Bye

english is not my native language  and your coment is useles anyway . Bye

It took a minute to write the answer 25 to u

It took a minute to write the answer 25 to u

@Springboob Squirepin just because it's not poory worded for you,does not mean it's not for other

@Springboob Squirepin just because it's not poory worded for you,does not mean it's not for other

Citizen Sixty-Six because people like you exist

Citizen Sixty-Six because people like you exist

@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ not funny mate

@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ not funny mate

@condits55 because not everyone is good at english.

@condits55 because not everyone is good at english.

Climate C. Heretic you dont have to be a dick about it

Climate C. Heretic you dont have to be a dick about it

@florin i had to calculate for 2 seconds

@florin i had to calculate for 2 seconds

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge you need help

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge you need help

That's OK . I think that's what happened to him.  He was too pressured,  he should of just sat there and used his head for a minute.  I can't believe the majority of people are math illiterate though that's what surprised me here.

Marc P it’s not that poorly worded. 😆. No high horse here friend. Don’t get so angry cause you can’t understand basic math 😂

Don’t think too much. Jesus will help you with arithmetic.

Don’t think too much. Jesus will help you with arithmetic.

Frankly this is why I hate quiz shows like these. They mislead and word the question on purpose just so you would have a hard time figuring out wtf is the question even suppose to be

@Springboob Squirepin it's really poorly worded lol. Get off your high horse

@Springboob Squirepin it's really poorly worded lol. Get off your high horse

Dan Tudor fuck off ‘I don’t know a math question’ ‘you’re not very intelligent person’ yeah man maths is shit anyway

Wait,  i still dont understand the question

Wait,  i still dont understand the question

Dan Tudor being bad in one subject doesn’t mean you aren’t intelligent

Dan Tudor being bad in one subject doesn’t mean you aren’t intelligent

@florin lmao you spelt seconds wrong dumbass

@florin lmao you spelt seconds wrong dumbass

I got it within 20secs<br>Most Time for understanding becsuse i am Not native english and dont know some mathematical words.  Lol

I got it within 20secs
Most Time for understanding becsuse i am Not native english and dont know some mathematical words.  Lol

florin I doubt it. You would have to realize what square numbers there are when squaring up to 7 and then try adding 2 of each of them to get 1 of the 4 answers I doubt you could process all that in 2 seconds

No shit! We did a crapload of questions based on Pythagoras theorem and such easy numbers in school. Few years later, I didn't even get the question for atleast the first 70 secs.

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge it was poorly worded

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge it was poorly worded

3,4 ,5 pyhthogorus theorem so 9+16=25 answer

3,4 ,5 pyhthogorus theorem so 9+16=25 answer

The answer is obvious (16+9), but question itself is misleading and poorly worded.

The answer is obvious (16+9), but question itself is misleading and poorly worded.

It took me 5 minutes to llook the so many possible things i can add togehter

It took me 5 minutes to llook the so many possible things i can add togehter

The math isn't hard but the question is confusing for non-English speaker

The math isn't hard but the question is confusing for non-English speaker

Dios nevan Interesting. Square and  and root are different things were I'm from.

Dios nevan Interesting. Square and  and root are different things were I'm from.

I still don't understand the question...

I still don't understand the question...

@The END me neither ahaha. Thats why i dnt understand the question at all.. ahahaha

@The END me neither ahaha. Thats why i dnt understand the question at all.. ahahaha

@Dan Tudor look in the mirror before looking down, you might find your reflection there.

@Dan Tudor look in the mirror before looking down, you might find your reflection there.

It's worded in a way to make the question seem harder and throw off people. Identifying the answers as squared numbers has nothing to do with how to solve the problem (Yes the all the answers ARE squared numbers, but this isn't knowledge that is necessary for an answer). The question could have said, "the sum of two squared numbers equal which of the following answers?" Also, this question is more of a theory question that you were supposed taught in school and not something you're supposed to be trying to calculate in your head.

@Dan Tudor then you really are not if you base his intelligence on that

@Dan Tudor then you really are not if you base his intelligence on that

I mean, in any case you should understand the question as soon as you hear the alternatives lol

I mean, in any case you should understand the question as soon as you hear the alternatives lol

It took me 0.01 seconds to read the question and get the right answer and I never even went to school

It took me 0.01 seconds to read the question and get the right answer and I never even went to school

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge sad if it took you so long!

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge sad if it took you so long!

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge you‘re an idiot then.

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge you‘re an idiot then.

@Dan Tudor I admit it. I'm thick. You deserve a gold medal.

@Dan Tudor I admit it. I'm thick. You deserve a gold medal.

I figured out that 25 was correct fairly quicly. A while later, it hit me that 16, 36 and 49 are also correct. They failed. They should have asked for natural numbers.

I see why people picked 16 at first glance if they didn’t look at the other answers. Just need to remember to look at the other answers

Guys not the fault of audience indeed they used more of a brain normal person would do 25 but they thought in a complex manner

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge dumb fuck

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge dumb fuck

Dan Tudor I bet you’re a genius with a 200 IQ

Dan Tudor I bet you’re a genius with a 200 IQ

It took me to watch the video until the end for me to know the answer was 25

It took me to watch the video until the end for me to know the answer was 25

@florin 2 sec only.
What a showoff.
Are you son of Einstein.

@florin 2 sec only.
What a showoff.
Are you son of Einstein.

And i understood it from the thumbnail itself...😂

And i understood it from the thumbnail itself...😂

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge i dont even speak english and able to answer it less than a minute

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge i dont even speak english and able to answer it less than a minute

@Anusha San <br>You're not a moderator!!!!

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge <br>How‘s the question poorly worded? 25, a square number, 16 and 9, two square numbers that sum up to 25. That‘s very precisely what the question is asking for.

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge
How‘s the question poorly worded? 25, a square number, 16 and 9, two square numbers that sum up to 25. That‘s very precisely what the question is asking for.

Same, for some reason I thought the two square numbers to be summed had to be the same numbers. So I'm only thinking about  2+2, 4+4, 9+9, 16+16, or 25+25 and none of those are correct. So easy to misinterpret the question.

Want to know why Asian countries are overtaking us? I’ll guarantee you, on the Japanese version of the show the contestant and the audience would have the answer.

Lol, i only understand the question when look at comments..

Lol, i only understand the question when look at comments..

Christian Schroeder <br>The difference only on Q, pretty similar : D

Christian Schroeder
The difference only on Q, pretty similar : D

Dios nevan
In germany:
Quadrat=Kuadrat
Wurzel=Akar

Dios nevan
In germany:
Quadrat=Kuadrat
Wurzel=Akar

Christian Schroeder <br>Nah, it's common for people to think an english comment to be from western. Atleast you take time to explain to me. So thank you mate

Christian Schroeder
Nah, it's common for people to think an english comment to be from western. Atleast you take time to explain to me. So thank you mate

Dios nevan <br>By the way, sry for being a little rough in my first message. I thought you were an American who is thinking they make this math in the USA the other way round :D

Dios nevan
By the way, sry for being a little rough in my first message. I thought you were an American who is thinking they make this math in the USA the other way round :D

Christian Schroeder
Ah,  okay. Make sense.
In here
square= Kuadrat, and Root= akar.
Neat information

Christian Schroeder
Ah,  okay. Make sense.
In here
square= Kuadrat, and Root= akar.
Neat information

Dios nevan
I'am not american too, I'm from germany and I don't think so.
The square of 3 is 9
The root of 9 is 3 (The root of the square number 9 is 3)
That is a small difference I think or am I wrong?

Christian Schroeder
Isn't it the same?  And i'm sorry cuz i live in Indonesia. And we call it akar which translate to root in English.
So i don't familiar with English education term

Dios nevan <br>No americans call it square numbers too! Don't you know the difference between square numbers and roots??

Dios nevan
No americans call it square numbers too! Don't you know the difference between square numbers and roots??

It took me 3 minutes to find out and translate into my language what square numbers are. I figured out the solution in about 1 sec

Γιώργος Αλμπακρής

@Dan Tudor I don't understand the question at all, even after more then a minute. But I'm pretty sure, you you're the "not very intelligent person" of us two :)

Same it took me longer to understand the question than to answer it.

Same it took me longer to understand the question than to answer it.

The question was worded weird that’s why

The question was worded weird that’s why

when situation is of 15k dollar it will surely take u  hours to understand lol

when situation is of 15k dollar it will surely take u  hours to understand lol

I know right - or at least 30s lol! But I got it

I know right - or at least 30s lol! But I got it

@Xx Agashi xX english is my second language, if they said it in my language i would immediately understand it

Also its a joke

This question was related to Pythagorean triplet

This question was related to Pythagorean triplet

I didn't even understand the question :< it's not very clear.

I didn't even understand the question :< it's not very clear.

@Rhea Verma He/She meant that it took him/her so long to even understand the question. And also, please comment in a language others can understand. Because really tho, its you who didnt understand what he/she said.

69696 subscribers with no videos challenge
To pagal ans bhi de deti
Aata wata Hai nayi khud ko Sher samagh lete hai

florin but you can't spell seconds correctly tho

florin but you can't spell seconds correctly tho

It took me 3 (three) seconds to understand the question AND answer it.

It took me 3 (three) seconds to understand the question AND answer it.

Same here. I thought when it said the sum of 2 smaller square numbers, that it was 1 square x2

Same here. I thought when it said the sum of 2 smaller square numbers, that it was 1 square x2

@Dan Tudor no, its just that the question was poorly worded.<br>Btw my high school is a mathematics gymnasium (is that the correct word?)

@Dan Tudor no, its just that the question was poorly worded.
Btw my high school is a mathematics gymnasium (is that the correct word?)

It took me a minute to understand the math of other country. We call it root here instead of square

It took me a minute to understand the math of other country. We call it root here instead of square

I think he meant understanding what the question meant, not finding the answer. I also took sometime to understand the question first.

Then you really aren't a very intelligent person

Then you really aren't a very intelligent person

it took me 2 secounds to answer the question and find it is 25.

it took me 2 secounds to answer the question and find it is 25.


Did the audience apologize afterwards?
Curious look on his face at 2:16. Almost as if he can't believe he's wrong, or he can't believe the audience didn't know its ass from  a hole in the ground.


Burh i already knew the answer <br>As soon as i saw the thumbnail

Burh i already knew the answer
As soon as i saw the thumbnail


I didn't understand what the question was asking at first, after that it's pretty easy.

i think you answered your own question with the original comment.

Brandon Ledet you know the pressure make your head blank out

also how do so many people get that question wrong? That's like 6th grade stuff or something.