I am confident most people bashing the dude would fail too. <br>Math problem is trivial compared to decoding that word salad under pressure of being in front of live audience and recorded to be shown on TV.

I am confident most people bashing the dude would fail too.
Math problem is trivial compared to decoding that word salad under pressure of being in front of live audience and recorded to be shown on TV.

@mambda Core of original question: "Which of these numbers is the sum of 2 square numbers?".
About twice shorter than original - nothing lost.

Much like squares, you (or at least I) had to memorize some primes (enough to answer my question). Much like squares you can find primes by doing trivial math if you don't remember them (I suspect this and getting caught off guard are the 2 biggest reasons for the mass flop).

The point of my question was to highlight that the difficulty of both questions doesn't stem from math. Every single person in that studio was capable of solving the math portion of the question (which is multiplication and adding/subtracting a number). If you map out how you solved the original problem and my problem you'll notice they are identical problems (in terms of steps and tools required to solve and available mental shortcuts).
Keep in mind any mental shortcuts you take and extra steps you'd take if you didn't have those shortcuts.

For example: knowing multiplication table is not the same as knowing squares of each number or just knowing squares square numbers on their own.
If you remember 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36... (bypassing the number a square number originates from) you breeze through the question.
If you remember squares of each number 1²=1,  2²=4 , 3²=9... it will take a bit longer as you're going through 1 extra step to get to a square.
Going through multiplication table has the more extra steps to a square number.
Going through actual multiplication is crazy amount of arithmetic within the scope of this problem. Doubt anybody had to do it, but just to illustrate the potential layers to solving a problem.

These seemingly insignificant differences, each adds an extra step to a ladder which you get thrown off of when you lose focus. If you don't do math in your job the answer is not immediately obvious and you have to climb this ladder multiple times (trial and error)

@Shizlgizl All the information in the question is relevant. Dropping any part of it would allow multiple answers.

Your question is poorly worded. Better would be: "What is the 2nd smallest number that is the sum of two primes and is divisible by 3?"And yes, I can do this in my head. Also giving multiple options would in fact make it easier. The answer is 9 (6 would be the smallest). Took about a minute.
Square numbers are significantly more trivial than primes and divisibility by a specific number.

@mambda Comments bash both, not just the audience.

These recording sessions are long, everyone is tired and this is a high effort question in a 0 reward/penalty game (for the audience).  How many of them do you think seriously looked for solution before they were polled? Now how many of them do you think only started doing so when they were asked (and pressure got on). The answer 16 really makes it seem like people missed the "square" in "square numbers" , think 16 = 8 + 8. Again, too much irrelevant info in the question.

Also, as I said, actual math in this problem is trivial. Here's a similar problem, that will trip up even more people for exact same reasons:

What is the 2nd number that is a sum of 2 prime number and is divisible by 3? (by the way, if I gave a multiple options, I wouldn't make it as easy)

Could you do it in your head? In how long?
What are the difficulties of this problem? It's not basic math, is it?

@mambda Comments bash both, not just the audience.

These recording sessions are long, everyone is tired and this is a high effort question in a 0 reward/penalty game (for the audience).  How many of them do you think seriously looked for solution before they were polled? Now how many of them do you think only started doing so when they were asked (and pressure got on). The answer 16 really makes it seem like people missed the "square" in "square numbers" , think 16 = 8 + 8. Again, too much irrelevant info in the question.

Also, as I said, actual math in this problem is trivial. Here's a similar problem, that will trip up even more people for exact same reasons:
*What is the 2nd number that is a sum of 2 prime number and is divisible by 3?* (by the way, if I gave a multiple options, I wouldn't make it as easy)

Could you do it in your head? In how long?
What are the difficulties of this problem? It's not basic math, is it?

Problem isn't the dude under pressure getting it wrong but more than 70% of the audience not knowing basic math.


I actually don’t know what it is. What is it?


Bruh I’m litterally ten years old, and it took me less than 20 seconds to figure it out


Yeah I don’t get it. Square numbers? So like, each number should have a square root symbol above it? And the sum, like, =16 or = 4? This question is not worded very well.

@Peter

Knowing the Pythagorean Theorem and basic trigonometry definitely help in understanding this problem. Also knowing perfect squares is a must. The only thing that threw me off when I first watched this video was the term "square number." I was able to get the answer anyways, but I had to think about it for a few minutes. Once I understood that square numbers are perfect squares, I knew the answer right away.

Perfect squares are something that most people learn about in elementary school or early middle school. You won't be reviewing this in college unless you study pure mathematics, especially number theory. I studied computer science for my Bachelor's degree and later returned to college to get my Master's in finance. I never studied perfect squares in my math classes. Later I bought a textbook on basic mathematics to refresh my skills and fill in some gaps I knew I had, and I learned about perfect squares there.

The question is worded fine. Please search online for the term “square number.” It has a specific meaning in math.


nah i dont think it was the problem, more like the wording of the question that tripped some of us off

How though? Genuinely asking since I'm not a native english speaker.


2x2 =4,  4x4 =16  He was Correct and so was the Audience...Yes 25 was correct too !...Maybe I Didn't Understand the Question

4x4 = 16 would be the product of two squares. The question specifically asks for the SUM of two squares. For a^2+b^2=16 no solutions for a and b (in the integers) exist.


Literally embarrassing, any of the answers would be correct if you simply add their square root to 0²


😂 I feel bad for the guy! Unless you had a very thorough 6th grade teacher. You would not have understood the question😅

The question is meant to confuse you. And is a baited one at that.

The square root and squared numbers reflect off primes. Unless you had a math degree and 5 to 10 minutes to sit and figure it out. There would be no way to understand this.

I would even say only 2% to 10% of the audience understood this question. The rest just guessed with no clue.

I mean, if you got to pre-calc, you would be well-equipped for this.


I'm good at math, but I had to pause the video, because the question is worded in a way that makes it hard.


I think the audience mixed up their "sums" and "products".

@Peter , not sure what your seeming obsession with the Pythagorean Theorem in proving your knowledge. I assume since the video question references squares, but your comments never actually utilizes it this way, it's always, "I know my Pythagorean Theorem," which does nothing to prove your skill or knowledge. If you want to show your math prowess in general, there are a large number of other areas you could present. For me, a brain teaser was working with irreducible polynomials in finite fields when learning coding theory and basics of cryptography. Though, this is still quite basic compared to others in mathematics (I'm far more an engineer than a mathematician). It is indeed good advice to assume you're not the smartest in the room. Especially if you're going to attempt an argument by authority and say you are right because you know more... that isn't how the world works.

With that said, the question confused me for a second, though I think largely because the cobwebs had to be cleared away first, haha. These days my mathematics use is largely computer based purely from an efficiency standpoint... but apparently some parts of my memory have faded. Though, the question as presented is largely just a brute force one considering there are only a few squares less than each of the numbers given for summation testing and/or subtraction, no fancy math required. I simply did 25 - 16 = 9 which is a square and there's your answer.

@Peter

You have a hard time with this question because you either forgot about perfect squares, or you never learned about them in the first place.

I can guarantee that I know the Pythagorean Theorem much better than you because you have consistently made inaccurate comments about this problem the moment you first starting commenting on this video.

Take a hint: don't assume you know more than someone if you don't even know who they are.

@LaughingStock55 I have studied and passed multiple math courses in an actual engineering physics program at university, and I still found this question a bit confusing for a few minutes.

And I am saying this as someone who constantly juggles the Pythagorean Theorem around in 3D space, and even has the Pythagorean Theorem in the denominator as a VARIABLE inside integrals, so I am probably significantly better at the Pythagorean Theorem than most people in here, probably including you as well.

I think the audience doesn't know what "sums" and "products" mean.


9 + 16 is 3^2 + 4^2 = 25. It’s not an easy question, it’s asked in a weird way and requires you to think how it adds up.

@mambda If you have forgotten the exact definition of the term "square number", then this question will be very confusing <i>no matter how</i> good you are at maths.

@mambda If you have forgotten the exact definition of the term "square number", then this question will be very confusing _no matter how_ good you are at maths.


Imagine u said 36. It’s also true because 3^2+5^2 = 6^2 but it wasn’t B


trigonomotry teachers keep hammering it dowwn our throats, the 3,4,5 triangle of pythagoras. 3^2 (9) + 4^2 (16) = 5^2 (25)


50 or 60 yrs since I was in a math class. Is there an easier way than just starting out one number at a time, squaring it, then subtracting it from each  of the 4 answers and then seeing if the resulting "difference" is a perfect square?I guess I'm asking if there is a formula. The way I did it would take forever if it was a large number, lol.

And fir all the people with negative comments about AMERICANS, we're a combination of every country in the world! Perhaps YOUR country helped dumb us down!


that’s a bad way to word that question, i thought it was A and even after she explained it i still don’t know what it’s asking

How is it badly worded? It's very precise.

25 is a square number and is the sum of two smaller square numbers:  9 and 16.


And guess what.. These same people vote. This is why we can't have nice things folks.


this is such an easy question it is 4^2 + 3^2


I think the wording of the sentence at the end is a little wrong or maybe just tricky? Which of these square numbers 16,25,36,49 also are sums of two SMALLER square numbers which may lead to only think of numbers like 4 and 9. Not 4^2 or 3^2.  4^2 is a square number being squared and 3 is not a square number… it is just a number being squared.  This is probably what threw most people off. At least for me and that’s why I believe the question was a little faulty tbh. That’s my opinion. Maybe the 16 being one of the answers threw me off tbh since I’m trying to think of a smaller square number than that one but it should be a smaller square number than the answer which is 25

@Broccoli_32 no, a square number and perfect square are the same thing (a square of an integer). A "squared number" would be the square of any number you want (integer, transcendental number or quaternion... doesn't matter).

Neither. 9 and 16 are square numbers because their roots are integers. What their roots actually are is irrelevant as long as those are integers. Nothing wrong with the question.

Just relatively tricky, you can write 25 = 16 + 9, where 16 = 4^2 and 9 = 3^2, so 16 and 9 are square numbers, thus 25 is the sum of 2 smaller square numbers and therefore the wording is correct.

Yeah this question was written incorrectly, it should say “smaller squared number”.


I am not that good at math myself...but basic Pythagoras theorem example????... 😅this is just plain cruelty


"Its A because 9 + 4 is 16. USA NUMBER #1!"


A)16 which is 4*2
B)25 which is 5*2
C)36 which is 6*2
D)49 which is 7*2

However
4x4 + 3x3=25
16+9=25

So A was incorrect but a would have to be
2x2 +3x4=16
But C is also incorrect cause
6×3 + 2x9=36
But D can also be wrong
7x2 + 7x5=49

So all.options are wrong or I can be overthinking


And these are the people who get to vote


All four are correct as long as u consider 0 a number

The answer must be a square number that is the sum of two “smaller” square numbers. Because a number cannot be smaller than itself, the answer cannot be derived from the sum of itself and 0. The only correct answer is 25, which equals 16 + 9.


Questions like this aren’t even about the math, they are just super ambiguous with what they are asking for

@Peter

The question in the video is straightforward and concise. Your counterexample is intentionally written to be difficult to follow, i.e. not valid.

@LaughingStock55 The statement "nobody in the audience failed to be not absent when the contestant did not give the opposite of the incorrect answer" is very specific as well, but I am pretty sure that you wouldn't be able to interpret it in just a few seconds.
And that is basically how a lot of people in here - including actual engineering students, myself included - feel when they read the question in this video for the first time:
they are able to answer it, but they need time to interpret it correctly.

@LaughingStock55 The statement "nobody in the audience failed to be not absent when the contestant did not give the opposite of the incorrect answer" is very specific as well, but I am pretty sure that you wouldn't be able to interpret it in just a few seconds.
And that is basically how a lot of people in here - _including actual engineering students,_ myself included - feel when they read the question in this video for the first time:
they are able to answer it, but they need time to interpret it correctly.

These questions can be ambiguous at times but this one absolutely wasn't lol. "Which square numbers add up to another square number" is a pretty straightforward question

The question is very specific if you actually know the meaning of “square number”.


Tf why they clapping 🤣 paid audience or what


😂😂 Seriously ......... thats really dumb.


mathmaticians screaming b 5 seconds into the video

Only if they remember all the special right triangles;<br>and mathematicians do actually in fact forget this kind of stuff if they don't review it.

Only if they remember all the special right triangles;
and mathematicians do actually in fact forget this kind of stuff if they don't review it.


Seriously? The whole audience knows nothing about basic math also?


𝙾𝚔𝚊𝚢, 𝚋𝚞𝚝 𝚑𝚘𝚠?

𝙾𝚔𝚊𝚢, 𝚋𝚞𝚝 𝚑𝚘𝚠?


Isn't 5squared plus 3 squared 36 which is six squared??

5 squared plus 3 squared is 25 + 9, which equals 34, not 36.


Tf did he get this wrong.. My asian bro who is 10 got it right in under 45 seconds


Let be honest the question was framed poorly. But that's the point of the game, since money is involved


The problem needs to say "positive integers." It not, every answer is correct.

No, it doesn't. The term "square number" is by definition the square of an integer (same meaning as "perfect square").


So why not 4 square + 0 square... It isn't mentioned explicitly to use Pythagoras

4 squared + 0 squared is 16 + 0 = 16.

The question specifies that the answer must be the sum of two "smaller" square numbers. Because 16 cannot be smaller than itself, the answer cannot equal 16 + 0.


Bro. I got it wrong too lmao I was feeling so smart too.


only if 0 is not a square number, otherwise 16 = 4^2 + 0^2

Why so many people don't read the question carefully? It says, a sum of two SMALLER square numbers. 16 is not smaller than itself.


16 can also be the answer :(<br>Question didn't  say two different square number

16 can also be the answer :(
Question didn't  say two different square number

@relaxpayourincometax they're specifically asking for too squares smaller than their sum. So 0^2 is not an option.

Curious to see your solution for 2n^2=16 (n being an integer obviously).

The question said "two smaller square numbers".

16 cannot be the answer because it cannot be smaller than itself.


Why is everyone in the comments acting like that was a simple problem… I thought 16 too. I thought she meant
√16 = 4 and √4 = 2
No other answer is like that she should’ve said what numbers can create a pothagorean theorem

It is a simple problem if you know the terminology.


And the irony is english people called us illiterate😂😂😂

@Ted Unguent he meant , most of the western dudes call Indians dumb ,of course it declined in the recent years , but living western country , I can tell you there is still that mentality in people

@Nitin Patel "Like you?"  What are you talking about?  What am I like?

@Ted Unguent no even today they are like you indians are poor and uneducated lives in slum i am like you got your all money from india


the question is just constructed in a very fucked uo way lol


I don't know why they bother with the 'ask the audience' option in America. It's a complete waste of time.


The question could be interpreted two ways. This is why standardized tests suck.

There is only one way to interpret the question if you actually know what it is asking.


Pythagoras watching from heaven: pathetic

The answer is (3)^2+(4)^2=25


this video was posted before i was born 💀


3 squared is 9 and four squares is 16 = 16 +9 = 25 which is why 25 is the answer


@The_Other_Cartographer omg no that’s criminal

@Lippy And Kitty Msp Real analysis >Calculus

I guess number theory isn't your speciality.


Ladies and gentlemen. We just seen how bad american education is; not because the gentleman didnt know the answer; but most people from audiance didnt know it as well.


I was confused. I know how to do math, but  I thought that the 2 smaller square numbers was 2+2=4 ---- 2×2= 4 ---- 4×4= 16


Give yourselves a pat on the back audience 👏 you didn’t know it either, shocking how many didn’t know basic maths. Make America clever again.


How did half of the audience get this wrong? I've lost faith in America.


Yeah, it does take a minute or two to think about it. 4 + 9 = 13❌, 9 + 16 = 25✅


25 = 16 + 9 = 4^2 + 3^2

If you hash it out with the other numbers, it gets messy quickly.


took me 5min to understand the question and 5 min to solve it
square of 3= 9
square of 4= 16
ans=25
man was definitely under pressure

🥇______ਕਿਰਨਦੀਪ ਕੌਰ ਭੁੱਲਰ______


I’m frickin 11 and I figured it out in 10 seconds


what was a very badly worded question. I though it was asking which number is the sum of its 2 times its square root: none of them, wtf lol

Just because you thought that doesn't mean the question is badly worded. Mathematically speaking it's completely correct and precise. At no point it even mentions the square root of the possible answers.


Honestly this question is set so dumb it is not even surprising he did not know.


Only if you remember what "square number" means.<br>If you have forgotten that term, then this question will be confusing no matter how skilled you are at math.

Only if you remember what "square number" means.
If you have forgotten that term, then this question will be confusing no matter how skilled you are at math.


all these boomers getting it wrong yet complaining common core isnt teaching math skills


@mambda

I think it's just a logical thing that goes like this:

If the square of a whole number is a whole number, and a square number equals the square of a whole number, then a square number is a whole number.

It's like saying a duck is a duck is a duck.

@LaughingStock55 *a square of a whole number

(you're right obviously, just semantics)

A "square number" is a whole number by definition. Look it up.


He didn't have the advantage of pausing the video, so I give him credit for doing his best. It took me about 3 minutes to come up with the answer on my own. If I were him I would have probably used more lifelines. At the end of the day, you want to gain as much as you can even if you don't win a million. They need to bring this show back.


Bro was not able to do such a simple problem. I wonder what he'll do in JEE Advanced Exam🙏


well fuck..i got the right answer but I figured it out the wrong way..

I thought of the correct answer too by accident, but originally i thought :

1^2 + 2^2 = 5.

the square of 25 is 5.

what did i miss/confuse?


That was such a weird way to phrase that question. Not surprised he missed it

@kwikythats barely different and in a way that doesnt matter

if you dont know what square numbers are you arent getting the question regardless

@JuanHuangWonOneYuanOnce which of these square numbers happens to be the sum of two different square numbers ?

It is a rudimentary question.

How would you have phrased it differently?

it isn't, mathematically it's a perfectly sound question


To be fair the question isnt worded super clearly either

@Nick.Karm how? I don't see how it does that at all.

I mean I knew it was 25, but the way its written makes it seem like its asking for two of the same square numbers. Thats not the case of course

What's not clear about the question? I'm not a native speaker and found it to be precise and easy to comprehend.


Uh did this guy ever like pass sixth grade


To be fair, wtf was the question worded like that? Could’ve simply said “what number is the sum of two squared numbers”

@Peter Objectively you're completely correct. Since I was tought that term in like third grade (or rather the direct translation into my language) I never considered that.

@mambda
"Square number" is a kind of misleading name;
personally I would have preferred if people stuck to the name "square integer", because this would emphasise the "integer" part.
I guarantee that even math professors occasionally confuse "squared integer" and "square integer" with each other, because it would clearly be very easy to do that by accident.

“what number is the sum of two squared numbers”<br>This could be any real number. In fact even complex number. In fact any number (probably). This includes all 4 answers obviously.

“what number is the sum of two squared numbers”
This could be any real number. In fact even complex number. In fact any number (probably). This includes all 4 answers obviously.

A "square number" is different than a "squared" number.

In the expression 2^2, the number 2 is the squared number. The solution 4 is a square number.

@Peter same, I kept thinking it was 16 until I realized what it was asking lmao

Yeah, it was a pretty weird question - I have been exposed to the Pythagorean Theorem in different forms for almost 30 years throughout my math career, and I still found this question kind of confusing.


To be fair, I the question is worded  in a little bit of a tricky way.

I myself assumed that the smaller square numbers had to be the same (4 and 4 or 9 and 9) and didn’t realize they could be different until after she read the answer :/


Yeeks, only 30% of the people got it too. What a bunch of failures we have in this country


Technically all because the square root of 0 is 0???

@Lone Cyborg so 0 squared is not considered to be a square number? honestly just asking

You’re not reading the question correctly.
A.) 16 couldn’t be an answer because the smallest numbers squared that get close to 16 are 2 and 3 squared which add up to 10 which doesn’t equal 16.
B.) 25 is correct because 3 and 4 squared equal 25.
C.) 36 isn’t right because the smallest squared numbers that get close to 36 are 3 and 5 squared which equals to 34 which doesn’t equal to 36 so it’s wrong.
D.) 49 is wrong because the sum of 3 and 6 squared equals to 45 which doesn’t equal to 49 since they’re the smallest squared numbers to get to 49 it’s wrong.


@Alexatedw Some people will say that even 11+17 is not a clear question, because they can't do it without a calculator. But it doesn't make the question unclear. As I see, you didn't explain what exactly was unclear. I wonder how else can you understand "a sum of two smaller square numbers". Unless maybe you don't know what a square is. (I guess maybe some forgot it)

@hopy51 not really. If someone didn’t find it clear then it’s objectively not clear

@Alexatedw Seems like you are just looking for excuses. The question was 100% clear.

@Alexatedw HOW IS IT WORDED WEIRD? ANSWER THE GODDAMN QUESTION. JEEZ.

@mambda ok good for you. Both that and the fact that it was worded weird can be true at the same time. Stop trolling kid

@Alexatedw again: how was it worded in a weird way then? As a non native english speaker I found it easy to understand and precise.

@mambda nah. The question was worded weird I get that now that you know the answer you can act like it’s easy. But, I’ve got a degree in physics, well past 5th grade math and I can see the issue he was having

@Alexatedw For the sum of two smaller square numbers that's also a square number. Straightforward if you passed 5th grade math.

@mambda it’s hard to understand what they are asking for


x^2 + y^2 = option<br>All of them are valid when you consider real numbers. The person who designed the question doesn't know math.

x^2 + y^2 = option
All of them are valid when you consider real numbers. The person who designed the question doesn't know math.

Square numbers are integers by definition. Square numbers, i.e. perfect squares, are derived by squaring other integers. Therefore the square numbers up to 49 are:

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

The number 25 in this set is also the sum of two smaller square numbers 16 + 9.


This is a badly written question. Most thought they meant 4x4 = 16 and 2x2 =4<br>Don’t blame him for not getting it right

This is a badly written question. Most thought they meant 4x4 = 16 and 2x2 =4
Don’t blame him for not getting it right

"... also happen to be the sum of two smaller square numbers?"

That's as clear as tear of mother nature.
4² = 16  and 2+2 ≠ 16. Also, 2 isn't a square number

The question is fine.

I used to think math questions were badly written too if I couldn't figure them out. Then I grew up.


But why isn't 16 the right answer? 4 x 4 = 16 and 4 is a square number?

@LaughingStock55 Ooooooh, so it's "add", not "multiply". I understood the question wrong. I think the vast majority of the audience did the same misunderstanding I did.

To get 16, you would need to add 4 + 12. The number 12 is not a square number.


Yeah it's definitely not as easy for the average adult. If you were good at math growing up or use it on a semi to regular basis sure. But normal people who aren't human calculators will definitely get stumped by this question idc what any of you nerds say.

I guess I qualify as a "nerd", since I have a great passion for math, but I do have enough grasp of reality to realise that a lot of people have either forgotten a lot of math, or just haven't been interested in it and thus haven't invested any time in it, or maybe even have struggled with it and become frustrated by it - math is challenging, and some people will find it very challenging.
But I am totally willing to teach people math whenever they ask for it;
I actually find that very fun, and it is cool to see when they have those epiphany moments when they "get" something.

I guess I qualify as a "nerd", since I have a great passion for math, but I do have enough grasp of reality to realise that a lot of people have either forgotten a lot of math, or just haven't been interested in it and thus haven't invested any time in it, or maybe even _have_ struggled with it and become frustrated by it - math is challenging, and some people will find it very challenging.
But I am totally willing to teach people math whenever they ask for it;
I actually find that very fun, and it is cool to see when they have those epiphany moments when they "get" something.


Sorry but the question was really confusing


I think the world is going backwards... So Manny less talented peoples


So?  That doesn't provide the answer to the question.


The wording of the question is very strange. I don't think the issue was his or the audience's ability to do the math. The issue was with the clarity of the question.


dO YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS TO BOYS WHO WRITE MENS STORIES? "THEY ARE CELEBRATED" THATS NEVER A GOOD THING."HOW WOULD YOU KNOW THAT.  i WROTE CELEBRATE IN A VERY SCARY FONT YESTERDAY.


The way this question is worded is what’s bad. The second part of the sentence should say “squared numbers” to avoid confusion

@Peter How? I'm a non native english speaker who some basic calculus at uni. By the way I'm not suggesting the dude under pressure getting it wrong but over 70% of the audience?

@mambda I work with the Pythagorean Theorem all the time - in 3D space, as a variable denominator factor inside integrals - and I still felt a bit confused by the question in this video. So yes, it <i>is</i> kinda poorly worded.

@mambda I work with the Pythagorean Theorem all the time - in 3D space, as a variable denominator factor inside integrals - and I still felt a bit confused by the question in this video. So yes, it _is_ kinda poorly worded.

@Aaron Johansen "Let’s just agree to disagree" bold statement after you came into this discussion with ludicrous claims. Not to mention the fact that we didn't discuss whether the question is well articulated or not. Mathematically speaking it is completely correct.

@mambda Let’s just agree to disagree that the question was stupidly worded hence why so many people got it wrong. They didn’t understand what the question was asking, the question could have included a formula to articulate it better. I’m not going to argue with a know it all though so I’m done after this message.

@Aaron Johansen bro, you literally just make stuff up and expect no-one to correct it?

@Aaron Johansen uh, no. Definitions do not suddenly change not to mention that the question does not redefine a perfect square in any way.

@mambda wrong in the context of the question

No, a "squared" number would be the square of any number (integer, complex, surreal, ...). A "square" number however by definition is the square of an integer.<br>In fact if it said "squared" any answer would be possible.

No, a "squared" number would be the square of any number (integer, complex, surreal, ...). A "square" number however by definition is the square of an integer.
In fact if it said "squared" any answer would be possible.


the question is incomplete , should say square of not just square numbers

What? Square numbers are by definition the square of an integer. Not sure what you mean.


All answers are actually correct because 0 is a square number lol.<br>0^2+4^2=16

All answers are actually correct because 0 is a square number lol.
0^2+4^2=16

@LaughingStock55 Ah, I did not see that one, thanks

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

The only answer that works is 25, which is 16 + 9.


The way the question is worded its just wrong because it can mean more than one mathematical calculation

Not really. A square number is defined as a the square of an integer. The "smaller" in the question excludes 0^2 + n^2 solutions. Only 3^2+4^2=25 remains.


i dont  understand the question..dr johnny phd


Not a glowing endorsement for Wake Forest


Oh, this was done in the US. No fucking surprise there.


wth.. an 8 yr old asian kid would have answered it it 5 secs or so...


The question is wrong, because all numbers are square numbers. It's not necessary to have integral roots

"Square number" is a specific math term and includes only those numbers that are the square of an integer.

You are confusing the term "square number" with "the square of a number."


I see a lot of stupid comments and video title itself is also stupid. If you put in his position and start doing mental calculations within the stress that is being live on tv, in front of many people I'd like to see if you could do it. I mean, the answer isn't that obvious and it takes some time to do mental calculations.

@mambda There's another thing, the term "square number". You talk about Pythagoras but the vast majority of people don't even know what a square number is to start with.

@mambda Most people aren't engineers, scientists or mathematicians or something related to readly know and recognize pythagorean theorem and it's safe to say that most don't even know, let alone recognize it.

@FreedomWarrior I disagree. if 78% of the audience don't know the most common pythagorean triple then there's something wrong. Also why vote if you don't know the answer?<br>I agree that asking the audience was dumb.

@FreedomWarrior I disagree. if 78% of the audience don't know the most common pythagorean triple then there's something wrong. Also why vote if you don't know the answer?
I agree that asking the audience was dumb.

@mambda The audience didn't even had time to make the calculations to start with, they only had a few seconds, unless some already did previously.<br>The decision to ask the audience was a very stupid decision too.

@mambda The audience didn't even had time to make the calculations to start with, they only had a few seconds, unless some already did previously.
The decision to ask the audience was a very stupid decision too.

The real issue here isn't the dude but the fact that 78% of the audience got it wrong too.


After some simple math
Its 25
The math: 16 + 9 = 25
16 is 4 to the power of 2 and 9 is 3 to the power of 2
Edit: im right, im impressed since im bad at math

efact oh that guy, sorry English isn't my first language so i dont know english math terms


*LADIES AND GENTLEMAN, I PRESENT TO YOU "THE AMERICANS!!!!!!!!!"


Biden would answer C, Trump would answer D


Why A) is not the answer (√8)²+(√8)²= 16 there is nothing like mentioned that it should be natural number so why not 👀

Lol because it's not square number think about it


Not exactly a good advertisement for Wake Forest.


im so sorry but every single option was correct, example: 16=4^2 and 16=2^2+(sqr(12))^2 AND YEA BOTH ARE NUMBERS SMALLERS

A.) 16 couldn’t be an answer because the smallest numbers squared that get close to 16 are 2 and 3 squared which add up to 10 which doesn’t equal 16.
B.) 25 is correct because 3 and 4 squared equal 25.
C.) 36 isn’t right because the smallest squared numbers that get close to 36 are 3 and 5 squared which equals to 34 which doesn’t equal to 36 so it’s wrong.
D.) 49 is wrong because the sum of 3 and 6 squared equals to 45 which doesn’t equal to 49 since they’re the smallest squared numbers to get to 49 it’s wrong.

A “square number,” aka perfect square is derived by squaring an integer. The square number 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 the 16 + 9.


I'm good at maths and I can prove it.  2 + 3 = 5

There I proved it. 😁


But 2 squared plus 2 squared is 16. So then both A and B are correct

@kubyo indiya thanks for clearing that up

It's a tricky question in the way it's worded. I got it wrong first too until you read that the sum of two square numbers, this mean two square numbers add to 25, so yes while 4x4 is made from two 2x2 and both square numbers added becomes 4+4=8 while if we take 3x3=9 and 4x4=16 gives 16+9=25. The way they use sum of two "smaller" square makes it sound weird asf 😂


They didn't define what set of numbers... rational numbers means all answers are true. So the person was correct.

@Peter arguing definitions is pointless. It's not about how you think it should be defined but how it is defined. Feel free to create your own set of numbers that includes the square numbers of all real numbers. Good job, you just created the non-negative reals again. Very useful.

@Peter

Peter - With each additional comment you post, it becomes increasingly clear that you have no clue what you are talking about.

"Square number" has a very specific definition in mathematics. It is synonymous with "perfect square." I suggest you pick up a book on basic mathematics and review this concept. You may be studying engineering in college, but you lack some fundamental knowledge at the elementary level.

@LaughingStock55  It would have been more accurate to use the name "square integer".

@LaughingStock55 Technically, a "square number" should include all numbers, because π is a number, and π² is "π-squared" - so the definition of "square number" is kind of incomplete and unsatisfying.

A “square number” is derived by squaring an integer. Therefore the answer must be a whole number. The only answer that works is 25, which equals 16 + 9.


the dumbing down of america. ANSWER A WTF


If that's how they vote in America it's much more understandable how Trump was elected...


This comment section reeks of nerd 😂(I can’t say shit either since I’m one too)


The problem really was just badly written

@mambda idk i just don't like that they add something as useless as "also happen to be" making it feel like having the end result be a number that can be square rooted more important than it really is rather than just seeing it as a number that just so happens to be square rootable.

@Bajungasam that would work. I still don't see how the original wording is bad though. The first "square" - even if technically speaking not required - states that all the options will be square numbers. That and the rest of the question basically shouts Pythagoras.

@mambda "which of these numbers happen to be the sum of two smaller square numbers?"

How? The wording is precise and clear. What would you change?


4² + 0² = 16 + 0 = 16

However, the answer must be the sum of two smaller square numbers. Because 16 cannot be smaller than itself, then the answer cannot be derived with the sum of 16 and 0.


Am i that trash!!<br>This looks so unfigurable

Am i that trash!!
This looks so unfigurable


it's an ambiguous question.    16 has two square numbers:  4, 4.  they add to 8.   now, 25 two squares:  5,5. add to 10.  36: 6, 6....add to 12.<br>now, if the answer is 25:  5, 5.  which sum to 10.  none of the answers provided are correct.  now, if you accept their answer, and add 4 + 9, you get 13!  so clearly, the question is in error.

it's an ambiguous question.    16 has two square numbers:  4, 4.  they add to 8.   now, 25 two squares:  5,5. add to 10.  36: 6, 6....add to 12.
now, if the answer is 25:  5, 5.  which sum to 10.  none of the answers provided are correct.  now, if you accept their answer, and add 4 + 9, you get 13!  so clearly, the question is in error.

A square number i.e. perfect square is an integer derived by squaring another integer. The square numbers up to 49 are:

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

In this set, the number 25 equals the sum of two smaller square numbers: 16 + 9.


Wrong method but correct solution. The correct method (according to the question) is 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2.


I'll be honest. I got stumped for a bit assuming that the smaller square numbers had to be the same number, then realised 16 + 9 = 25

@Mai Redd well thanks for making me realise the trigonometry there. Bloody a²+b²=c²

same, I thought both small numbers had to be the same. So it's 3² + 4² = 5²... wouldn't have guessed that, lol.


Look, this is a actualy hatd wuestion
Stop saying sum
Sum is evil
What si sum?
SAY TEH ACTUAL THING
is it produkt?  Vsota? Razlika?
The answer of division?


why do so many ppl that dont know the answer vote


I can literally solved before starting the question

But I am a student who  know at  atleast about 6 th grade mathmatics and who is   minimum pythyogorean  triplet number which is 5

@Peter thanks I literally like your comment  yes in my math exam I can't even solve what is intergal of x² in 1 minute due to pressure I am an introvert <br>And I can also relate that statement  this happens with me everything 😔😥😀

@Peter thanks I literally like your comment  yes in my math exam I can't even solve what is intergal of x² in 1 minute due to pressure I am an introvert
And I can also relate that statement  this happens with me everything 😔😥😀


but all of the options are 0^2 plus some number squared....

Note the "smaller" in the question. This excludes answers like 0^2+4^2=4^2 as 4^2 isn't smaller than 4^2.


terribly worded question, this has more to do with linguistics than eith math

@mambda
"Clear" depends on whether you keep the exact definition of "square number" in mind or not.
If you have forgotten that that name is defined as "the result of squaring an integer", then you will get lost in this problem no matter how good you are at math, because that one single "link in the chain" will be missing.
It is also easy to get brain fog when you are nervous and feel a lot of pressure in the middle of a game show, so you will have to view this video from that perspective as well.

@Peter I personally have no issue with people getting it wrong / not understanding the question (especially the contestant while being under pressure, 70% of the audience getting it wrong is concerning though).
What annoys me are the people which after misunderstanding the question claim that the question is wrong / poorly worded / etc. because that is simply not the case.
I stand by my point that the question is clear. By that I don't mean that the question is intuitive.

@mambda This question isn't necessarily super-clear just because you have studied math.
I have worked in detail with the Pythagorean Theorem as a minor part of much bigger actual university math problems for almost 5 years - and then another like 10-15 years before that - and I still found this question somewhat confusing, since it can easily be misinterpreted if you don't keep track of exactly what it is saying.

Also, my father has had a degree in Engineering Physics for like 35 years, and he felt confused for a few minutes by a relatively basic moment problem in physics when I asked him about it a few years ago, simply because he has focused on a career as a math teacher and thus hasn't worked specifically with physics problems for several years, so he was rusty on physics.

A lot of people in here have this smug attitude like "I studied math once and memorised it, so I am above all of these stupid people who aren't comfortable with math";
that attitude doesn't lead to anything good at all, and it only serves as a way for arrogant people to act superior.
If they were actually concerned about people's math skills, then they would help people who struggled with math, and encourage them, not constantly mock them.

@mambda This question isn't necessarily super-clear just because you have studied math.
I have worked in detail with the Pythagorean Theorem as a minor part of much bigger actual university math problems for almost 5 years - and then another like 10-15 years before that - and I still found this question somewhat confusing, since it can easily be misinterpreted if you don't keep track of exactly what it is saying.

Also, my father has had a degree in Engineering Physics for like 35 years, and he felt confused for a few minutes by a relatively basic moment problem in physics when I asked him about it a few years ago, simply because he has focused on a career as a math teacher and thus hasn't worked specifically with physics problems for several years, so he was rusty on physics.

A lot of people in here have this smug attitude like "I studied math once and memorised it, so I am above all of these stupid people who aren't comfortable with math";
that attitude doesn't lead to anything good at all, and it _only_ serves as a way for arrogant people to act superior.
If they were _actually_ concerned about people's math skills, then they would _help_ people who struggled with math, and _encourage_ them, not constantly mock them.

How is it terribly worded? Mathematically speaking it's completely correct and precise.


Didn't know Hillary Clinton hosted this show


Why are the clapping ??? Because they all are weak in maths 🤷


It's not surprising that the audience got it wrong. They're Americans after all.


I am like 100% sure they messed this up since:<br>3^2 + 4^2 = 3 + 4 * 2 = 13

I am like 100% sure they messed this up since:
3^2 + 4^2 = 3 + 4 * 2 = 13

@M-H 12 I just noticed it myself! I meant it equals 11 and not 13.

You pretty much wrote math as wrong as you possibly could based on the question.


That question is worded so poorly, downright disingenuous. Had to pause and read that multiple times and realized that my answer of "16" was wrong because of the video I am on. I thought it asked which numbers which are square also have their square squarable. I.E. 4^2=16 and 4=2^2. <br>Mostly because I've never hd anyone interested in aokething so bulshit. Who tf cares or benefits from this answer in real life. Fick math and bless that audience.

That question is worded so poorly, downright disingenuous. Had to pause and read that multiple times and realized that my answer of "16" was wrong because of the video I am on. I thought it asked which numbers which are square also have their square squarable. I.E. 4^2=16 and 4=2^2.
Mostly because I've never hd anyone interested in aokething so bulshit. Who tf cares or benefits from this answer in real life. Fick math and bless that audience.

I am not denying that this question can easily feel confusing if you don't read it carefully - heck, I have studied math for several years, and I still hesitated a bit for a while.

That said though, math is very useful, and it is actually the foundation for our whole modern society.
The question in this video is closely related to magnitudes, like for example the forces between charges that are at certain coordinates in space, or the speed of a projectile that travels at a certain horizontal and vertical speed.
Also, GPS satellites require a high knowledge of physics, chemistry and electronics, and all of those topics are based on a lot of math.
A simple water pipeline requires a lot of calculations in continuum mechanics in order to minimise the loss of friction through the pipes, and an aeroplane involves literally thousands of complex computer calculations where they try to optimise the design of the aeroplane wings, the required material, and so on.

Yes, math is frequently frustrating, and everyone struggles with it every now and then, but it is definitely extremely useful, and actually required for our modern society.

I am not denying that this question can easily feel confusing if you don't read it carefully - heck, I have studied math for several years, and I still hesitated a bit for a while.

That said though, math is _very_ useful, and it is actually the foundation for our whole modern society.
The question in this video is closely related to magnitudes, like for example the forces between charges that are at certain coordinates in space, or the speed of a projectile that travels at a certain horizontal and vertical speed.
Also, GPS satellites require a high knowledge of physics, chemistry and electronics, and all of those topics are based on a lot of math.
A simple water pipeline requires a lot of calculations in continuum mechanics in order to minimise the loss of friction through the pipes, and an aeroplane involves literally thousands of complex computer calculations where they try to optimise the design of the aeroplane wings, the required material, and so on.

Yes, math is frequently frustrating, and everyone struggles with it every now and then, but it is definitely extremely useful, and actually _required_ for our modern society.


The answer must be a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. (4)² equals 16. Since when is 16 smaller than itself?


@Peter

Your rephrasing of the question is MUCH HARDER to follow. While I understand what you wrote, I had to break it down into several component parts.

Your question requires us to remember square roots, right triangles, hypotenuses, legs of a right triangle, whole numbers, and addition. Yuck!

The original question requires us only to remember addition and the square numbers up to 49:

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

Actually, the original question only requires us to know the most famous right triangle in all mathematics: 3-4-5

It was worded fine but majority of the people just didn't read it correctly and voted for smallest square number instead of smallest addition of two squares. If this question had timer then there is a chance of making a mistake but that guy didn't think. Audience under limited time didn't read the question properly and got it wrong.

@Peter

This is true, but that doesn't mean that the problem is poorly worded. If you understand the concept but not the question, then the question is poorly worded. If the problem is worded correctly and you don't get it, then you don't understand the concept.

The original commenter gave no indication as to why he believed the question is poorly worded. Because the question is not poorly worded, I can only conclude that he doesn't understand the concept.

The question is worded okay. You don't understand the concept behind it.


Oh, the audience doesn't know it either. Great example of a failed American education system


All of these comments are what’s wrong with society. You guys are like HEY I COUKD DO THAT but you weren’t there under all the pressure the guy was when the problem was asked. And also, he probably made the same mistake I did and thought the two smaller numbers had to be the same number. Learn to be more understanding and less judgmental of others. That’s how humanity advances. You guys are the problem, not him.

I don't judge the guy at all. I judge the fact that more than 70% of the audience got it wrong.


That was the shittiest question ever, 3 is not a square number yet the question phrased it as if the square numbers were the ones being added.

What? 9 and 16 are added. Those two are square numbers. The wording is fine.


Nobody on here admitting they got it wrong 😂😂😂


You need to know the square numbers of number 1 to 5 to solve this. What a doofus...


Meredith could've at least flashed him her cooter as a consolation prize.


(3×3) + (4×4) = (5×5) <br>a squared + b squared = c squared

(3×3) + (4×4) = (5×5)
a squared + b squared = c squared


4^2 + 3^2 = 25
16+ 9 = 25
Tough luck better luck next time.


Shouldn't it be which of these "squared" numbers...

No, a "square number" is specifically defined as the square of an integer whereas "squared number" could be the square of any number.


People are commenting that the question wasn't worded correctly. It was. It's just that the majority of people didn't care about math and left it at the school doorstep, or don't analyse the sentence to figure out what is being asked. I think the majority of the audience basically guessed, when they should have just not pressed a button at all. It must also be damned hard to think all of that through when you're the one sitting on that chair. Lots of pressure. Feel bad for the guy.


Hey this guy made it to College without understanding basic math, that in and of itself as an accomplishment.


a A FAR BETTER ANSWER    2 sq is 4  sq is 16

It asks for the SUM of two smaller squared numbers. You don’t even have a sum.

@az21bob666 why so you think the most famous Pythagorean Triple is bad?

@az21bob666

The question is fine if you actually understand what they are asking for.

i know but they way they ask the question is bad.

That's not what the question is asking for.

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

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

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


i thought the answer was C 36 because
25 + 9 = 36
5^2 + 3^2 = 6^2 = 36

Nice calculation tell me more. 25+9=36 very good


It's wild how easy this actually was to answer, not even in a snobby way. Just use one less number than the actual square root, so for A, you can use 3. 3^2 = 9 leaving A with 7, which isnt possible. C is 5^2 = 25 leaves you with 11, and D is 6^2 = 36 leaving you with 13. And ofc B, 25, is just 3^2 + 4^2. Different times I suppose but still, can't believe the audience answers LMAO


Which of these square numbers also happens to be THE SUM of two smaller square numbers? I'm Spanish
4+4=8
5²=25
25≠5²+5²
I don't understand the question.
This is a bullshit.

@mambda ooooooooohhhhhh, i think.... The same number🤦


Couldn't we argue that 16 is also an correct answer, because 16, can be written as 4 squared plus 0 squared and if I understand correctly there is nothing preventing us from putting zero into solution?

The answer must be the sum of two smaller square numbers. Because 16 cannot be smaller than itself, then it cannot be the answer when summed with 0.

The only answer that works is 25, which is 16 + 9.


That was worded like garbage.   It's B 16+9=25.  Which squared number is the sum of two squared numbers.


Since I cant image that more than halft of the audience never went to school it is obvious to me that they just wanted to punish him for his lack of brainpower


From this comment section, I'm finding that math nerds are mean people. Yes, the math is simple, but does that look like a math formula to you? No. I've taken Calc 1,2,3, differential equations, and linear Algebra, and I still managed to think the question was asking for a squared number that's an addition of 2 squared numbers. It's a classic psychology trick that happened to be in the form of a math question where they make it look easy, so instead of rationally making an observation and deducting the answer, you see the answer (16) and justify it by thinking the sum of two squared numbers (2 and 2) equals the square of 16 (which is 4). Game shows do this all the time, Stop being @ssholes

I have studied math at university for about 4 years, but I have never got the idea that I am somehow "better" than people with less exposure to math just because of that;
in fact, it has made me eager to help people who find math difficult, and I am always willing to do that whenever someone asks me about it, since I find it genuinely fun.
The people who mock those who have problems with math have self-confidence issues, and a superiority complex.
Those people should be avoided, because they spread a toxic and harmful energy.

I have studied math at university for about 4 years, but I have never got the idea that I am somehow "better" than people with less exposure to math just because of that;
in fact, it has made me eager to _help_ people who find math difficult, and I am always willing to do that whenever someone asks me about it, since I find it genuinely fun.
The people who mock those who have problems with math have self-confidence issues, and a superiority complex.
Those people should be avoided, because they spread a toxic and harmful energy.

@LaughingStock55  yeah, it's so odd, as an engineer who usually find the engineering solution (ie, funny formula or calculator online) I'm usually envious of people who easily and fully remember and understand math, but not this time

They are definitely insecure. The only thing they offer the world is the ability to solve math problems.


Question itself was an issue. It felt as we had only those four options. Anyways, if you are going to appear on that show you must have practiced at least that much to know about the question.

Anyone wondering the answer, it is 25. Question asked which of the given square is the sum of two smaller squares, and 25 = 9 + 16.


i think everyone thought the question meant "which of these square numbers happens to be a squared number of a square number"

@Jon Smith its just reading the question wrong


Jesus christ, I couldn't figure it out either. So ashamed.


I think people got confused, they took this as if "SAME square number sum". Stll 16 is the wrong ans, but they feel it's worth to guess 😅


He could have probably sued them since all of them apply to the asked question. It was never mentioned to be a perfect square number

@Captain you're confidentially incorrect. By definition even.

@LaughingStock55 Perfect squares are integers

@LaughingStock55 No lmao, 2.25 is also a square number but not a perfect square, you may correct me if I'm wrong it may as well be that I mixed the term perfect square up with something else but the question doesn't say it has to be an integer square

A "Square Number" and "Perfect Square" are the same thing.


If the highest audience percentage is right around 50%, usually the next highest percentage is the correct answer.


everyone in the comments pretending they get it, this questions is brutally worded


f yall it took me like 10 mins shii confused me though. dont d ride in  the replies please or i will get deep


It didn't cost him that much. It just prevented him from gaining it.


A lot of people in here seem to not realise that there is a difference between needing time to think about something, and not understanding something.


These same people also vote Democrat and Republican. Explains Trump and Biden. 26th in the World, ftw!


I think the question is wrong because every no. in the option can be written as the sum of two square no.
(✓8)²+(✓8)² = 16
(-✓18)² + (-✓18)² = 36
or more ways
but the answer 25(b) is only correct when they ask for sum of square of two "positive integers"

A "square number" is defined as the square of an integer (the same as a "perfect square").


0 is a number, all answers are thereby correct.


why isnt the word 'multiplied' in the title? Like "two smaller square numbers multiplied". Question is not clear.

It's specifically asking for a "sum" which is the result of an addition.


I wonder how many bottom/shit wage people are trying to feel pumped up cause they know a random maths question on Sq numbers lol


Well I mean 16 is the sum of square of root 5 squared plus root 11 squared

Neither 5 nor 11 are square numbers. A square number is derived by squaring an integer. Therefore, the square numbers up to 49 are:

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

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


I don't understand the question. 2^2*2^2=16. Where is the problem?

@NkName all of the answers are squares. Only one is also the sum of two other smaller squares.<br>Edit: spelling

@NkName all of the answers are squares. Only one is also the sum of two other smaller squares.
Edit: spelling

@Unreal Samurai so x^2 + y^2 must be one of the answers and at the same time it must be a square?

sum means addition not multiplication 4^2 + 3^2 = 16+9 = 25


Wow, people are dumb!!.. I can't believe half the audience thought it was A.. this wasn't even difficult... I mean come on!.. Just start at 1 and start squaring.. 1,4,9,16,25... you can stop there because 25 plus 25 is 50... now start adding them together... it's not 1 and 4, not 4 and 9, and there it is!!... 9 and 16.. took all of 30 seconds... sure I wasn't under pressure, but neither was the audience.. my god our educational system sucks!

@LaughingStock55 In fairness, I deserved that. That was a callous and pejorative remark. It was intended to be a rebuke of a failed education system that's puts far too much emphasis on memorization as opposed to critical thinking, but it's true that I let my ego get the better of me and it only came across as narcissistic and demeaning... My apologies.

You sound like a charming fellow. I bet people love to spend time with you as you chide them on their lack of knowledge. The ladies must flock to you like flies on dung.


Anyone talking about pythagorean theorem is just as bad as the guy and 50% of the audience.

How? The question essentially is about the first and most famous Pythagorean Triple.


Wow. Reading the comments are brutal. Yall are forgetting a major variable. Time demand and pressure being on a TV show. Yall are running in here to try to passively say how smart you are. Most people learned Pythagoras theory. This question can easily be misinterpreted when you are rushing and assuming information. Funny part is,  I bet if I was to follow your reddit post, most of you are introverted, have anxiety and scared of the public. Like get real.

Under pressure you can definitely get this wrong or misunderstand the question. However more than 70% of the audience getting this wrong is concerning.


I work with the Pythagorean Theorem all the time in 3D space during integral calculations, and I still found this problem slightly confusing. It is very easy to misinterpret this question, and a lot of math people in here agree about that.


Either the youtube audience is more educated than this man either the youtube audience has the privilege of not having to solve this problem under time and money pressure. Remember how intimidating this is for most people to solve a math problem when an entire class is looking at him/her, let alone all your familly, friends and millions of folks behind there TV.

Anyway, i always found it harder to solve math problems when it is not properly formalized. Natural langages are ambiguous and this simple question can be approach in many different ways wich would lead the most of us to loose some precious time / get it wrong. I think it explains why the audience was lost too.


Why should this question be asked at all in first place? Is it a maths competition? You really have to think hard if you're not into maths and I think one should not expect an immediate answer either.


Took me about 3 minutes to figure it out because the question was not worded well. Under the pressure of the show, I would have used the 50/50 and probably still missed it.


c = 25 + 9 and b = 16 + 9 so really 2 correct answers this question is dumb!!!!

@LaughingStock55 stop laughing at me wtf

Not sure where you learned math, but 25 + 9 = 34, not 36.


Why? The math involved is like 4th grade math.


it's 4x4 lol<br> 4² means you multiply 4 by itself so 4x4=16 same with 3² 3x3=9

it's 4x4 lol
 4² means you multiply 4 by itself so 4x4=16 same with 3² 3x3=9


Technically, any of the answers was correct because they didn’t specify the numbers had to be integers (they could be Real numbers which include Rational and Irrational numbers).  Eg: 16=3^2 + (SQRT(7))^2, 25=3^2 + 4^2, 36=5^2 + ((SQRT(11))^2, 49=6^2 + ((SQRT(13))^2, QED

The question specified the the answer must be a "square number" that is the sum of two smaller "square numbers".

"Square number" is another term for perfect square. Perfect squares are derived by squaring integers. Therefore, the square numbers up to 49 are:

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

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


Since 0 is a perfect square, all of the answers are correct🤔

@A K I missed that too until someone else pointed it out to me haha

Note the "smaller" in the question. This excludes answers like 0^2+4^2=16.


to be fair, this question could have been worded better.

@e I'm not a native english speaker and thought "square number" is a very common term eg. when talking about Pythagoras. An alternative would be "perfect square". I don't know any other options than those two.

@mambda "square number" is not a term regular folks are going to get. I'm not sure i have a better alternative, but i can totally see how the audience chose A. But maybe thats why its such a good game show question.


@O’Reagano no, then all answers would be correct. A square number by definition is the square of an integer. A "squared" number  is the square of any number which would allow answers like 1^2 + (sqrt (15))^2 = 16.

@mambda Second part of the sentence should say squared not square for clarity

How? It's very precise and clear in my opinion.


4^2 + 0^2 = 16...<br>0 is also a number right guys?

4^2 + 0^2 = 16...
0 is also a number right guys?

The answer must be the sum of two smaller square numbers. 16 + 0 equals 16, but 16 cannot be smaller than itself.

Only 25 works. 16 + 9 = 25


Here was my thought process:
2 squared (Multiplied by itself) is 4.
4 squared (Multiplied by itself) is 16.
If you have two 2's squared and added the SUM of them together which is what the question is asking, it equals 16.
25 is 2 DIFFERENT numbers which was purposefully not specified.
In the end, 2 is just not a square integer so 16 can't be the answer, but it is correct if you take away the bullshit that is algebra.

"Purposely not specified"? There's no integer solutions for 2a^2=b^2 (a,b != 0) anyway.

The 3,4,5 Pythagorean Triple is super famous and by just going through the first square numbers you can solve this in seconds if you know what a "sum" is.


Everybody in this comment section: "What an utter fool for not solving polynomial equations in his head"
Also everybody in this comment section during their last math exam: pulls out calculator and types in 3 + 2

Everybody in this comment section: _"What an utter fool for not solving polynomial equations in his head"_
Also everybody in this comment section during their last math exam: *_pulls out calculator and types in 3 + 2_*


The question is confusing. It’s not worded correctly, as it makes no sense.

@mambda nothing is wrong with the question. It just would have been nice for them to make it more simple for the dumb people like me!!

@Lethabo Mthimkulu which would've been? And again: what's wrong with the question?

They could have asked the question in a much better way

@LaughingStock55 Yikes, what you’re saying makes sense and I’d still get it wrong lol!

The question is fine if you actually know what it’s talking about. It asks for a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. 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 if two smaller numbers in the set is 25, which equals 16 + 9


The audience was right 2.5^2 + 3.122498999199199^2 = 6.25 + 9.75 = 16. Or are we talking about natural numbers only? Well you forgot to specify that. But still 4^2 + 0^2 = 16. Oh, you meant natural non-zero, distinct, positive, sequential numbers?

There's the word "smaller" in the question which excludes 0^2+4^2 = 4^2.

"Square Number" has a specific definition in math and includes only whole numbers whose square roots are integers. In other words, square numbers are perfect squares.


You property tax dollars hard at work financing your public fool systems.

..

@mambda Right. It would force you to face the truth. Arrogant ignorant piece of garbage.

@Word of Mouth "The public schools are WAY overfunded. " AHAHHAH good one dude, good to know i dont have to read the rest.

@mambda The public schools are WAY overfunded. The administrations are top heavy and the student teacher ratio is getting ridiculously pampered but still the grades go down and down and the standards are lowered and still.. the grades go down and down. The only thing they still teach in grade school is the fluidity of gender and how to suck off your fellow non-binary classmate.  Oh they also learn that Christianity, parents and America are all evil.

When I went to grade school the student teacher ratio was one teacher to 27-32 students and we learned a LOT. I learned a lot more in grade school than I ever learned the following six years.

..

Then maybe actually start funding the public school system.


A true mathematician would know all answers are correct

@ShadeÖclutch a square number by definition is the square of an integer. Last time I checked sqrt(15) isn't an integer.

@ShadeÖclutch

You are not understanding the definition of "Square Number." Either that or you are not paying attention to what I just wrote. I've listed square numbers for you twice and clearly explained why the only correct answer is 25. At this point it's your decision whether or not you actually want to know this stuff.

@LaughingStock55 tell me indevidual square of whole root32/2 + whole root18/2=?
Does it not come to 25 too and did not break any rules of the asked question
The same can be done for all the options

@LaughingStock55 that is what I am saying Math is a very simple language if u don't specify how u want the question answered there are thousands of way to answer the same question and they never specified which kind of number to use <br>They just asked about the end goal is one of these number and square any 2 no. to get one of the option as answers

@LaughingStock55 that is what I am saying Math is a very simple language if u don't specify how u want the question answered there are thousands of way to answer the same question and they never specified which kind of number to use
They just asked about the end goal is one of these number and square any 2 no. to get one of the option as answers

@ShadeÖclutch

"Square number" has a specific definition in math, as I stated in my previous comment. Square numbers include only whole numbers whose square roots are integers. Therefore, you cannot just take the square of any number as you have suggested. Only the following qualify as square numbers:

0,  1,  4,  9,  16,  25,  36,  49,  64,  81,  100, ...

The only correct choice in this video is 25, which is 16 + 9.

@LaughingStock55 I know what math is thats why i said all options are correct simply because the question is itself flawed

They did not specify which number to be added while squaring so any and all no can make the answer thats why I said the question was itself flawed that is why all are possible answer

@LaughingStock55 square of root10 + square of root15

A true mathematician would've read the question more carefully before commenting.

Nope. Only 25 is correct. A “square number”, aka perfect square is found by squaring an integer. Therefore the square numbers up to 49 are:

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

The answer must be a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. The only number in the set above that is the sum of two smaller numbers in the set is 25, which equals 16 + 9.


This question is wrong. Every rational number can be written as the sum of two smaller square numbers (as the question does not specify perfect squares only). Nevertheless, even if you consider them to be only perfect squares, every answer is correct; for example 16 = 0² + 4²

@Nicolás Ignacio Maturana Vargas because 16 isn't smaller than 16. They're asking for smaller SQUARES and not for smaller roots of the squares.

@Reality Analyst  learn to read before commenting.

@mambda I get the first part, I was confused and you're right. But 0 < 4 and 0 is a square number so why wouldn't that be right?

A "square number" is specifically defined as the square of an integer. Furthermore note the "smaller" in the question. This excludes answers like 0^2+4^2=16.


To all the math geniuses in the comments ...Most non math geniuses don't rely on games like this to earn money and most importantly wouldn't feel stupid from a question like this with zero perspective in daily life and if it does you wouldn't have to analize it that  much! And if in one in a million someone pops it up so be it!!! We are more practical and logical beings!

@hopy51 Yes you can taunt me the player and the audience for failing the question! My comment was directed to the geniuses below who are doing the same thing as you . Obviously it's not just a matter of counting  or a  life fact about our planet. You cannot call people stupid based on their abilities of doing mathematics ! And mind you i come from a nation that gave birth to all this concepts and their names!! But it also made me appreciate logic and theory ( concepts also developed by people of my nation)   more!!! Again I don't blame my mind for not being so beautiful...Used to do it as a teenager that caused me  nothing but agony and stress and not leaving me appreciate my straight As of everything else..Unnecessary.<br>We are all good at something.

@hopy51 Yes you can taunt me the player and the audience for failing the question! My comment was directed to the geniuses below who are doing the same thing as you . Obviously it's not just a matter of counting  or a  life fact about our planet. You cannot call people stupid based on their abilities of doing mathematics ! And mind you i come from a nation that gave birth to all this concepts and their names!! But it also made me appreciate logic and theory ( concepts also developed by people of my nation)   more!!! Again I don't blame my mind for not being so beautiful...Used to do it as a teenager that caused me  nothing but agony and stress and not leaving me appreciate my straight As of everything else..Unnecessary.
We are all good at something.

Thankfully  I don't see algebra and geometry to my every move and thought...My mind isn't  that beautiful!

@mambda I guess the audience and the player do the same thing!

@mambda Of course man...I did it  without thinking all the details of my every move.

So you think it's a normal thing if someone thinks the Earth is flat? I mean, why would you need to know this if it doesn't help in your job? You sound like a very one dimensional person. One doesn't need to be a math genius in order to know how to count. 10 years old children are able to do this.

@ameleni never painted a wall? Baked cookies on a square oven tray? Basic geometry is your life (maybe not daily).

For some professions maybe not.  For me is irrelevant anyway.  But tell me what's the purpose of " the sum of two smaller square numbers " in yours?

"square numbers aren't relevant in daily life" lmao what a stupid take.


How can be 25 though when 5 times 5 is 25 but then 5 plus 5 equals 10??

@Stephen Steele you just need to solve 25 = a + b

since a and b both need to be square numbers

16(4*4)  and 9(3*3) would satisfy that equation

this would be algebra

@LaughingStock55 Right, I get what you saying but I just don't know where the 16 and 9 is coming from. What grade you in?

@Stephen Steele  The question asks for a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. Look at my previous comment for a list of the square numbers. 25 = 16 + 9

These are all square numbers, and 16 and 9 add to 25. You are trying to add the square root, which is not the same as the square.

@LaughingStock55 But the swuare of 25 is 5 and when you add 5 and 5 it's 10??? Where you get 16 and 9?

The square numbers up to 49 are:

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

The square number 25 is equal to the sum of the two smaller square numbers 16 + 9.


This comment section is full of childish behaviour even though its a math video. Another thing is dude was probably under massive stress so it was that much harder to recall pythagores thorem from the pile of others mathematical theorems he've been taught before.

Problem isn't the dude under pressure getting it wrong but the fact that 70% of the audience got it wrong.


Actually all the numbers are the sum of two smaller square numbers. For example 16 is the sum of the squares of 2√2 and 2√2. Which are both numbers. Just saying

A square number is defined as the square of an integer. √2 is most certainly not an integer.


The comment section seems to lack any level of self-awareness.   No shit you all can answer this because you most likely fall into 2 categories.  1. a kid who is still in school and is still taking math or 2. a person who works a job that uses math on a regular basis.   You're not going to remember everything that was taught to you 20 years ago unless you are using it frequently.

@0doublezero0 The question isn’t 6*6, which is what you’re saying most people don’t know. Are you denying most adults can’t calculate that? No? Then people know square numbers. It doesn’t matter if you haven’t come across a question like this in 20 years. As long as you know multiplication and addition. You can solve it. 3*3 + 4*4 = 25, and that math you think most adults don’t know according to your comment. Why did people get it wrong? Because they didn’t think. They guessed. They didn’t bother adding square numbers until they got a match. That is the reason the question is “difficult”.<br>So, when are you going to prove adults don’t know 6*6? A square number, the topic which you said most adults have forgotten?

@0doublezero0 The question isn’t 6*6, which is what you’re saying most people don’t know. Are you denying most adults can’t calculate that? No? Then people know square numbers. It doesn’t matter if you haven’t come across a question like this in 20 years. As long as you know multiplication and addition. You can solve it. 3*3 + 4*4 = 25, and that math you think most adults don’t know according to your comment. Why did people get it wrong? Because they didn’t think. They guessed. They didn’t bother adding square numbers until they got a match. That is the reason the question is “difficult”.
So, when are you going to prove adults don’t know 6*6? A square number, the topic which you said most adults have forgotten?

@mambda Unfortunately, that part is true.  lol

@0doublezero0 finally something we can agree on.

@mambda Well then, most of the general population +10 years out of school are imbeciles because I doubt they could answer this question (lol).

@0doublezero0 because the other 80% are imbeciles.

A third category includes those who like trivia and remember this pointless stuff just to feel smart. Otherwise we are just sad little people who are insecure about our self image. Take that rude little gremlin who trolled you. How good can his life really be if the only important thing going on for him is winning arguments on random YouTube videos?

@M-H 12 "Piss off with your demands."  Keep coping.  You say most people can do this math yet only around 20% of the audience got it correct.  I explained to you all why this happened, but your response is that they are not the norm.  This is just pure cope.  At the end of the day, I have more proof of my statement than you do of yours.

Yes, you can multiply two of the same numbers together and it would be the same as squaring it.  However, I doubt you will have a situation where you are using said squares (exclusively) to solve for a problem (like this).   Most of those people are around 10 years out of school on average, so its 100% reasonable why they got this wrong.  Keep calling them morons if you like, but they are the norm.  You can accept this or just be ignorant to the level of common knowledge the average person has outside of school.

Next you'll tell me squaring imaginary numbers is something the average 30-year-old English teacher should know...

@0doublezero0 Corrected? Arabic numerals is the name for the current most common numerical digits. It’s a name, you buffoon. I don’t recall saying anything about origin. Ironic you say I put words in your mouth.

So what if a lawyer doesn’t “need to square numbers” aka not know multiplication? I don’t need to know how to write to do many jobs, in fact I don’t need to know how to use the toilet to do most professions even. Yet would you still say it is understandable and logical not to know? Now perhaps you realize how “need” means absolutely nothing. I don’t need to know how to use the toilet, yet it is pretty practical and expected, isn’t it?

I think it’s pretty telling if you count 6+6+6+6+6+6 instead of just 6*6, a person who doesn’t manage elementary grade math. So that brings me to the next point, would you hire that “lawyer” you talk about who doesn’t even manage the simplest elementary math? Most definitely not unless there aren’t other options.

Piss off with your demands. You made the claim that people don’t remember squaring numbers (multiplication with 2 numbers of the same value) if they haven’t done it in 20 years. You said it so it is your duty to prove it unless you want to appear more of a moron. Oh wait you can’t since almost every adult in the entirety of the world has used multiplication in the last 20 years. How unfortunate. Do you still not get it? Squaring numbers is just multiplication.

@mambda I'm going to take a stab and say you fall into one of these two categories I've mentioned, but don't want to admit it.  So you know I'm right, so deal with it. lol

@0doublezero0 squaring is simple multiplication. This question is simple. Deal with it.

@mambda Let me clarify, you don't need to square things to live a normal life. Division, multiplication, Subtraction, and Addition are necessary.  Yes, squaring is basic math but utilizing the Pathoregon theorem to solve that question above isn't.  Its well beyond what you need in math to live as an English teacher. (if your going to be tell me basic math is basic algebra, you might as well tell all 6 graders their doing basic calculus since their learning algebra. All math builds upon itself all LMAO which is why I stated math majors would know this easily).

@M-H 12 "I doubt you have even taken calculus since what you say is blatantly nonsensical and you appear to not even know what square numbers are."  Believe what you want, the fact I corrected you on your statement on Arabic numbers being Indian in origin shows I have more respect for the origin of things than you.

All you've done is put words in my mouth without really understanding anything I've stated.  You should learn math as far as you can go.  However, for most daily activities you don't need to have this level of understanding of math.  A lawyer could go his entire life not being able square numbers and use the Pythagorean theorem.

Find 5 people over the age of 70 who are not in math or sciences and ask them this very question and prove me wrong.  Good luck.

@0doublezero0 This isn’t Pythagoras theorem, this is simple multiplication. Multiplication which so happens to be of the same number. I doubt you have even taken calculus since what you say is blatantly nonsensical and you appear to not even know what square numbers are. You definitely use multiplication in your daily life, and square numbers is simple elementary math. In other words, you don’t meet square numbers once in a lesson, you meet them throughout your entire math education aswell as in your life. Making your past point of remembering some arbitrary information with no progression a terrible comparison. Also making your claim of not used in daily life wrong. <br>So no, most people can answer this question because they aren’t idiots.

@0doublezero0 This isn’t Pythagoras theorem, this is simple multiplication. Multiplication which so happens to be of the same number. I doubt you have even taken calculus since what you say is blatantly nonsensical and you appear to not even know what square numbers are. You definitely use multiplication in your daily life, and square numbers is simple elementary math. In other words, you don’t meet square numbers once in a lesson, you meet them throughout your entire math education aswell as in your life. Making your past point of remembering some arbitrary information with no progression a terrible comparison. Also making your claim of not used in daily life wrong.
So no, most people can answer this question because they aren’t idiots.

@0doublezero0 this literally is basic math lmao<br>Edit: also basic math is basic algebra.

@0doublezero0 this literally is basic math lmao
Edit: also basic math is basic algebra.

@mambda And? You really think a lawyer uses algebraic theorems to win a court case?  The average person only needs basic math to live a normal life, algebra is not basic math...

@M-H 12 "we shouldn’t teach Arabic numerals."  Nice assumption.  It should really be referred to as Hindu-Arabic numeral systems since it was India that laid the foundation for number system.

I never said you shouldn't have a foundation?   However, if you think most people use the Pythagorean theorem in their daily lives, then I doubt you've spoken to anyone outside of academia or the math/sciences about this.

@Mark people still don't understand the fundamental theorems of algebra (or passed 5th grade).

Damn this video came out 15 years ago and people are still commenting

@0doublezero0 So you’ve never multiplied a number by the same number in 20 years? You’re the type of person to say we shouldn’t teach Arabic numerals.

@M-H 12 Uh no, square number is not used to file your taxes and you can do jobs that don't require squaring of numbers.  I've not had a situation where I had to square numbers in 20 years (not since I took calculus).

The point is that if its easy, you fit into one of these two categories.   Asking this type is like asking a 25-year-old do you still remember the first paragraph of the Gettysburg address that was taught to you in 6th grade.

Square numbers and addition is something everyone uses and should know. It’s not complicated.


For the idiots in the comments that don't understand the question (spoiler):
x²+y²=ans; ans must be a square number.

Answer:
B:25
25 = 3²+4²
25 = 5²


This is a horrendous question. 16 is equal to the sum of the square root of 8 squared plus the square root of 8 squared. All of the answers could be sums of square numbers.

@anonymussy123 square numbers and perfect squares are the same thing. A square of an integer.

@mambda they did not mention perfect squares anywhere in the question

@RBT-000 they didn't say perfect squares anywhere in the question

This is a horrendous comment. sqrt(8) is a irrational number making 8 not a perfect square. None of the answers except for 25 are sums of two smaller square numbers.

You don’t know the definition of perfect squares.

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

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

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


This didn't cost him anything. Lack of a gain is not a loss. He didn't have to give the TV show $15K, did he?


@alguien lolco if it said "squared" instead of "square" in the second instance all answers would be correct. A square number is defined as the square of an integer. A "squared" number could refer to any number.
The first "square" is not necessary, however makes the question easier since you don't have to verify that the listed answers are all in fact square numbers.
So no. The question is formulated well.

@LaughingStock55The question is wrongly formulated from the point where it mentions that "square numbers" are also the sum of two "squared numbers".  I want to refer to the redundancy of the first data and also the fact that the question doesn't say "squared" it says "square".

In what way?

The question is fine if you actually know what it’s asking.


Reread the question. The answer must be a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. Yes, 0 + 16 = 16, but 16 cannot be smaller than itself. Therefore, 16 cannot be the answer.


I would say A because:
4x4 = 16 and
0x0 = 0,
16+0 = 16

@Nick R it would be a lovely outcome for the participant; every answer is correct.

Yes, LaughingStock55 has nailed it. But additionally, your reasoning Supersonic leads you to every one of the answers being correct. 4x4, 5x5, 6x6, 7x7 each +0

@LaughingStock55 great attention to detail. ✅

The answer must be the sum of two smaller square numbers. Because 16 cannot be smaller than itself, the answer cannot be derived using the sum of 16 and 0.


All of them
4²+0²=16
7²+0²=49
They didn't specify the question well enough

@LaughingStock55 Dude how are you so good at math? Are you a teacher?

Reread the question.

The answer must be a square number that is the sum of two smaller square numbers. A square number is derived by squaring an integer. Therefore the square numbers up to 49 are:

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

The only number in this set that is the sum of two smaller numbers in the set is 25, which equals 16 + 9. The answer cannot be the sum of itself and 0 because a number cannot be smaller than itself.

As per ur theory all options are correct


The audience was right: 16 = (3+i)^2+(3-i)^2

@LaughingStock55 It's seems square numbers is another term used for perfect squares in US.

In my country, the square numbers refer to any square of a number over a field.

@The_Other_Cartographer

"Square number" is another term for perfect square. They are the exact same thing.

The question is unambiguous. The only correct answer is 25.

Please search for "square number" online and read about it.

@LaughingStock55 The question was ambiguous and didn't mention 'perfect squares', so technically all of four answers were right in the world complex numbers.

Square numbers, aka perfect squares, must be whole numbers. Imaginary numbers are not in the set of square numbers.


It should be the smaller no , 4 is not smaller than 4

The answer must be the sum of two smaller square numbers.

It's true that 16 + 0 = 16, but 16 cannot be smaller than itself and therefore cannot be the answer.


Goofy aah question. Y'all really on a high horse for knowing square numbers when they're rarely referred to in everyday life. Unless you're in a math-related career, you hardly use math

@CynicalDuty clearly you've never painted a room then. "just google it" instead of being able to multiply 2 numbers. Pathetic.

@mambda How often are you going to be painting a room or even measuring it lol. I can just brush it up on Google. AND if you can't paint a room without measuring it, that's comical

Ever painted a wall? Had to measure a room? In fact calculate the area of anything? While not used on a daily base you should know this.


What a stupid ****ing question. And I got A in GSCE AND A-level maths.

@Stories read aloud also how is the wording confusing?

@Stories read aloud not even a native speaker, knobhead. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to be able to add two numbers.

@mambda Stop trying to sound smart, you really don't.

@Stories read aloud the 3,4,5 Pythagorean Triple is very famous. Also the wording is very precise and not confusing at all if you know what "sum" and "squares" means.<br>I can see how this might be confusing for non native english speakers but for native speakers who passed the 4th grade this should be very easy.

@Stories read aloud the 3,4,5 Pythagorean Triple is very famous. Also the wording is very precise and not confusing at all if you know what "sum" and "squares" means.
I can see how this might be confusing for non native english speakers but for native speakers who passed the 4th grade this should be very easy.

@mambda It's worded poorly and requires calculation, not a general knowledge question.


I'm with Ryan.  Isn't that a ridiculously hard question for $16k???  Or am I the product of the crap UK education system?

@MOUNT CRUSHMORE "However the question is worded incorrectly with loads of different exploits and loopholes." Nope.


People in the comments are over exaggerating. It was worded very confusing and had nothing to do with math skills. I would’ve got it wrong just because I didn’t understand the question and would’ve needed to see an example of what they meant

The question isn't worded confusingly, quite the opposite. Anyway, the dude not understanding under pressure is no problem. The real issue is 72% of the audience getting it wrong. That's just pathetic.

The guy didn't seem to even remember what a square number was


Nobody caught that there are two specially-named powers: "to the second power" is generally pronounced or written as "squared",  therefore the semantics of the question at hand is incorrectly spelled. It should have read "squared".   The show owes our contestant $16,000.00 plus 18% per year interest for 15 years but probably the show is out of business due to bad semantics.

No. A "square number" is defined as the square of an integer. A "squared number" would be the square of any number.


The question is itself wrong. It should be stated the number should be s natural number

@LaughingStock55 o gotcha. i see there is a difference between square and squared number.

@Zitscx ø

Okay let’s see if this helps you understand the concept of square numbers.

Take the integers 0 through 7. A  square number a.k.a. perfect square is found by squaring an integer. Therefore  the square numbers up to 49 are:

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

You are confusing the term “square number” with “squared number.” A square number must be an integer by definition, whereas you can square any number you want.

@LaughingStock55 2 is a square of root2. it aint necessarily should be an integer. Irrational numbers are also numbers.

A square number is derived by squaring an integer. Therefore a square number by definition is a whole number.


But I bet they know all about 'racism', 'gay rights', and all the other crap taught in schools.