I don't blame the audience, this question was worded weirdly...

@MrY3110w Oh boy, how low the standards are these days when engineering students cannot even fogure out elementary school math.

Engineers should be able to tell which information is useless.

The reason these engineers are saying its worded weirdly is because they've been dealing too much with computers which need extremely precise directions forcing them to get into the habit of wanting extremely precis directions. Doesn't mean their dumb only that if you give vague directions nothing will get done if you give precise directions shit'll get done ;)

Peter Geras

"if our criteria is that we need to choose two perfect squares with each being less than the result, -4 and 0 satisfy A."

First of all, -4 is not a perfect square (or square number) since -4 is not the square of an integer.  There is no integer n such that n^2 = -4.  Additionally, -4 + 0 = -4, not 16.

If you mean that we can use (-4)^2 + (0)^2 = 16, then this, again, does not satisfy the criteria for the question.

The square number (or perfect square) in question is not -4, but (-4)^2 = 16, and 16 is not smaller than 16.

The question states that the square numbers you are adding together have to be smaller than the sum.  The question never mentions the square roots of the square numbers you are adding together (which is the only way that -4 could ever come into play here).

MuffinsAPlenty Then in that case, if our criteria is that we need to choose two perfect squares with each being less than the result, -4 and 0 satisfy A.

Ya I sorta realized that. I personally think it would have been significantly better to say "Perfect Square" even if it is synonymous with "Square Number" purely because the common person, or even some math profs ive had (might be a language issue) doesn't necessarily associate the two terms.<br>Either way, dumb question, easy answer

Ya I sorta realized that. I personally think it would have been significantly better to say "Perfect Square" even if it is synonymous with "Square Number" purely because the common person, or even some math profs ive had (might be a language issue) doesn't necessarily associate the two terms.
Either way, dumb question, easy answer

Tylemaker19 Careful!

"In mathematics, a square number or perfect square is an integer that is the square of an integer"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_number

"A square number, also called a perfect square, is a figurate number of the form S_n=n^2, where n is an integer."
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SquareNumber.html

Part of the definition of a square number is that the number must be the square of an integer.  As such, your examples do not fit the criteria put forth in the question, as all of them use as an addend a number which cannot be written as the square of an integer.

This hearkens back to my point about mathematics using very precise terminology.  In this case, "square number" means something different from "square of a number."

MuffinsAPlenty MrY3110w <br>Definitely improper wording. You could easily make a case for any of these answers. It's obviously B, but (2√10)^2 + 3^2 = 49, likewise (√(36-pi^2))^2 + pi^2 = 36 also (√(16-e^2))^2 + e^2 = 16 and those are all "smaller square numbers". Its a technicality but still.

MuffinsAPlenty MrY3110w
Definitely improper wording. You could easily make a case for any of these answers. It's obviously B, but (2√10)^2 + 3^2 = 49, likewise (√(36-pi^2))^2 + pi^2 = 36 also (√(16-e^2))^2 + e^2 = 16 and those are all "smaller square numbers". Its a technicality but still.

I understand, this question was worded strangely.

MuffinsAPlenty

I agree with everything you wrote in your post except perhaps this:

"I can understand why people think the question is worded oddly.  Most people don't know much about math and don't care to know much about math, so many people would not be familiar with reading/comprehending the precise language and terminology used in mathematics" and "It is worded strangely in that most people don't have an exposure to the precise language that mathematics uses, and thus, are not prepared to read a question with this caliber of mathematical language."

Worded oddly and using terms that not everyone knows are different things. This is what makes trivia trivia - having to know specific, seemingly obscure things in order to figure out the answer. Even if a "square number" were known as a "Goulashian number," then knowing what a "Goulashian number" is would just be part of the process. Knowing terms and background information is part of trivia and part of what makes it challenging, and it's why not everyone can get them all right.

Бранимир Милошевић

That's a great minus, since creationism is crucial in today's needs. Even if industry is going great, it doesn't solve the aforementioned problem

1878EFC2008<br>You don't know much about America do you? It's the lead developer in the developing world and yet somehow, the laughing stock? Also... unless the school is private, creationism is not taught.

1878EFC2008
You don't know much about America do you? It's the lead developer in the developing world and yet somehow, the laughing stock? Also... unless the school is private, creationism is not taught.

Vahe Hakobyan So... nobody understood why this was intended to be written this way. Indeed the question doesn't lack consistency at all. However, given his situation, the production wanted to rearrange the wording so that it becomes more confusing. In such nerve-cracking situations, this would help to confuse many people. He reacted correctly, asking for the crowd's opinion, in order to calm himself. Nevertheless, he did not take his time, and the crowd was also bamboozed, though in a much more comfortable position and gave him the middle finger (figuratively)

1878EFC2008 I didn't know youtube was exclusive to the United States

Sum Says I like your improvement very much, actually.  Definitely agree with what you said.

The question couldn't have been worded better.

MuffinsAPlenty
I think "Which of these square numbers is also the sum of two smaller square numbers?" is a much better wording for the question.  It's not as wordy as the orginal and a little more concise than the original question. "..also happens to be" is not really needed. The answer choice either is or isn't, it doesn't "happen" to be anything.  However, I could understand why WWTBAM would word it that way. At first hearing the question could sound a little confusing.

Mathematically, as you were saying, the orignal question is correctly stated, however it sounds too wordy. That's my take on it.

MuffinsAPlenty Thanks for being able to see both sides of the argument. I did not say the question was stated wrong, I just think the question as stated strangely. Like you said, the terminology used here is intended more for mathematicians, not engineers, certainly not most of the people in the crowd.

I'd like to point out a few things I noticed.  And various points refer to various different people and their claims.

1. I can understand why people think the question is worded oddly.  Most people don't know much about math and don't care to know much about math, so many people would not be familiar with reading/comprehending the precise language and terminology used in mathematics.

2. Being an engineer (or engineering student) does not mean you are good at math.  You may be good at finding derivatives, solving differential equations, plugging numbers into formulas, etc., but none of that stuff is on the forefront of mathematics.  Actual mathematics is proof-intensive.  In a proof-intensive mathematics course, you will be lucky to see a few computational problems ever.  Also, in a proof-intensive mathematics course, one must pay attention very carefully to what terminology is used.  Mathematics terminology has very precise meanings and must be communicated in a very precise manner; otherwise, you may end up saying something incorrectly or saying something you did not intend to say.  Most universities do not hold engineering majors up to this standard, teaching mathematics courses more as a "plug and chug" type course, as opposed to a course on actual mathematical reasoning and thought.  So being an engineer (or engineering student) may give you an advantage compared to the average person on having seen more mathematical ideas, it certainly does not mean that you are an authority on mathematics.

3. "what's the point of telling you the numbers are squares numbers"  So that it is a more interesting mathematical fact.  Who cares if two square numbers happen to add up to some random number?  It is far more interesting that a square number can be the sum of two smaller square numbers.

4. "The question is not poorly stated. It is just indicating the possible usage of Pythagorean theorem." I vehemently disagree.  While one can connect the problem with the Pythagorean Theorem, the problem is not indicating or hinting at the Pythagorean Theorem being used.  The Pythagorean Theorem is a theorem from Euclidean geometry.  This question is a question about number theory.  While connections can be made, this does not mean that the question is indicating any sort of possible usage of the Pythagorean Theorem here.  I don't even understand how one could even actually use the Pythagorean Theorem to answer this question.

5. I agree that there's no reason to be a jerk here.  It doesn't help to convince anyone of anything.

6. "4^2 and 0^2 is also correct."  I know this was already pointed out, but I'd like to point it out again.  The question specifically states that the two square number you are adding together must be smaller than the sum.  4^2 is equal to, and thus not smaller than the sum, so this is not a valid solution to the question as it is posed.

7. "Seeing my post is one of the most liked posts on this video proves the fact that a lot of people agrees with me."  Okay, good.  I know you did not suggest this, but I'm afraid of people reading something you did not say into it.  Just because a lot of people agree with you does not mean you are correct.  Again, I'm not saying that you suggested you were correct.  (You didn't.)  There isn't really a "correct" or "incorrect" about what you stated anyway, but more about that in point 8.  I'm just bringing up this point because people have argued on this video before that just because they have gotten a lot of likes (or pluses or whatever) that they are correct.  That is certainly not the case.  Especially for things relating to mathematics.

8. The main "debaters" (so to speak) in this argument are not arguing against each other.  One side is arguing that the question is worded strangely, while the other side is arguing that the question is worded correctly.  Yes, the question is indeed worded correctly.  And yes, most people do consider the question to be worded strangely, weirdly, or oddly.  These things are not mutually exclusive nor are they opposites.  It is worded correctly in that there is one correct answer and all of the words make mathematical sense based on the mathematical definitions.  It is worded strangely in that most people don't have an exposure to the precise language that mathematics uses, and thus, are not prepared to read a question with this caliber of mathematical language.

9. "What are you asking for? It is a matter of opinion. We think it is oddly stated, you don't. We don't need to provide evidence for an opinion lol."  Okay, I understand you.  At the same time, however, you could explain why you think the question is oddly stated.  Going into that reasoning would certainly not hurt you.  It could help you learn how to develop an argument in a better way than you currently do (and it certainly won't hurt your arguing skills if it doesn't help you).  Perhaps upon further meditation on the question, you may decide to change your mind.  Perhaps you could change someone else's mind by pointing out something that someone else may not have thought of yet. Perhaps you are missing something - maybe you have a gap in your knowledge about the meaning of one of the terms.  If this is the case, someone could explain it to you.  So while you don't have to support an opinion, true, it could be beneficial to one of the parties involved.

I'm sorry for being so long winded, but I wanted to respond to a lot.

I'd like to point out a few things I noticed.  And various points refer to various different people and their claims.

1. I can understand why people think the question is worded oddly.  Most people don't know much about math and don't care to know much about math, so many people would not be familiar with reading/comprehending the precise language and terminology used in mathematics.

2. Being an engineer (or engineering student) does not mean you are good at math.  You may be good at finding derivatives, solving differential equations, plugging numbers into formulas, etc., but none of that stuff is on the forefront of mathematics.  Actual mathematics is proof-intensive.  In a proof-intensive mathematics course, you will be lucky to see a few computational problems ever.  Also, in a proof-intensive mathematics course, one must pay attention very carefully to what terminology is used.  Mathematics terminology has very precise meanings and must be communicated in a very precise manner; otherwise, you may end up saying something incorrectly or saying something you did not intend to say.  Most universities do not hold engineering majors up to this standard, teaching mathematics courses more as a "plug and chug" type course, as opposed to a course on actual mathematical reasoning and thought.  So being an engineer (or engineering student) may give you an advantage compared to the average person on having seen more mathematical ideas, it certainly does not mean that you are an authority on mathematics.

3. "what's the point of telling you the numbers are squares numbers"  So that it is a more interesting mathematical fact.  Who cares if two square numbers happen to add up to some random number?  It is far more interesting that a square number can be the sum of two smaller square numbers.

4. "The question is not poorly stated. It is just indicating the possible usage of Pythagorean theorem." I vehemently disagree.  While one can connect the problem with the Pythagorean Theorem, the problem is not indicating or hinting at the Pythagorean Theorem being used.  The Pythagorean Theorem is a theorem from Euclidean geometry.  This question is a question about number theory.  While connections can be made, this does not mean that the question is indicating any sort of possible usage of the Pythagorean Theorem here.  I don't even understand how one could even actually use the Pythagorean Theorem to answer this question.

5. I agree that there's no reason to be a jerk here.  It doesn't help to convince anyone of anything.

6. "4^2 and 0^2 is also correct."  I know this was already pointed out, but I'd like to point it out again.  The question specifically states that the two square number you are adding together must be smaller than the sum.  4^2 is equal to, and thus not smaller than the sum, so this is not a valid solution to the question as it is posed.

7. "Seeing my post is one of the most liked posts on this video proves the fact that a lot of people agrees with me."  Okay, good.  I know you did not suggest this, but I'm afraid of people reading something you did not say into it.  Just because a lot of people agree with you does not mean you are *correct*.  Again, I'm not saying that you suggested you were correct.  (You didn't.)  There isn't really a "correct" or "incorrect" about what you stated anyway, but more about that in point 8.  I'm just bringing up this point because people have argued on this video before that just because they have gotten a lot of likes (or pluses or whatever) that they are correct.  That is certainly not the case.  Especially for things relating to mathematics.

8. The main "debaters" (so to speak) in this argument are not arguing against each other.  One side is arguing that the question is worded _strangely_, while the other side is arguing that the question is worded _correctly_.  Yes, the question is indeed worded correctly.  And yes, most people do consider the question to be worded strangely, weirdly, or oddly.  These things are not mutually exclusive nor are they opposites.  It is worded correctly in that there is one correct answer and all of the words make mathematical sense based on the mathematical definitions.  It is worded strangely in that most people don't have an exposure to the precise language that mathematics uses, and thus, are not prepared to read a question with this caliber of mathematical language.

9. "What are you asking for? It is a matter of opinion. We think it is oddly stated, you don't. We don't need to provide evidence for an opinion lol."  Okay, I understand you.  At the same time, however, you could explain _why_ you think the question is oddly stated.  Going into that reasoning would certainly not hurt you.  It could help you learn how to develop an argument in a better way than you currently do (and it certainly won't hurt your arguing skills if it doesn't help you).  Perhaps upon further meditation on the question, you may decide to change your mind.  Perhaps you could change someone else's mind by pointing out something that someone else may not have thought of yet. Perhaps you are missing something - maybe you have a gap in your knowledge about the meaning of one of the terms.  If this is the case, someone could explain it to you.  So while you don't have to support an opinion, true, it could be beneficial to one of the parties involved.

I'm sorry for being so long winded, but I wanted to respond to a lot.

Vahe Hakobyan What are you asking for? It is a matter of opinion. We think it is oddly stated, you don't. We don't need to provide evidence for an opinion lol. We aren't looking to publish a paper on the oddity of the question asked. This is youtube, get over your pompous little self.

Vahe Hakobyan I think the question is poorly stated as well, in my opinion. I'm a computer engineering student at a university also and have taken Calculus and math courses. I obviously know the math but the question was weirdly stated. You don't need to be a jerk because other people think it's stated strangely. We all think differently after all, even a child could figure that out so don't be rude.

Vahe Hakobyan I'm starting to think you're just some 13 year old with a big ego. Seeing my post is one of the most liked posts on this video proves the fact that a lot of people agrees with me. If you scroll through the comments you can see other people also thinks the question was weird. I highly doubt you know what you're talking about. I'm sure you figured that out all by yourself and not because the video gave you the answer or anything :p

Vahe Hakobyan Like I said, the math was not hard, it was the wording of the question. I don't know what kind of math you learn in your country but you certainly do not need to know that the number is a square to know the answer. 4^2 and 0^2 is also correct.

PS Universities don't just take anyone for their engineering programs, especially not the university I go to. Before you take a jab at my abilities on the internet to show off your dominance, please read what I said before typing away

Valera Osipov Also I never said the math was a problem... I said the question was worded weirdly, which a lot of people agrees with

Valera Osipov I presume you are able to understand any texts without any confusion just by separating sentences in parts?

MrY3110w So that's what confusing? One word? It's not math problem then, it must be some kind of mental disease when one is not able to separate sentence in parts.

Valera Osipov what's the point of telling you the numbers are squares numbers

It's worded just fine independant of what kind of student you are. What could you possibly get wrong here?

I'm an engineering student as well, and I thought it was worded weirdly too.

M Ali Sucks for you knowing you and your family's lives might depend on me one day then

if you lack a 8th grade education, possibly.


"Why are we even learning the Pythagorean theorem? We won't used that in the real life!"<br>Lose 15k$ :o

"Why are we even learning the Pythagorean theorem? We won't used that in the real life!"
Lose 15k$ :o


No way he couldn't have figured it out if he would have taken his time. Just got flustered and went with the audience without thinking about it. You can figure out what a square number is just by looking at the answers if you don't know. Then just sit there and run through them until tell you get it.


Oh i got it, and I'm drunk too. But I could feel the pressure, so i understand how he got it wrong. tough break.


Yes I paused the video to figure it out but I still got it right regardless basically bordering genius


I mean, both the audience and AOL said 16, so you can't really blame him.


English is not my first language so I interpreted this question completely wrong. I thought that these numbers were results of perfect squares, and that the perfect squares themselves must the the result of perfect squares as well. So I thought 4 x 4 = 16, and 2 x 2 = 4, therefore it's A. Glad I'm not this guy, I'm pretty good at mathematics but I would have looked like a complete fool lmao


Even if you didn't recognise the answer straight away (anyone who knows a what 3,4,5 triangle would see it instantly) - surely even someone crap at maths would take a couple of minutes to work it out with some basic adding up !


I swear the audience always tries to sabotage 😅


but learning math will cost you about the same amount, plus a lot of time


I dont want to be smart at math<br>Because i actually counted the square numbers just to help him

I dont want to be smart at math
Because i actually counted the square numbers just to help him


That moment when 70% of the audience don't know the answer


I think a better way to word this question would be “Which of these perfect squares also happens to be the sum of two smaller perfect squares?”

Square number and perfect square are two terms for the same thing. It is unnecessary to substitute one for the other.


I think the audience thought that the Square had to itself be made up of squares. 16 being the square of 4 which is a square of 2. But obviously that's from misinterpreting the question as the real answer makes this quite obvious and trivial


When trusting the public can cost you 15000


He doesn't know, half of the audience doesn't know, and half of the AOL audience doesn't know. That is SAD!


Should've used the other life line, the 80/20 one


Feel for this guy... yes, this isn’t too tough a question at home, but a different story on TV with a live audience and lights etc. I can see how it could be confusing... he did the right think asking the audience and if you are aiming big you can’t then really afford to use all your other lifelines reconfirming what they have told you.  He got the question wrong, but not his approach.  Hopefully he is luckier in love!

@João Marcos Costa Since most the audience got it wrong, it seems most people aren’t good at math, when

@Paul Ramos depends on the job interview. Some that require Bachelors degree or higher DO ask those types of questions.

I don't feel for him, I don't think he could be arsed to even try to answer it.<br>The answer is in the question, as it tells you all the numbers there were square numbers, so once you know the square numbers are 1,4,9,16,25,... its just a matter of trying different pairs till you find a pair that add up to one of the 4 options.

I don't feel for him, I don't think he could be arsed to even try to answer it.
The answer is in the question, as it tells you all the numbers there were square numbers, so once you know the square numbers are 1,4,9,16,25,... its just a matter of trying different pairs till you find a pair that add up to one of the 4 options.

@youuuuuuuuuuutube since this show is American, if you speak a different language that isn’t very common in the US then just ask your family what’s 4^2 + 3^2.

@Isaac Swoyer Yeah, he probably wouldn't be able to pass 9th grade basic algebra!... If it required answering math problems in front of a live audience with a bunch of lights in his face and thousands of dollars on the line.

Most people are not great at math under this much pressure.

No it’s a simple math problem. He’s an idiot who doesn’t know what a square number is. This dude wouldn’t pass 9th grade basic algebra.

More like algebruh

Yeah, he got out on the spot and was too nervous to figure it out. Math can do that to you haha

Hell, I didn't know the answer.  I was leaning towards 49, why idk. You don't get those questions on a job interview.  I consider myself successful for only having a HS diploma,  a house (mortgage), a few cars, shit load of tools, go kart, 5 lawnmowers.  Just an average steelworker,nothing fancy.

How was asking the audience the right thing? the audience gave the wrong answer, so it was clearly the wrong move.<br>Calling a friend that he knows is good at Math (or at least smart), would have been a better move.

How was asking the audience the right thing? the audience gave the wrong answer, so it was clearly the wrong move.
Calling a friend that he knows is good at Math (or at least smart), would have been a better move.


Oh my goodness, even the freaking audience!!!


tbh if I were in the audience i'd vote a mistake by anger of seeing a grown man not able to figure that out.


Puh, took me about 8 minutes to figure out what exactly the question was about.  But at least I came up with the right answer at the end.<br>But if I was forced to come up with an answer quickly, it would have been 16 for me, but I certainly would not have felt certain with it.

Puh, took me about 8 minutes to figure out what exactly the question was about.  But at least I came up with the right answer at the end.
But if I was forced to come up with an answer quickly, it would have been 16 for me, but I certainly would not have felt certain with it.


I will be lying to you if I told you this guy passed 6th grade maths.


thats why math is important,for such common events like this :D

Also for building computers and software for people to write dumb comments.

knowing how long something is is obviously not important for anything

Glockel cuz normal people are not on the internet :D

Is it weird that I instantly knew the answer 16+9=25?

Why is everyone on the internet such a douche ffs


Most easiest example teacher gives you Pythogorus Theorum


Anyone who's done pythagoras sums knows it well


When i clicked i thought it'll be some hard question ain't no way mid aged ppl couldn't solve it💀


The most famous triangle in all of Pythagorum.


Very difficult question, maybe combinations possible/need to be searched... haha... quiz master totally screwed everybody lol.


Roses are red, violets are blue
This is on my recommended 11 years later
How about you?

*Roses are red, violets are blue*
*This is on my recommended 11 years later*
*How about you?*

Roses are red,
Violets are f*cking violet,
not blue.
F*ck you.

JonsyTheGerman because 11 years later he killed the whole audience.

JonsyTheGerman the second line doesn’t rhyme... so it actually would sound pretty weird if you said it out loud. Try it....

JonsyTheGerman - Indeed. What the heck, You Tube?

I think we all get a TV show now.. We've been brought together.. but why

it's this algorithm
i don't understand why it wanted us to see this
edit: yes i typed this like im implying it's a living thing

it probably is


THE SUM, the sum of two square numbers, I was thinking the quotient of two other square numbers and probably the audience as well. How tricky lol


Technically, it would be all of them. As stated, they are all square numbers, and because zero squared is zero, then the sum of the number on the screen (which is a square number) plus zero (also a square number) equals the number on the screen (still a square number). I know it's not what the person who came up with the question intended, but it's still true.

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


I still don’t really understand the question “also happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers” maybe that’s simple but I’m confused


I learned about the pythagorean theorem plenty, but never in this way. That stressed me out a bit. The 3, 4, 5 thing I see in the comments; never heard of it.


Am I the only one who was confused the first time I read the question?


Education will never be as expensive as ignorance.

I mean the question was kinda confusing though. It didn't make sense to me until comments pointed it out.

@galactic85 but he is a college student, is on hot seat and has all the time in the world to think.

Dude I haven't had anybody ask me about this stuff In YEARS. I still know and understand what square roots are but It took me a bit to refresh my memory as i was rereading the question. I drop emails into folders on a computer for a living. Square roots don't come up a lot in daily conversations. I'm not ignorant I just haven't had any reason to think about this stuff because I haven't had a practical reason to use it and most of the ways in which I try to educate myself in the present pertain to history and political theory. Don't assume 'ignorance' is always the case.

It is not just that but Math is the most disliked subject in school while subjective literature, which I hated because I couldn’t understand what a book was talking about, is well-liked.

Well this video is just one cherry-picked example, what percentage of the population even plays this

Also you can learn this not at school

@Mr. Sarcastic What? Integration by parts and partials aren't that bad. TBH the only hard pieces are when trig is involved

Ive Mc Fallen
I don't know what fuckin type of geometry you guys are doing
But by parts integrals with partial fractions are assrape
Then again i am a second year so i don't know much

@Mr. Sarcastic fuck no. Geometry is shit. Volume, space, length bullshit. Give me algebra, ANALYTIC geometry, calculus

I hope you are not serious... No one should have to know something stupid like that.

@Mr. Sarcastic Nah Calc is easy. It's literally all derivatives, the algebra itself is argue is the hard part.

First Class Experience
Fuck calculus
Geometry is a piece of cake

Troll Master fuck geometry to be exact, everything below that is ok


Although I'm real good at math and I love math riddles, I have to admit that I got this one wrong... It never even crossed my mind that the sum might be of two DIFFERENT square numbers, so I kept counting and couldn't find the right answer... Finally I figured it had to be 16, since neither one of the rest fit at all, whereas 16 could be the sum of multiple 4s. I assumed they asked the question wrong and I didn't even consider that I might've not known the answer... So yeah, I'm pretty good at maths but obviously don't even know the basics LMAO

It's simple - without even knowing the Pythagorean Triple. The squares in order are 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, and 49. If you take any smaller square from 16 (eg 9 leaves 7), it doesn't work. Same applies to 36 (25 leaves 11, and 16 leaves 20), and 49 (36 leaves 13, and 25 leaves 24). The key is not overthinking it...


Bro that's literally the first Pythagorean tripley


ah i forgot what a square number was for a moment then i remembered.


There are three types of people in the world. Those that can do maths and those that can't do maths.


The moment, when the audience applauses after discovering that it was the wrong answer, had left me in splits.

But part of the audience got it right, they had to clap their hands.


The game show producers should have made C be 25. It would have been really funny.


Maybe he thought (-4)^2 + 0^2 = 4^2, with -4,0 < 4. However the question asks for the comparative sizes of the <b>square</b> numbers themselves. In this case, 16 + 0 = 16, and 16 certainly isn't smaller than 16, so it doesn't satisfy the conditions of the questions. The simple example 9 + 16 = 25 is all that was needed

Maybe he thought (-4)^2 + 0^2 = 4^2, with -4,0 < 4. However the question asks for the comparative sizes of the *square* numbers themselves. In this case, 16 + 0 = 16, and 16 certainly isn't smaller than 16, so it doesn't satisfy the conditions of the questions. The simple example 9 + 16 = 25 is all that was needed


I would have got it wrong too. I thought the question was about the root of 4 and 9 which has 2 and 3. I read the question wrong and would have lost too but for different reasons.

Yes, this question is a lot about terminology.<br>It can be enough that you have forgotten exactly what "square number" refers to in order to get confused, since "square number" is a clue that all numbers are the results of squaring integers.

Yes, this question is a lot about terminology.
It can be enough that you have forgotten exactly what "square number" refers to in order to get confused, since "square number" is a clue that all numbers are the results of squaring integers.


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

You know off the bat that you are dealing with a number found by adding two smaller numbers. A "square number" is a perfect square, so you need to go through the list of perfect squares up to 49. These include:

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

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

If you know the Pythagorean theorem, this problem is much easier because the 3-4-5 triangle is one of the most well known triangles in mathematics. Basically, the sides are related because:

3^2 + 4^2 = 5 ^2
9 + 16 = 25

The only difficult part of this question is remembering the basic math concept behind it. If you were not good in math, or if it's been a while, then this question will obviously stump you.


The audience probably didn’t see the word “sum”


***** I want to believe it was a troll audience too. XD If he just took some time he could have worked it out in his head, but he was too laaaazy. I prolly woulda trolled him too, even though I normally wouldn't. lol


I can forgive him because he was under stress. But the audience embarass me.


16+9=25. That's a type of equation which can be found by trial and error method. I can't believe the audience got that wrong🗿


I legit read the question wrong and would've got it wrong as well


Any guy who has made one question on Pythagoras theorem knows about 3²+4² = 25 as it's literally the most common question.


Question was difficult to understand. But hey, Pythagoras Theorem.


this is not about 'not knowing math'. it's about the number of possibilities the person has to account for against the pressure of the ticking clock.


Right off the bat I know it's 25 as 3^2 +4^2 = 5^2 is a classic and repeated example of Pythagoras theorem


Oh fuck, I thought it was 36. Well, I failed my maths GCSE.


omg this was so painful to watch<br>3-4-5 triangle is literally the first thing you learn in anything that involves trig

omg this was so painful to watch
3-4-5 triangle is literally the first thing you learn in anything that involves trig


BRUH THATS LITERALLY 5TH GRADE MATH IN BRAZIL


After asking the audience: my faith in humanity has been lost forever.


It was only till 7^2. He could have just use pen and paper to list everything out even if he didnt have it memorized.


Me thinking about this question if the game was taking place in Singapore. Literally everyone over the age of ten would get it in less than 5 seconds.


Well he clearly not that dumb cause more than half the audience also picked the wrong answer on a basic math problem


345 is the most used Pythagorean triplet. Pythagoras's soul suicided after watching this


A week ago I wrote a program that finds Pythagorean Triples like 3,4,5 just for fun. Yet when I first saw this question, I was like, "Wow! That's a pretty tough question!" and started brute-forcing my way through all the possibilities of answer (A). Until I noticed that 25 was one of the answers. That's how stupid I can be at times. On the plus side, it's positive proof that I'm not a robot.

@up is down In this case brute forcing is pretty easy, as long as you bound it properly beforehand: I did the same.

The highest square in the question is 7, so you're only dealing with 6 and below. You can also discount 1, since you know intuitively that none of the squares are within 1 of each other. 5 numbers leaves you with 10 combinations at most, and you get the answer long before that.

@tehnoobleader yes, you are right, where m is any natural number

@up is down brute forcing is actually the better, if you do not have the quick solution and the case is simple like this, it would take just a few two or one digit addition to check everything, so fast and simple, and have the benefit of being mindless, so less chance of making a mistake.

@Mickey P ik but im saying no math question is designed to be solved by brute forcing through all the possibilities (unless theres only a few) so its more prudent to look for like a pattern, something in the question, and stuff like that first

@up is down No there are only 21 possible results might as well just start with the smallest number and work your way up than try to devise a method. If you were trying to find a way to replicate it quickly and reliably then you might want to devise a method.

Or if there were much larger numbers / larger set of numbers

Were you concerned that you might be a robot?

You are a robot with an anti-Turing-Test algorithm built in.

Well I guess I'm a robot , solved it in 5 seconds

@GeorgeSmiley77 A. Euclids formula* Euclidean method is something completely different. B. Your formula is wrong. There are no parenthesis and m and n are squared independently. This is also only true if m and n are coprime

@tehnoobleader a^2 +  b^2 = c^2 when a = m^2 - n^2, b = 2mn, c = m^2 + n^2, where m and n are positive integers, m>n>0, and one of m or n is odd, and m and n are coprime. It's called the Euclidean method. It generates all primitive (non-multiple/mutually prime) pythagorean triples. Your method also gives non-primitive triples, eg. m=3 gives 6, 8, 10, which is 3,4,5 doubled. Thanks for the additional info, I didn't know about your algorithm.

Pythagorean triplets are 2m, m^2-1, m^2+1 where m is any real number, right? I did it 5 years ago and I'm not sure

wouldn’t it be better to look for an easier way before brute forcing your way through? usually math questions try to flush out a concept


It's not necessarily the math that it hard, it's the wording. People get sum confused with product and that's how I ended up with A. The question should have been "what 2 numbers square numbers added together equal to one of these square numbers?"


A lot of people in here try to boost their own egos by mocking people who find math difficult, but they apparently cannot comprehend the following simple facts:

1.
It is harder to think clearly when you are under pressure

2.
People can forget math concepts;
EVERYONE forgets math concepts if they don't regularly work with them

3.
Some people suffer from dyscalculia, which makes math a lot harder for them than for other people, even when they get a lot of tutoring

4.
Some people have negative experiences with math, and decide that it is pointless for them;
you cannot motivate people to learn something if they don't see a value in it


Audience clapping after giving wrong answer, maybe they were told to give wrong answer.


I think it would be hard for anyone to do math under these circumstances, honestly

@ave lanDDer $100 has you filling your pants with shit before the second question.

If your grade in math from your  school days is below average or your IQ, then yeah, you'll definitely have a hard time.


Worded math problems are harder then just solving an equation for x


Trust me, game shows like this never get that technical, although it's good reasoning if you do get it wrong.

Another good suggestion, but that also does not work.

The reason is that they used the word smaller in the question.  The two numbers you are adding together must be smaller than the sum.

So if you were using 4^2 + 0^2 for example, one of the numbers you are adding (4^2) is equal to the sum (16), not smaller than it.

Another good suggestion, but that also does not work.

The reason is that they used the word *smaller* in the question.  The two numbers you are adding together must be smaller than the sum.

So if you were using 4^2 + 0^2 for example, one of the numbers you are adding (4^2) is equal to the sum (16), not smaller than it.

Can't you say 4^2 and 0^2, same with 5, 6 and 7

Luke Michalowski "Square number" means the same thing as "perfect square."  A square number is defined to be an integer which is the square of an integer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_number
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SquareNumber.html

Luke Michalowski I see what you're saying and completely agree!

MuffinsAPlenty If you use irrational numbers, for example 16=((12)^1/2)^2+(2)^2. The question should have said perfect squares.

Tell me why you think so, and I will tell you why they aren't all right.


It's basically Pythagoras triplets (3,4,5)


Looks like 70% of the audience needs to recite multiplication tables again.


no way this many people in america didnt pass 5th grade in high school.


In his defense, his brain had probably melted and the question isn't as straightforward as a random trivia question.


Understanding what the question meant took me a bit because I read it wrong


Congrats to him and to the audience! You may not know math as long as you want, but here you can find the answer by attempts of summing two integers and obtain the result!<br>I'm so stunned watching this!

Congrats to him and to the audience! You may not know math as long as you want, but here you can find the answer by attempts of summing two integers and obtain the result!
I'm so stunned watching this!


> Question is revealed
Me: 25
> Answer choices are revealed
Me: Yeah, that's about as complicated as they could make that on a game show for a general audience.


Pen and pencil to decipher the question. 25=x^+y^ it becomes a lot easier. Imo the question is harder then the answer under this type of in the moment pressure. Just one man’s opinion. Shout out to all you math wizards 🧙♀ ❤


me who got 16:

edit: SUM, FRICKING SUM!!! NOT PRODUCT!!! I THOUGHT MY TEACHER WAS BEING OVERDRAMATIC WHEN SHE SAID IT MATTERS!!!


It’s just another way to say a^2 + b^2 = c^2, the Pythagorean theorem. A classic example  that I remember was 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2 => 9 + 16 = 25.


Could be worse. He could've been tricked into exchanging a dollar bill for 60 cents.


Questions wording seemed fine to me. Solved it in a heartbeat thanks to school.

xXBombs_ AwayXx Hey your the guy from TWOW!

xXBombs_ AwayXx I got it confused, I thought it had to be the same number, but when I realized it could be different numbers, I easily got the answer

Cancer Police did u never learn what 3 squared and 4 squared is?

Just saying there are more important things

+NonTwinBrothers Not sure what school you went to if they never taught square numbers....

'Muricans don't go to that communist school shit.


Even if he doesn’t know the Pythagorean theorem, he can quickly determine the answer.   With 16, it’s obvious the only numbers squared to consider are those less than 4 - none of those work.  Then 25, consider numbers squared less than 5 - that’s 4 and 3 - that works and no need consider anything further.


This one had me at first, but not for the usual reasons. This is actually kinda devious because it you implicitly assume that the question means that the 2 smaller squares  must be the same but they actually don't. 25 = 16 + 9 = 4^2 + 3^2 is the correct answer. 16 and 36 look tempting because your brain wants to think that 8 + 8 = 16 means that 8 is square or that 36 = 18 + 18 means that 18 is square, but neither are.


This show : exists*<br>Amitabh bachchan : our show

This show : exists*
Amitabh bachchan : our show


I was thinking it all wrong for a moment but I get a lot of 3 squared and 4 squared in Math equal to 25.


They have the audacity to sit there and clap


Twist of plot, Audience clapping means they wanted him to lose


That question was meant to fail him. I can feel it. I am a university student, and it still threw me off.

Same, but english isn't my first language so I didn't really understood the question properly in the first place.

Same here;<br>it is easy to confuse things and get lost in the jungle of "number" and "square" descriptions if you don't read the question carefully, and remain calm.

Same here;
it is easy to confuse things and get lost in the jungle of "number" and "square" descriptions if you don't read the question carefully, and remain calm.


I just remembered triplets that used to make a right triangle the most common one 3,4,5 as 3^2+4^2=5^2


Audience might have thought 4 square + 0 square =16😂


It’s 25 because 9 + 16 = 25 which is the same as 3² + 4² = 5². This problem is based on the idea of Pythagorean triples. It can be found by putting integers in the formula a² + b² = c². Another example of Pythagorean triples is 6,8, and 10. 5, 12, and 13 is another Pythagorean triple.

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

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

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

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

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

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


@omp199 Well, there's probably a lot of overlap between people who struggle with this extremely simple math problem and people who also struggle with reading comprehension. It actually makes a lot of sense that we observe this behavior here. YouTube comments also attract lower IQ individuals.

@lx I don't see how "which square number" is redundant. Yeah all of the options are squares but that's precisely why they said "which square number". If one of the options wasn't a square number then "which square number" wouldn't make any sense since it implies that the only options are square numbers. It's like if the question was worded with "which numbers" instead, it would still be redundant because all of the options are numbers. The argument doesn't really make sense.

Also I recognise that the question is harder if you don't know about Pythagorean triples, but that's not my point. My point is that the question was worded fine. I am biased in thinking how easy the question is though since I study maths, but it's precisely why I study maths that I can say that if you think THIS question is poorly worded, you would not survive in any kind of Maths course.

@Static Chimera no it isnt, "which square number" is redundant because all options are squares. also if you dont know the 3-4-5 fact, and you can only think without a pen, it will be harder.

What is up with all these people claiming that the question was poorly worded? Which part of it was not clear?

@TheShermanTanker Nah, the question was worded fine. "Which square number is also the sum of two smaller square numbers." There are way more complicated worded questions in Mathematics, this pales in comparison.

Just list the square numbers, so instead of thinking 4 squared + 3 squared you simply think 16 + 9.

@TheShermanTanker <br>Bruh, the question was clearly understandable

@TheShermanTanker
Bruh, the question was clearly understandable

i lost brain cells because i wasn't sure what the question was asking me.  i also thought it was 16 too.  turned out i was wrong.  its not until meredith viera explained that i kind of got it.  then it took me like another 5 to 10 minutes to like nearly completely get it.

The question was extremely poorly worded, it took me 3 minutes to finally realize what it was actually asking

I was amazed especially by the way he didn’t take any time to try and figure it out. And even then, if you’re going to ask the audiance’s help, at least give them some time to figure it out before you ask them...

On the contrary, I now feel like I have more brain cells than 78% of an American audience

You know you do <b>lose brain cells</b> every freakin minute.

You know you do *lose brain cells* every freakin minute.

Really? I think I might have gained a couple.

DivineAtheistWannabe hahah my man I’ll give you that one

Don't pretend like you had any to begin with


That's why math is important if you study math then you might get 16,000 dollars


Poor buddy could never call himself a genius anymore.


I thought in first instance they meant 2^2 =4 and 4^2 =16 so that’s why i think so many people got it wrong


Took me 15 seconds but 25 is right.  The problem also is that in that American version of the show there is a much quicker time limit


How the hell did this guy get on Millionaire when he can’t do basic high school math?


The question almost got me, and I majored in math. I thought the question was "which of these numbers have a square root that is also a squared number" or something to that effect. 16 is a reasonably wrong guess since it's the only number here which fits that description. I think we use "squared" number instead of "square" number so I immediately thought they were referring to the square root when they said "square number". Could just be a language difference though since English isn't our first language.

@BuxOfficial No, the definition of a square number is the same in EVERY country. In French, a square number is n² where n is an integer, but that´s also the definition in the US (do not get mistaken from the posts here where idiots say that 2,5²=6,25 is a square number because it´s not). The terminology might be different since different countries have different languages obviously, but the definition is the same all over the world.<br>Imagine this would not be the case. Then maths would not work.

@BuxOfficial No, the definition of a square number is the same in EVERY country. In French, a square number is n² where n is an integer, but that´s also the definition in the US (do not get mistaken from the posts here where idiots say that 2,5²=6,25 is a square number because it´s not). The terminology might be different since different countries have different languages obviously, but the definition is the same all over the world.
Imagine this would not be the case. Then maths would not work.

@T. D. Stunning. Masters in maths and you don´t get a primary school question. The level is really low these days.

It´s one of the most fundamental things in math and the question is as basic as it gets (it´s pure and simple in mathematical form). Hard to understand that someone who majored in math cannot get the question. It´s like saying "I am a mechanic, but can you please tell me what a car is?"

lol im dumb as shit and i still got it in like 3 seconds 3-4-5 is like the most basic shit ever and i knew the question was going that way just when i finished reading it

@BuxOfficial Yeah, of course it's x raised to the power 2.

And if x could be anything but a whole number, such a definition would be meaningless, as it would overlap with all real numbers.

@AboodXD Hi! Just wanted to let you know that people can misconstrue this question due to being pressured or distracted. That includes this magna graduate with a 1.25 in Geometry who watched the video while brushing her hair. The question may not have been worded poorly, but it can still confuse someone under the right (or wrong) circumstances. In the contestant's case, it just had to be a timed game show. 😅

@BuxOfficial that changes nothing as <i>all</i> shown numbers are so-called "natural" square numbers, which should let you deduce what kind of square numbers they are talking about.

@BuxOfficial that changes nothing as _all_ shown numbers are so-called "natural" square numbers, which should let you deduce what kind of square numbers they are talking about.

@AboodXD in french, a square number is just x². The equivalent of a squarw number in english would be something called a natural square number

@AboodXD It isn't poorly worded, however the definition of a square number is different in other countries, and I believe that's what's causing issues.

@AboodXD We need a genius like you curing cancer, not commenting on youtube...

@Tretch He's right, the question is crystal clear, I didn't realize at first that you could relate this to the 3-4-5 triangle, so it took me a while to figure out the answer, but the question leaves no room for mistaken interpretations.

@Tretch nice sarcasm, but I'll pass on playing along.

@AboodXD dude you’re just smarter than everyone else sorry, how can we compete with pure genius like you. Please, have pity for us poor mortals, oh great one.

Same lol this question was just phrased badly

English is not my mother language and I still cannot understand how this question can be misunderstood. I've read many claims for how it's "worded poorly" and don't relate to any of them.

Same. I have a Masters degree in mathematics, and this almost got me because I read the question in such a lazy manner.


50 percent of the audience was trolling him. It takes all of 2 seconds to rule out a there's literally only 3 possible smaller squares than 16.


It's okay, the host doesn't even know what a square number is.


And this question came in my math Olympiad paper for p3 and I got it always right


It is beyond me how can anyone fail at this. Even if you don't remember the well known (3,4,5) Pythagorean triple, you can simply check all options. He didn't even try to compute some small squares and add them. Don't know what the host was sorry for. Not her fault that the guy and the audience can't compute something any 8 years old should be able to compute.


Why did I think the numbers must be the same, why am I so thick sometimes?


Pythagoras 2500 years ago would answer immediately.

Javier Dextre There is none for most users, but I still thought it funny as hell because all three of them were green with different letters

Caffé Mocca English didn't exist 2500 ago..

All 3 of you should just shut up and add a picture on your profile

Bartooc pythagoras 2500 years ago didn't understand english so nope


It all boils down to Pythagorean theorem, 5^2 = 4^2 + 3^2


The issue isn’t math. It’s actually misunderstanding what the question is asking. There is a reason 50% of the audience chose A. That wasn’t random.

I also got it wrong and had a face palm moment.

I thought it was asking which which of these squared numbers also happens to be the square of another number.

If I hadn’t just assumed that, and written it down, I would have realized I was wrong.

The question was actually asking x^2 + y^2 = Z (the sum of two squared numbers)

I think if they had phrased the question a little differently, more people would have gotten it. But, there is nothing wrong with the question. It’s fair. It reminds me of the axiom: “read the freaking question.”

Everyone gets stuff wrong. That doesn’t make you stupid. You are only stupid if you refuse to learn from your mistakes.


81% сложно вспомнить математику.

81% сложно вспомнить математику.

Виктор Коляденко


Ok so like thinking about it for literally 10 seconds tells you it can't be 16. The only squares before 16 are 4 and 9 which sum to 13. He was under a lot of pressure though.


Aint no way im gonna multiply two digit numbers


So: the simplest example of a right-angled triangle when they teach you about sine / cosine / tangent and right-angled triangles in maths. As soon as I started trying to find two that worked, “square of the hypotenuse” popped into my head when 16 and 9 worked for 25.


The moment I saw the question I thought of 25. Simply because 3 4 5 triangle. Finally trigonometry helped me in something


he's not alone not knowing the table of multiplication, 70% of the audience and even worst on AOL have given a wrong answer ! the question is why this guy were chosen to participate in the game????


Moral of story : Always read the question right.


I don't think this is a "can't do math" issue. It's more of a "don't comprehend the question" issue. I thought the answer was 16 as well. In fact, I was dead certain it was 16. The problem was I completely misunderstood the question.

Of all the answers there, 16 is the only one that the square root of is also square, which is what I thought it was asking for some reason. Even though 4 + 4 != 16, I simply eliminated the other three answers because 5, 6 and 7 aren't square. It didn't even occur to me that they would be the sum of two different numbers.

If it wasn't a word problem (or if it was worded more mathematically), I'd probably have put my thought process in a more correct space. For instance if it read:
"If x + y = z, where x, y and z are all square numbers and x and y are both less than z, which of the following could be z?"

They wouldn't ever word it that way, but that's how I would understand it better.

@vibovitold<br>You are forgetting that the guy in this video had to answer this question under a lot of psychological pressure in the middle of a game show, and thus was much more likely to get brain fog than people who sit in the comfort of their own homes with unlimited time to answer it.

@vibovitold
You are forgetting that the guy in this video had to answer this question under a lot of psychological pressure in the middle of a game show, and thus was much more likely to get brain fog than people who sit in the comfort of their own homes with unlimited time to answer it.

Comprehending questions IS a quintessential part of "doing math".

Just like understanding the positions on the chessboard finding the right moves IS crucial for playing chess (well), or like correctly identifying symptoms of a disease IS a quintessential part of practicing medicine, etc.

These are not two separate abilities as you imply. Interpretting problems is a fundamental skill here.

If you're misunderstanding abstract concepts and statements to begin with, then how on earth could you take it one step further and competently reason about them (which is what math is) : )


wow , that was easy even if you know  a little bit about Pythagoras theorem. lol


Ok I understand with the pressure you won't be able to think straight but the audience tho👎

Well, we know the general public HATES math with a passion!

@SkillUp Gaming You dumb piece of fecal matter. He was saying that the audience got it wrong because they omitted the "sum" part out of the word problem. If you was to think of it like that then yes the answer would have been 16. The main issue here is the amount of people who problem for get that sum means addition. Honestly the question is worded extremely shitty.

+Aaorn 4+4=8, not 16. The question does not ask for the "product," it asks for the sum, you stupid piece of shit.

@Kaelum They got it wrong most likely because they didn't understand the question. Most likely they thought the question asked which square was composed of smaller squares. This would incline them to think 16 because 4*4 and 4 is composed of 2*2. They confused what a square is versus what a square root is.

@Rish True, but the question says two SMALLER square numbers. So 4^2 can't be used.

Think straight? You’d have to be special needs not to get this

@Rish then acc. to your logic.. It should hv been 0^2 + 1^2 = 1 and that was obliviously not in the option so the question would hv been wrong to start with! Show some smartness bro!

@Zombie Salad<br>That's why we have a show called "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?"

@Zombie Salad
That's why we have a show called "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?"

@benchijs No.. the question says the *sum of 2 square number*, which is equal to another square number..

@we dem boyz No.. given the question, 7 24 25 doesn't count, because it says the sum of smaller *square number*.. does 7 and 24 a square number? No! it's should be 9 and 16..

I feel hella dumb, i was accidentally looking for PRODUCT instead of sum

I'm terrible at math too..so I understand his situation but the audience!! How can this many people be wrong? Well..I guess being in a South Asian country I can depend on the audience for math questions despite not being strong at math myself. But still shocked to see them wrong!

Yea wtf they dont know that simple question.

Yea wtf they dont know that simple question.

I'm from the U.S. and I got it right. Heck, I'm from Florida and i got it right, and our education system is even worse than most of the rest of the country's. Mostly I'm just wondering what logic had most people guessing "16."

Travis Sonnylal IM SAYING... ppl apparently dont know how to square small numbers and thats scary

Toxic V Let me tell you an interesting fact-
3²=4+5=9 and 3²+4²=5²
7²=24+25=49 and 7²+24²=25²
9²=40+41=81 and 9²+40²=41²

this pattern works for all odd numbers.

Stephanie R  3,4 5 these are called triplets in india i don't know what they r called in the west called. They r a few more triplets btw.

Travis Sonnylal oh nvm reading deeper in the comment section i understand now

Travis Sonnylal wait this could be because im not and english speaker but isnt it A? Like 16 square is 4 and 4s square is 2???

Wtf man simple maths answer is 25= 16 + 9 LMAO AUDIENCE!!

But unless you already know that it's impossible to work it out in that amount of time.

alex rusnak Because less money and Americans take smartest people throughout the world

+ADARSH - so why it was not India to put the man on the Moon, invent smartphone, etc?

I love math and I can't understand this, lol. Thought it was asking about square roots. oh well, I was good at math in middle school lol

In India a 7 year old normal guy can solve this

All of you guys are forgetting they are Americans

Toxic V there are many cases where the sum of 2 squares is equal to another square, but only 25 is correct amongst the answers shown.

Its common 6th grade stuff. The audience is indeed stupid

Stephanie R when you take high school geometry, the instructor uses it as a classic example of Pythagorean’s Theorem, because of the simplicity of the numbers.

You're giving people too much credit. Most people won't know this.

The moment I saw the question I was thinking Pythagorean’s Theorem, which is almost always taut using 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2.  I’m at a total loss as to why the audience got it wrong.

Either they're scripted to troll the participant, or they didn't understand the question.

Travis Sonnylal yeah more votes on 16 wtf

Travis Sonnylal yeah more votes on 16 wtf


Which of these square numbers (which equal c^2) is equal to the sum of two smaller square numbers a^2 + b^2.

I think the difficulty was understanding the English of the math.

I made the mistake of thinking of the product of a * b instead of the sum of a^2 + b^2 as well. Oops 🙊


I'm not sure what's worse, that he couldn't think up some small square numbers and try adding them together or than so much of audience was wrong...

Definitely the latter. One guy under pressure being wrong is not comparable to 78% of the audience being wrong.


Why does he represent every middle school back bencher🤓


I got this answer within probably half a second once the choices were revealed and somehow a large majority of the audience in both polls got it wrong. I don't claim to be a math whiz by any stretch though I'm decent at it, being an engineer and all, but it blows my mind that something that came so instantly for me, a majority of the people in the audience got completely wrong. 😆

@Nam Vu yes you are correct, i thought it was 36 😅


this is more of an english comprehension question than a math question.

shh dude. Let the people who figured out the answer think they are smarter than the entire USA combined. Don't burst their bubble.


Wow, unfortunately for Ryan and the country, I'm pretty dumb, but still know the sum of the square numbers 9 and 16 = 25!


If you're reading too quickly, you might fall for the trap and go with the square number that's the product of a squared number (2^2)^2 = 16. As long as you aren't too nervous and can concentrate enough to see it's about the sum and understanding the question appropriately, it's a pretty easy question as long as you know what a square number is. The thought process could be as simple as "2 squared is 4, 3 squared is 9, 4 squared is 16... oh it's B.. 25 because 16 +9 = 25"


The question was worded properly. There is literally no excuse.


Good thing this is an American show, they saved themselves a lot of money


These questions were not even in my school exams (asian)😂


I don’t blame him, I misunderstood the question at first too. I was thinking of which one was the the square of it’s squares (if that makes sense). I thought it was 16, like 2 squared is 4, and 4 squared is 16. I got it once she explained the solution but I can only imagine what he was thinking plus the stress of $15k and being on tv

Yeah if it was "which of these squares is the PRODUCT of two smaller squares" it would have been 16.

@Sarah if you cant read thats your problem lol, the question was pretty clear

@James_&_Anna_Burns the sum of two square numbers, you are making the sum of four, idk why y'all can't read something so simple

@James Svacha the way people think of square numbers is the number multiplied by itself. So they're going to get fixated  on the definition of a squared number without realizing that oh yeah, I can mix and match those smaller square numbers (16 + 9) to come up with an appropriate sum (25). Again, as I said before, it's meant to trip people up and I think OP did a good of explaining how they got it mixed up and someone else explained the solution in an actual helpful way instead of just saying "it's pretty explicit" like you. Like cool, you added literally nothing to the conversation.

@James Svacha No, it actually really wasn't. It's not about simply knowing those things, it's about being clear with what they're asking. Again, it's designed to trip people up under pressure. If you're not under pressure and you're asked the question, you would see it more clearly for what it is. I'm just so sick of shaming people, especially when it comes to math. It creates an unwelcoming atmosphere that doesn't allow people to explore why they might have got something wrong and to try again. That's exactly what this video is trying to do. And you're one of the people reinforcing its message.

@Sarah It's even sadder when these kinds of questions pop up in important exams.
I'm not from the US, so I wouldn't say I'm the most fluent. But even so, I've seen countless memes of English tests disguised as math questions.

These questions make me use abacus on add math.

Yes it make sense as you are an American too, nothing new.

Thank goodness I’m not alone. I’m sure the audience thought this as well.

@Sydney Carton someone wants you to call him smart

@Sydney Carton someone wants you to call him smart

here is nothing wrong with the wording of the question. You literally could not word it any clearer.

@Arvie Talaugon actually 16 would be true then? 4+4+4+4. doesn’t say the squared are different or there are only 2

Same that question was worded trash af I though it was asking me what 2 options had even square numbers

@James Svacha Which clearly a lot of these commenters don't.

He didn't talk out any reasoning or ever say which way he was leaning (assuming this wasn't edited out). I am convinced he probably didn't know what a square number is, and that much of the audience didn't either.

The wording of the question is weird.

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

I misunderstood it as well. There's something about the "two smaller square numbers" that doesn't seem quite right. I'm not sure why though.

@Sarah English isn’t my first language and I can state with 100% confidence that the question was very explicit. I can also state with 90% confidence that you have the literacy of a 6th grader and the math skills of a 4th grader.

@ElvenIvy07
I think this event shows that a large chunk of the general public does not know that "sum" has a precise definition... meaning the result of "addition".
I agree with those who say this question is 100% clear.
If it's not clear to an individual person that "sum" means "addition", that's not a problem with the question.

I think if he knew what the question meant it would have been easy for him. I suppose its meaning didn't jump right out at him and then anxiety took over so he just went with the audience. Sometimes the problem isn't figuring out the math itself but in poor comprehension of what's being asked. Or average even since the bloody audience let him down! 🤦🏼♀

@Panda Power I guess our teachers were right when they told us that properly reading the problems helps giving the correct answers XD

The question clearly said sum. It was pretty explicit. The only thing that was potentially misleading is whether or not the two numbers were identical or not, and then you realize they had to be two different numbers when you work it out.

@Sirus "I was thinking of which one was the the square of it’s squares"
- its; possessive, it's contraction of it is
- only its fits grammatically

'Sum' is defined by addition. Perfectly understandable question.

He didn't misunderstand the question, he just listened to the audience, and the audience was wrong

@Tsrenis As long as you know that a square is when a number is multiplied by itself, you don't need to "memorize square numbers". As long as you know that one very basic thing, it wouldn't be too hard to just brute force this going down the list of smallest square numbers like 1*1, 2*2, 3*3, 4*4, 5*5. Just by doing those 5 easy multiplications you'd realize that 9, 16 and 25 are all square numbers and since 9+16=25, that 25 is the correct answer.

@Tsrenis all you need to know is that squaring a number means multiplying it by itself, unless you don't know how to multiply (that's the only time you'll need to memorize)

@Tsrenis who says you need to memorize one?

@Tsrenis who says you need to memorize one?

@Arvie Talaugon who in the fuck memorizes square numbers

@Arvie Talaugon who in the fuck memorizes square numbers

@Sarah it was definitely explicit. Unless you don't know what a square number is, what a sum is, how to count to two, and what "smaller" means.

@John Smith No it actually wasn't that explicit. You could technically make sense of it either way. It's a game show. It's meant to trip people up, especially under pressure.

@Genesis Dorsey the question was quite explicit. If people failed to understand it, that’s their problem.

I did the same thing. I was like oh, 16. DEFINITELY think that question could have been worded differently

yeah, everyone is blaming the audience's incompetency at math, but I'm so so sure most of them are just bad at reading the question properly before choosing.

You got the question wrong from the "square of it's squares" hence you got 2 squared then squared again

It was actually "which square is the sum of smaller squares" which can be answered if you just list up all square numbers less than 49(biggest in the choices so no need to think something bigger than this) which would be : 4, 9, 16, 25, 36

Now you just need to add 2 out of this,  and look for any results that also shows in the choices


3²+4²=5² smallest positive integers (3,4and5) of Pythagoras theorem 😀


Difficult worded question. It’s more of a word game than a math problem


The question is phrased a bit weirdly, I also thought it was 16, cuz I thought at first it meant like, the root of 16 is 4, the root of which is 2, so 2 square numbers…

It's clearly asking for a sum of squares, not a product or a root of a root.


You know, it would have been nice if they said that the square numbers weren't the same. So confusing.


And people complain about foreign people stealing jobs

Lol most people in your country are illiterate, when you have to learn someone else's language to live you are their slave..

Not to mention that they have to compete not just against foreigners for high-paying jobs, but also against artificial intelligence.

Because they keep indulging in entertainment and prolonged adolescence that they refuse to grow up and aim at betterment. As a result, the foreigners keep taking those available jobs.

first i was surprised as to how could a nation be so dumb enough to elect the fat orange trump into the white house. But after seeing the IQ level of the audience here, im honestly not that surprised anymore...

45superscott Hate to break it to you. But both of the people you mentioned dropped out of school

Americans get triggered. Let's face it, their education system is shit. Even they complain about it.

NishC300 Why? Because it's so much easier to get ahead when the population can't understand 7th grade arithmetic.

If you talking about tech jobs, obviously the audience doesn't work in tech so your comparison is irrelevant; if you talking about farm jobs why would math knowledge even matter?

45superscott you need smart people from other countries? How about srinivasan ramanujan and cv raman

Because in the land of idiots, they have less competition to deal with. Their home country already has too many smart people to compete with.

NishC300  its bcoz of the presence of a small percentage of people who use their brains lol

NishC300 you know one thing, average people being dumb doesn't mean that intelligent people are not in the US. Competition is very low in US. Anybody can earn something doing part time. Many countries don't have this luxury so the people have to work hard, study Maths and Science and hence this was so easy. Average American people bcz of so less competitive nature don't do any study and hence this dumb

It's not real this was made to make fun of Americans saying we're stupid y'all do realize that

Pranav Jaguste I would go and steal their jobs.. if they had any.

The people of USA were not dumb during world war but after 1980 s they became as retarted  as fuck

NishC300 Ask yourself, would you rather stay in your home country with people as smart if not better or just simply go to the land of idiots and take their job

NishC300 , Because usa prints money.So it doesn't matter how much they print.If gold was the reserve currency instead of usa,you beautiful country would look worse than poo.

NishC300 Because the land of idiots is where they can survive.

NYGiantsFan7198 the current nationally ranked education overall has nothing to do with the national economy. Its more related to the consequences of EOI and the politics of the international economy

This is simple 7th grade math. There is something seriously wrong with these people if children in middle school have the intellectual ability to answer this question. The question is asking about a pythagorean triple. I’m an American and I’ll admit that the majority of the American population is retarded. Yet, they complain about foreigners stealing their jobs. The reason being is that we’re not even a top 20 education system in the world. Thus, most Americans just complain while doing nothing to change this problem except for voting in other idiots like Trump.

Because the land of idiots has the best economy

lol then why are these foreigners going to the USA rather than staying in their home countries?

Why would you go to the land of idiots lol


It's a lot easier when you simplify the question to, "Which of these is the sum of two square numbers?"

Then technically all answers would be correct since 0 is also considered to be a square number. The "smaller" part is very much relevant.


According to the logic of some people in here, we might as well say that anyone who doesn't know the name of the 30th element in the periodic table must also "suck at chemistry";<br>seriously, that would be pretty much the same kind of logic.

According to the logic of some people in here, we might as well say that anyone who doesn't know the name of the 30th element in the periodic table must also "suck at chemistry";
seriously, that would be pretty much the same kind of logic.


Just because he got a question wrong(in which all answers are technically right anyway) doesn’t mean he doesn’t understand math.


The audience is either trolling or they didn't understand when they could use Pythagoras Theorem in real life.


The fact that the AOL crowd, who are on a freaking computer, still couldn't figure this out is very depressing


oh i totally interpreted the question as “which of these squares is the <b>square</b> of another smaller square” and was thinking 2^2=4 and 4^2=16

oh i totally interpreted the question as “which of these squares is the *square* of another smaller square” and was thinking 2^2=4 and 4^2=16


Keyword:The ＳＵＭ of two smaller square numbers.

5^2 is already gonna equal 25 so the sums of square numbers can't be greater than 5. 1 doesn't amount to shit and 2 doesn't add up so your only options are (3^2=9) + (4^2=16)  or (0^2=0) + (5^2=25).

It's been almost a decade since  I graduated from the school system and the fact the audience can't remember something I was taught in the 4th grade is just sad. Like I'm sure people probably don't use it in their everyday lives but c'mon. At least try to retain something.

And then they have the audacity to clap afterwards ☠

💀 Ｒｏｓｃｃｏ T h e Ｒｅａｐｅｒ 💀


To fit the difficulty of this question, the choices should at least be: A. 529 B. 576 C. 625 D. 784

can remember (7,24,25) as a triple from the back of my head, so D. Can also see B + 49 = D


I guess in his mind he only lost about $12


I’m doing my major in math and honestly it took me like half a second to answer that ques bcuz the 3-4-5 triangle is like the most used thing in any math course lol

Yah in JEE it's the fav triangle 37°, 53° XD

@Mohammed Haris And yet there's only one Indian I can think of who's ever done anything significant in mathematics/science. Let me guess, people from other countries robbed their ideas. right? 🤦♂

You don't need majors to know this, this is middle school maths

@Charles Petrizzi bruh what is <i>your</i> point? I never said i didnt know these, i only said what i do know. maybe you should be ashamed of the way you talk to people :)

@Charles Petrizzi bruh what is _your_ point? I never said i didnt know these, i only said what i do know. maybe you should be ashamed of the way you talk to people :)

So...what's your point? As a math major in college you should be ashamed you don't know the 8-15-17, 33-56-65, or 20-99-101 as quickly.

@Vince It's a Pythagorean triple. Basically, Pythagoras's theorem stuff. If a right-angled triangle has the two smaller sides as length 3 and 4, the hypotenuse is always 5. That's because of Pythagoras's theorem, which is c^2 = a^2 + b^2, which is literally what the question in the video is asking, which square number (c^2) is the sum of two smaller square numbers (a^2 + b^2). If you don't know what Pythagoras's theorem is, I suggest looking it up, as explaining it here would be a bit too long.

Another reason would be that you are indian😂 so math is easy for you

Well can you explain it to the rest of us?

Yup, we learn this in school when we're like 13 or 14 years old, the 3-4-5 triangle.

When I heard the question I started thinking, well 25 would be too obvious so what's the next square that's a sum of two squares after that?

Then I saw B 25 and now I'm like, shit, how does the audience not know that?

Ya i always come across it in physics too

Me 2 bro, i was looking comments kinda' this

@UnHoly Most people misread it to be which number squared happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers.

Eshita Goel I usually find trouble understanding questions, so I'm not by any means a smart person, but I knew the answer for this question in half a second as well.

It's weird that people found trouble understanding this question, although after contemplating, it does seem like a stupid question.

Same here! Lol!!! But I know this because of school.


Here is another question kind of along the same lines:  Which of the following integers is both the cube of an integer AND the sum of two distinct squares of integers?    A:  8     B:  36     C:  27     D:  64

The answer is D:  64.

Note that  4^3 = 64  and  0^2 + 8^2 = 0 + 64 = 64.


Here’s an explanation of square numbers for anyone who got this wrong: A square number is a number that is the result of another number times itself(AKA a number squared, AKA a number raised to the power of 2). 4*4=16, so 16 is a square number and 4 is what is known as the “square root” of 16. 3*3=9, so 9 is a square number, 3 is the square root. 16+9=25. 25 is the result of 5*5. 1 is an interesting number because it is both the square and square root of itself. Numbers like 1, 9, 16 and 25 are also known as “perfect squares” because their square roots are whole numbers with no decimals. Basically meaning every number has a square root, but only certain ones are “perfect” like those mentioned. The perfect-squares are simply referred to as square numbers and vice versa. This is pretty basic math to be real with you, if you’re not a young kid you should definitely know this kind of stuff; it will broaden your horizons. Hopefully it makes sense now, and you can see how simple the logic behind it is.

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

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

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

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

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

My reason for it was because of the phrasing i admit i was thinking about it in the sense that 16 = 4 *4 which is 2+2 * 2+2  and also . The show sometimes itself flips product and sum around too so all the other people saying but that is a product dont get that you cant gurrsntee it will be phrased like that on the show. Others also point out that 4+4 = 8 and 8 +8 equals 16 so it seems in some sense the phrasing of the question and ironically peoples math skills themselves likely increased the questions difficulty. This is i think a problem in math classes too tbh. People who are good at analytical math can have difficulty in applied mathmatics due to teacher inserting information or over rounding or other aspects that affect their accuracy and the student who are better at math ironicslly may be more likely to not pass those classes more due to ironically taking in the information that was given to them too


I'm not good with math but the answer is easy it seems.


It's a shame because it's quite easy. He could've won this.


I thought it meant that the "two smaller squared numbers" would be the same not different numbers


Damn son. Those are some big numbers. I didn't even know those and you just subtracted them as if it was nothing. You some kind of science whizz?

He's talking bout the prize money, he started with 16000 lost 15000

Michael Jay - Value Investing Are you Asian ?


I did not totally understand the question but still got it right. 25 Sq = 5.  1 Sq = 1.    2 Sq = 4.   1+4=5


legit america might be the only country where the audience would get this wrong. The audience is usually pretty on point and this is ultimately such a simple question that it should be a lay up for the audience to majority get it right.


Ok ngl this took me a bit of while to think of. I understood the premise of the question


It doesn't need for high math knowledge to know the answer of a question like this


Well I knew the answer right away but I didn't even get that $1000