Never, EVER ask laypeople anything about math. People just cannot do basic math.


+Stay Calm: The person I replied to said that 5^2 + 0^2 could've worked. It could not, because the question states "two smaller square numbers", and 5^2 is not smaller than 5^2. And no, bowlchamps37 isn't dumb.

I am generally slow at math, but I have a logical mind and I got it before the poll The question is complicated for a quiz show with lights on you but not WRONG.<br>Audience and home viewers have no excuse unless they are uneducated... for once an excuse.

I am generally slow at math, but I have a logical mind and I got it before the poll The question is complicated for a quiz show with lights on you but not WRONG.
Audience and home viewers have no excuse unless they are uneducated... for once an excuse.

Ofc it is absolutely clear. It even says the sum of 2 "smaller" squares. So all the 0² people have no point. And this cannot even be catogarized a math question. This is common knowledge. Next time when someone asks who the 1st President of the US was, you cannot answer. I am neither into history nor politics.

Mike V no the question is quite straightforward!

No it’s not, you probably just don’t understand.

LittleR0124 that would mean every answer is right, which isn’t how the game works, never has.

LittleR0124 x^2 (5 x 5 = 25) is not smaller than x^2. Both the other square numbers are supposed to be smaller than the answer.

MuffinsAPlenty how about some of us arent native speakers and cant properly understand it? :p

@Simon Torres I agree with you. I have a math degree and people here are getting all too technical. Like what are they supposed to say? Natural numbers that is a subset of the real field and non-isomorphic to the complex numbers? Oh, my bad, I should have said field. Give me a break. Obviously they can't all work so you throw out the trivial solutions. I'm not saying it should have been easy to get answer B; what I'm saying is that people here are too technical and pedantic. That's best left for an actual math class.

Who cares, this isn't a maths quiz. Any rando who knows how squaring works can understand that the answer is unambiguously B. Do you guys really think that this show is going to throw some maths that's above general knowledge in a question? Or are you just trying to show off your epic math skillz to prove you're smarter than the average quizgoer?

I think it was the anxiety that made it hard. Try answering a question that requires some actual thought, while under pressure, and see how far you can take it.

I also thought the question could have been worded better. I thought any of them could have worked since (x^2 + 0^2 = x^2). Took me a few re-reads to get it.

Yeah it's pretty ambiguous... They didn't mention if the smaller numbers were natural numbers

No, the question is not framed "wrong."  It may be difficult to understand if you don't read it carefully, but 25 is the unambiguously correct answer to the question that was asked.


This question based on Pythagorean  triplet


The question was worded vaguely, don't get such a hard on over judging people.

Jim Jeffries If 25 = 16 + 9 is the answer they wanted to hear, then 16 (as a part of the sum) is not smaller than 16 (being one of the options). It seems that the meaning of "smaller" is not clear.

Two <b>smaller</b> square numbers - ie 16 cannot be included, because both of the numbers that sum to it must be smaller than 16

Two *smaller* square numbers - ie 16 cannot be included, because both of the numbers that sum to it must be smaller than 16

That is not true at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_number

0 is a number but by most definitions not a square number

that would mean that every answer is right, because you can argue that for every square number

Isn't he right though. 0^2 + 4^2 = 16?   0 is > 16  and 4> 16. Therefore 16 is the sum of two smaller squared numbers 0 and 4 unless 0 has suddenly ceased to no longer be a number?

It was NOT worded vaguely. He's just dumb. In fact, I don't know how you couldn't worded it better


@Nick D Yes, 5x5 + 12x12 = 13x13 = 169, but 169 was not one of the choices.

@Nick D Yes, 5x5 + 12x12 = 13x13 = 169, but 169 was not one of the choices.

gaaazz tank Maths? must be an international student. Every fucking indian in my eng class calls it maths, man fuck internationals. And ya I proved it, my version was much easier to understand for everyone I told. And I never said the program had an obligation to cater their wording for us, it wasn't unfair wording either, just more complex than what I wrote. You of all foreign bastards should know that clarity in speaking english is key to not coming across as indian online.

well what did you expect ? The show is trying to do that so it's harder to get the answer

well what did you expect ? The show is trying to do that so it's harder to get the answer

I cant continue this discussion cus i dont know the englsi math terms for this stuff. Okol you won<br>

I cant continue this discussion cus i dont know the englsi math terms for this stuff. Okol you won

why? it's not my first language but i can't spot alot of ambiguity here ...?

why? it's not my first language but i can't spot alot of ambiguity here ...?

And please don't bring politics and stuff into this discussion here insulting peoples race and even worse saying you hate them unless you are here to discuss race then I will ignore any further notifs on this comment thread. Wow the world really is a dangerous place you just made me reassess my safety online

And please don't bring politics and stuff into this discussion here insulting peoples race and even worse saying you hate them unless you are here to discuss race then I will ignore any further notifs on this comment thread. Wow the world really is a dangerous place you just made me reassess my safety online

I was talking about the people who wouldn't have been able to solve it even with perfect wording and honestly don't get me into YOUR passionate three week flame war since I never asked for that.

I was talking about the people who wouldn't have been able to solve it even with perfect wording and honestly don't get me into YOUR passionate three week flame war since I never asked for that.

Daniel Hu well your area must not be stats then. An average seventh grader can work it out? Well look how much of the audience couldn't. Does not align with what you said. You just dont get it, this is not about the math difficulty its about the wording. I already proved up there^ waaaay up there, that it could be worded better.

ps. please dont say ohhh idiot you didnt get it haaha, once I got my mind past the wording, I got it. Super simple, it's not even about forgetting the meaning of square numbers, it's simply the wording. Nah stfu Daniel, man I hate that westernized asian type, you're like the worst of both worlds. I would much rather you get your friends off the boat and switch with them, I like the ones that I don't understand.

Fresh Rock Pape-E He's trying to salvage his loses. root 49 is a square number QizziT every time you say (49)^.5 , just assume you're saying 7. & is a whole number. 10 is a whole number right? Well using your logic if I tie 10 up into some stupid expression, lets say (10^2)/10...is that expression a whole number, yes because that expression is just a way of expressing the (whole) number 10.

"root 49" is 7, and seven obviously is a natural number. Dafuq are you saying?

"root 49" is 7, and seven obviously is a natural number. Dafuq are you saying?

+QizziT<br>We already have a word for what you think a square is. It's called a "number"

+QizziT
We already have a word for what you think a square is. It's called a "number"

Fresh Rock Papa-E 49 is a squared number. Root 49 squared is 49 and root 49 isnt a natural number

Fresh Rock Papa-E 49 is a squared number. Root 49 squared is 49 and root 49 isnt a natural number

Yes. I'm sure. Otherwise anything can be a square number, since any number can be expressed as a square of an irrational number. Also, look it up next time. https://www.mathsisfun.com/definitions/square-number.html

Yes. I'm sure. Otherwise anything can be a square number, since any number can be expressed as a square of an irrational number. Also, look it up next time. https://www.mathsisfun.com/definitions/square-number.html

"square numbers" already implies natural numbers, so...

"square numbers" already implies natural numbers, so...

(root of 49 /root of 2) squared  (root of 49 /root of 2) squared = 49
roots anulate with squared, but the number needed to be squared, folowing the question. so its basicaly half of 49 + half of 49 = 49.

this aplies to every awnser

this question was bull shit this man should sue them.

for the awnser to be corect, the number NEEDED TO BE A NATURAL NUMBERS, leading to a pretty bad made question

MrTarz Engineering students don't typically have CV's... like ever. I knew the answer but at first glance I was caught on the wording. That's quite the jump in logic you made by assuming I called him arrogant for knowing the answer. To be honest I haven't taken one word of this guy seriously, so I would not be bothered if he claimed he got the answer. This question would never be asked of an engineer in his field ever, so I find it hard to believe he's even in mecheng since all the mecheng friends I have would most definitely trash the irrelevance to this question in mech.

Fresh Rock Papa-E yeah only interested when it suits you, stop coming back to this then. I mean you have lied about your own word more than once now, but 'whatever man'

Fresh Rock Papa-E yeah only interested when it suits you, stop coming back to this then. I mean you have lied about your own word more than once now, but 'whatever man'

+MrTarz
Just to clarify, he claimed to be an engineer, which he's not. While claiming such a thing is being... Less than honest... It still wasn't arrogant.

He then slowly started calling other people stupid, which could start to be considered arrogant, but my first few comments in this thread were still defending him. It was then that I started explaining to him what these "idiots" may have been thinking and he started to really show his colors. He called me an idiot for doing exactly what he did; the only difference was that I caught my mistake less than a second after I'd made it while he left his and luckily chose the one choice of the infinite solutions that he could have chosen from had he understood the method he'd used.

He then dropped his hand on the table when anon pointed out that his reasoning, experience, and mannerisms lined up with those of a high school student, making sure to emphasize that it was just an observation and that there's nothing wrong with being a high school student even if that ended up being the case. Fresh didn't seem to agree that there was nothing wrong with being a high school student.

Hank Uh.. Whatever man. I just don't care anymore about this conversation.

Hank Uh.. Whatever man. I just don't care anymore about this conversation.

+Fresh Rock Papa-E
Your 4th comment in this thread: "Im also an engineer and I inmediately understood what they meant, and also I knew the answer before they showed it." Which in itself could be considered arrogant considering you go on to call other people idiots for doing exactly what you did; You "knew the answer before they showed it" despite there being an infinite number of solutions described by the Pythagorean Triple that you so proudly remembered.

He didn't assume your level of education. He said that your comments made you seem like you had that level of education. He even went onto say that having that level of education isn't a bad thing. You seemed to be deeply offended for having your self perceived superiority or prowess recognized by him. That is, by definition, arrogance.

If you're going to call people idiots for not re-reading a question carefully several times before even letting their brains do anything related to said question, it might be a good idea to read others' comments--or at least your own comments--carefully once or twice before replying in an emotionally driven salt-fest.

Hank Uh... I didn't "use" the "I'm an angineer I'm smarter than you". HE was the one who brought up the topic of my level of education, and I simply corrected him. How is that being pretentious or arrogant? If anything he was that, assuming my level of education.

And I didn't even say I was an engineer. I always said I'm just a student, so dafuq are you talking about? You criticize me for things I didn't say at all!

+MrTarz<br>No, anon's calling him arrogant because he's arrogant. He's used the "I'm an engineer. I'm smarter than you. Stop trying to debate me" card, despite not being an actual engineer. He claims to be a student about to finish up his ME degree. Depending on where he's from, he might be considered an engineer once he gets that, but in the US, he isn't even eligible to start taking the certification exams. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't even know about them. Do you refer to a medical student as a doctor?

+MrTarz
No, anon's calling him arrogant because he's arrogant. He's used the "I'm an engineer. I'm smarter than you. Stop trying to debate me" card, despite not being an actual engineer. He claims to be a student about to finish up his ME degree. Depending on where he's from, he might be considered an engineer once he gets that, but in the US, he isn't even eligible to start taking the certification exams. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't even know about them. Do you refer to a medical student as a doctor?

anon86 Uh, sure, whatever man, I'm arrogant and pretentious.

anon86 Uh, sure, whatever man, I'm arrogant and pretentious.

I'm the pretentious one now? You're acting like a champ because you remembered a pythagorean triple, that's as arrogant and pretentious as engineers get.

I'm the pretentious one now? You're acting like a champ because you remembered a pythagorean triple, that's as arrogant and pretentious as engineers get.

Fresh Rock Papa-E So just arrogant I suppose. And you can figure that out yourself by just going through any comments about how it was worded poorly. For one I would have said 2 distinct numbers rather than "what two numbers". I guess I have an argument now.. Actually just to shut you up here: "The sum of two distinct square numbers happens to equal which of these numbers". I wouldn't mention that A B C or D are perfect squares whatsover. Them doing that is just a red herring. And honestly go through your comments from when this all started and decide if you're a pretentious douche or not. I'm not the only one who's called you out on being one.

I know it's my fault for using "Hank" as a screen name, and I know there's no better designation for people to use, but I always chuckle a little whenever someone refers to me as Hank. It's a strange anomaly. When I use other screen names, it doesn't faze me at all, but when I use "Hank," I giggle internally every time. Maybe it's because it's a real name?

Ad hominems lmao, okay I was just going to give you some time because you seem to be more argumentative than anything else that could be constructive... at least at the time. The only argument here is about the language used in the million dollar question. It wasn't worded to be comprehensible, even if it was comprehended by people. And I was talking to Hank about engineering not you, I really don't have time for arrogant, pretentious engineers, as if there aren't enough that <b>think</b> they are top shit because they remember pythagorean triples from grade school.

Ad hominems lmao, okay I was just going to give you some time because you seem to be more argumentative than anything else that could be constructive... at least at the time. The only argument here is about the language used in the million dollar question. It wasn't worded to be comprehensible, even if it was comprehended by people. And I was talking to Hank about engineering not you, I really don't have time for arrogant, pretentious engineers, as if there aren't enough that *think* they are top shit because they remember pythagorean triples from grade school.

Oh, I love the ad hominems, fyi I'm about to finish my mechanical engineering degree. Not that it matters in any way, but since you wanted to talk about this...<br>Also, I've just read again what I typed last night, and it completely understandable.

Oh, I love the ad hominems, fyi I'm about to finish my mechanical engineering degree. Not that it matters in any way, but since you wanted to talk about this...
Also, I've just read again what I typed last night, and it completely understandable.

Yeah I kinda walked into the SAT without much prep, was not fun

Yeah I kinda walked into the SAT without much prep, was not fun

+anon86
They still don't let you go back to old sections since the difficulty of the second section is based on how well you did on the first section, but I think the old version didn't allow you to revisit the previous questions of a section after submitting it. I'm not sure how the paper delivered version handles things, though... Maybe they have a few graders on standby with the key to grade each part before you get through the first section of the other part? That probably won't be relevant for you, though, since you being on YouTube makes me think wherever you're from will use the computerized version.

My advice is to start studying for that a couple months in advance. I only gave myself a couple of weeks, so I didn't improve a whole lot... CrunchPrep has some great guides, study plans, and links to free resources like full length practice exams.

Hank Exactly, and oh thats helpful, when I wrote the SAT I remember they wouldn't let yo go back on anything once each section was done. But yeah, had someone else worded this much better, I bet 70% of the audience would not guess A, much less. This math problem should be more a math problem than word problem.

Hank Exactly, and oh thats helpful, when I wrote the SAT I remember they wouldn't let yo go back on anything once each section was done. But yeah, had someone else worded this much better, I bet 70% of the audience would not guess A, much less. This math problem should be more a math problem than word problem.

+anon86
I think I may have already seen it. I think a bigger, more common issue with situations like this is that there's  really no reason to analyze the questions extremely carefully and scrupulously perform the algebra. We in the comments aren't trying to win a million dollars. Why waste more than a few seconds solving it and reading it? When you're taking a difficult test, you don't have time to read through the question thrice before solving it. You answer it based on your experience and intuition, and move on. If you have time, you go back. You can even go back to earlier questions on the GRE now.

If you're writing a paper, signing off on a project, or releasing a product, yes you check everything over carefully. Then again, none of those situations require you to glean the intended meaning from a word problem.

Guys like patrickjmt make a living off of dumbing things down in math, less wordy. He is considered one of the best online for highschool to early uni math courses, and he would never have used that type of wording. It is done with the intention to not fork up a million dollars, some people just dont get that part.

Guys like patrickjmt make a living off of dumbing things down in math, less wordy. He is considered one of the best online for highschool to early uni math courses, and he would never have used that type of wording. It is done with the intention to not fork up a million dollars, some people just dont get that part.

Hank I'm gonna ignore this guy for a bit, seems a little too eager at 1:30 AM. I know exactly what you mean, there is this math equation that this world renowned mathematician could never solve. Some retards can in like 2 min. It's somewhere on vsauce but I can link if you're interested. Anyways the point stands, you'll be better at what you did more recently in a lot of cases, like this one where a 3-4-5 triangle hasn't come up in my engineering years but would a lot in grade 11. I feel this guy might be around that age. Nothing wrong with that just a 3-4-5 triangle might be more relevant to him.

And you clearly didn't follow your own advice about answering/replying before comprehending.

And you clearly didn't follow your own advice about answering/replying before comprehending.

+Fresh Rock Papa-E<br>Sounds to me like you don't read what you write ;)

+Fresh Rock Papa-E
Sounds to me like you don't read what you write ;)

Hank Quite surely this is the most retarded thing I will read today, and I'm quite confident of it despite being just 1:29 AM here. Anyone who has been taught advanced math (or anything about stem really), has developed the methodology to think critically and reasonably before jumping to conclusion using his intuition. It's just necessary to go through education. You don't answer questions until you have read them like 3 times and you are confident of what you are asked.

It's not the same type of mistake. One is just a computation error. The other is being lazy and not trying to understand the question before answering. They have completely different causes.

It's not the same type of mistake. One is just a computation error. The other is being lazy and not trying to understand the question before answering. They have completely different causes.

+anon86<br>I might even go so far as to say that people who are comfortable with higher level math--like DEs, Linear Algebra, and Complex Variables--would be more likely to screw it up than people only fluent up to something like college algebra or calc 1 because the latter group is more likely to be careful while people like you or I often don't want to waste any time on such trivial calculations.

+anon86
I might even go so far as to say that people who are comfortable with higher level math--like DEs, Linear Algebra, and Complex Variables--would be more likely to screw it up than people only fluent up to something like college algebra or calc 1 because the latter group is more likely to be careful while people like you or I often don't want to waste any time on such trivial calculations.

Fresh Rock Papa-E its the same type of mistake. You're missing the point. This question is about memorization more than anything. I can assure you that many people who may be great at differential equations, could have completed screwed that question up if watching this video.

Fresh Rock Papa-E its the same type of mistake. You're missing the point. This question is about memorization more than anything. I can assure you that many people who may be great at differential equations, could have completed screwed that question up if watching this video.

+Fresh Rock Papa-E<br>What's different about it?

+Fresh Rock Papa-E
What's different about it?

It's not the same kind of mistake though..

It's not the same kind of mistake though..

+Fresh Rock Papa-E
My first response can be found in that last post of mine "I'm an idiot"
The second can be inferred from that same post, being that the question was about squares and my eyes immediately went to the nicest number. Think about when you reflexively jump up and hit your head on a shelf, or you pull your arm back and hit it on the wall behind you. Why would you bang your head on the shelf or elbow the wall?

Have you never made stupid arithmetic mistakes on an exam? I just got a linear algebra test back. The 3% that I lost were because I screwed up a couple of elementary row operations. Your brain sees a somewhat familiar pattern, and spits out the most common result of that pattern before you have a chance to think about the problem.

anon86 It happens from time to time though. It's one of those things that you end up memorizing, like the sines and cosines of 30º,45º and 60º, sqrt(2), and so on.

anon86 It happens from time to time though. It's one of those things that you end up memorizing, like the sines and cosines of 30º,45º and 60º, sqrt(2), and so on.

Hank So... You guessed randomly what the answer was without understanding the question. Why would you do that?

Hank So... You guessed randomly what the answer was without understanding the question. Why would you do that?

And yes, if I remember correctly, my first choice was A because I didn't wait to process the question properly (edit: and I'm an idiot). I think it was probably just because 16's a nicer number. 2^2=4 -> 4^2 = 16; 2^4=16; etc. I do a lot of stuff with digital logic, so round base 2 values are very attractive to me.

Of course, then I actually read the question properly and realized what the correct answer was.

Hank The amount of times we use 3-4-5 triangle in upper engineering classes is almost never. It may come up here or there but I can see how it doesn't come to mind to some people, let alone engineers. However you dont need to know the triangle to do the question, just a short cut.

Hank The amount of times we use 3-4-5 triangle in upper engineering classes is almost never. It may come up here or there but I can see how it doesn't come to mind to some people, let alone engineers. However you dont need to know the triangle to do the question, just a short cut.

Hank yes I have heard of it. just did not come to mind. thank you :)

Hank yes I have heard of it. just did not come to mind. thank you :)

+Maarten Mtr<br>Have you ever heard of a 3-4-5 triangle? It's a fairly fundamental part of geometry. That's why he knew it off the top of his head. It doesn't work with 4, 5, and 6 because that's not how scaling works. 4, 16/3, and 20/3, though, and the easier 6, 8, and 10.

+Maarten Mtr
Have you ever heard of a 3-4-5 triangle? It's a fairly fundamental part of geometry. That's why he knew it off the top of his head. It doesn't work with 4, 5, and 6 because that's not how scaling works. 4, 16/3, and 20/3, though, and the easier 6, 8, and 10.

+Fresh Rock Papa-E<br>I know the actual solution. Play the video--after a potential ad--for a second. YouTube doesn't let you comment on a video that's open if you haven't watched any of it, which really only hinders the few of us who don't block ads. Good move, Google.

+Fresh Rock Papa-E
I know the actual solution. Play the video--after a potential ad--for a second. YouTube doesn't let you comment on a video that's open if you haven't watched any of it, which really only hinders the few of us who don't block ads. Good move, Google.

how do you know this? does not apply to 4*4+5*5=41 !=6*6

how do you know this? does not apply to 4*4+5*5=41 !=6*6

Refreshing SOMETIMES helps, but I've spent a good 5 minutes refreshing trying to get a comment to post...

Refreshing SOMETIMES helps, but I've spent a good 5 minutes refreshing trying to get a comment to post...

Also, just copy the comment and do f5 when youtube does that. I don't even know why they changed it, worked so much better before..

Also, just copy the comment and do f5 when youtube does that. I don't even know why they changed it, worked so much better before..

How is it more correct? If you interpret things that way, then he hasn't lost anything. Only then you have a point, but not if you claim that he has lost 16k.

How is it more correct? If you interpret things that way, then he hasn't lost anything. Only then you have a point, but not if you claim that he has lost 16k.

+Fresh Rock Papa-E<br>He's "more correct" in a sense. He's lost the opportunity to win the $16k, and instead won $1k. He never actually won the $16k, so it's not really as simple as subtracting the two. Even if it were, that would introduce the potential that he could go on to win the $1M, which would then mean he actually "lost" $999k. Then, if you look at what he "has earned so far" as earnings, he would have lost the $16k that he earned, but then won $1k as a sort of consolidation. If YouTube tells me "failed to post" imma be pissed.

+Fresh Rock Papa-E
He's "more correct" in a sense. He's lost the opportunity to win the $16k, and instead won $1k. He never actually won the $16k, so it's not really as simple as subtracting the two. Even if it were, that would introduce the potential that he could go on to win the $1M, which would then mean he actually "lost" $999k. Then, if you look at what he "has earned so far" as earnings, he would have lost the $16k that he earned, but then won $1k as a sort of consolidation. If YouTube tells me "failed to post" imma be pissed.

He is losing only 15k, what are you talking? He could have won 16k, he won 1k, he lost 15k.

He is losing only 15k, what are you talking? He could have won 16k, he won 1k, he lost 15k.

***** Imaginary numbers? When you think about it all numbers are Imaginary

***** Imaginary numbers? When you think about it all numbers are Imaginary

"imaginary numbers are not numbers"<br>You heard it here first, folks.

"imaginary numbers are not numbers"
You heard it here first, folks.

+Santiago Ferrari
Then why create the word if it includes everything?
Yes, i is a number. sqrt(-1).

+Santiago Ferrari
Then why create the word if it includes everything?
Yes, i is a number. sqrt(-1).

+Santiago Ferrari
Look up the definition of "square number." What would be the point of defining squares as you seem to be? Literally every number would be a square.
sqrt(0)=0
sqrt(-36)=6i
Even if we haven't bothered giving a result some sort of notation, you could just leave it as the square root of whatever to continue your calculation

Hank wow a few grammar and punctuation mistakes on the internet, must posses toddler English skills. I'm rushing my sentences dude, this isn't an assignment.

Hank wow a few grammar and punctuation mistakes on the internet, must posses toddler English skills. I'm rushing my sentences dude, this isn't an assignment.

"Hope your not"
"In what world does two"
"physically no square numbers"
"a number times by itself"
Your misuse and lack of punctuation

He misread/misheard it. It's that simple. Considering 45% of people in the audience thought it was A--the correct answer being the third most selected of the four choices--it seems to have been a pretty common mistake. It's probably caused by a psychological phenomenon similar the one that causes the vast majority of people to not notice repeated words that span a line-break, or the one that allows you to scrmable the odrer of letetrs in wodrs witohut singfictnly reudcnig redabailtiy as I did just now.

Hank And how do I have a toddler's grasp of the English language exactly? I'm not lecturing I'm baffled by how he can not understand that simple "Word problem" even though he's an engineering student. You get taught about square numbers in juniors school, it's not difficult it's just a fancy word for saying a number times by itself once.

+Mr Muscle<br>In what world does someone with a toddler's grasp of the English language lecture a native English speaking engineering student on a word problem?

+Mr Muscle
In what world does someone with a toddler's grasp of the English language lecture a native English speaking engineering student on a word problem?

Mr Muscle I'd hire an engineer who I can teach that concept to rather than a douchebag wannabe like yourself

Mr Muscle I'd hire an engineer who I can teach that concept to rather than a douchebag wannabe like yourself

lamakicker69 why the hell would it be A? Hope your not an engineer since you would probably be fired if you couldn't answer that question. In what world does two square numbers add up to 16? There are physically no square numbers that would add up to 16.

lamakicker69 why the hell would it be A? Hope your not an engineer since you would probably be fired if you couldn't answer that question. In what world does two square numbers add up to 16? There are physically no square numbers that would add up to 16.

Michael Chang Nah, you are just stupid and lazy to bother understanding it.

Michael Chang Nah, you are just stupid and lazy to bother understanding it.

Daniel Gardecki Engineers in clash of clans? kek

Daniel Gardecki Engineers in clash of clans? kek

Everyones an engineer these days especially if they're from India.....well that's what the majority of Indians on Clash of Clans say they are when they pretend they're from the UK, USA, Australia or Canada. It's almost as if they're trying to make themselves look clever, like the 18yo Cambridge student above saying it could be interpreted many ways (when it couldn't) and the other Fruit (sorry Citrus) using non-square numbers as why it could have been a different answer.

Uh... Dafuq are you talking about? I'm not even english, so you  are the only douchy here. Maybe you should talk to me in spanish if you are so afraid that I will look every engineer look English illiterate.

Uh... Dafuq are you talking about? I'm not even english, so you  are the only douchy here. Maybe you should talk to me in spanish if you are so afraid that I will look every engineer look English illiterate.

+Eric Pive<br>If you're gonna edit you might as well edit thoroughly. Before you say that isn't relevant, just remember you're arguing clear and concise interpretation from this video. You never claimed to be an english major, but at least don't be a douchy engineer who can't spell. You're making the rest of us engineers seem like we are all illiterate. The question is a very easy question that grade school covers yet most of the audience was not choosing B so it was set up to be a bit mind boggling although it technically is asking for what it intends to get as an answer.

+Eric Pive
If you're gonna edit you might as well edit thoroughly. Before you say that isn't relevant, just remember you're arguing clear and concise interpretation from this video. You never claimed to be an english major, but at least don't be a douchy engineer who can't spell. You're making the rest of us engineers seem like we are all illiterate. The question is a very easy question that grade school covers yet most of the audience was not choosing B so it was set up to be a bit mind boggling although it technically is asking for what it intends to get as an answer.

It seemed pretty straightforward to me. Man those excuses for not knowing math

It seemed pretty straightforward to me. Man those excuses for not knowing math

Maybe he confused sum and product? Since 16 is 4x4 and 4 is 2x2

Maybe he confused sum and product? Since 16 is 4x4 and 4 is 2x2

Why would you say A? What did you think the question was?

Why would you say A? What did you think the question was?

I know they mean the same thing, My point and the original comment wasn't that they used the wrong terminology, only that the question was poorly phrased. In my opinion "square" or "perfect square" is a better term to use in this case.

I know they mean the same thing, My point and the original comment wasn't that they used the wrong terminology, only that the question was poorly phrased. In my opinion "square" or "perfect square" is a better term to use in this case.

"Square numbers" is exactly the same thing as "perfect squares"
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SquareNumber.html

"Square numbers" is exactly the same thing as "perfect squares"
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SquareNumber.html

Yeah instead of "square numbers" a better term to use would have been "squares" or "perfect squares" because that is what those numbers are actually called. They also could have been more explicit with the sum thing saying two other perfect squares added together but that's just a minor difference imo

Yeah instead of "square numbers" a better term to use would have been "squares" or "perfect squares" because that is what those numbers are actually called. They also could have been more explicit with the sum thing saying two other perfect squares added together but that's just a minor difference imo

when they said a sum of 2 smaller squares i thought they meant that the 2 smaller squares had to be the same. so a smaller square x2. now thay i see the answer idk why i thought that way but yea i can understand him

when they said a sum of 2 smaller squares i thought they meant that the 2 smaller squares had to be the same. so a smaller square x2. now thay i see the answer idk why i thought that way but yea i can understand him

its 15k. u would spend more than a glance on the question.

its 15k. u would spend more than a glance on the question.

lol looks like this guy got it wrong too and is trying to make an excuse

lol looks like this guy got it wrong too and is trying to make an excuse

absolutiontheory98 Uhm... I'm an engineer, so..<br>Btw, how is it any relevant? I don't know why you even bring it to the discussion. Also, do you have any way to make the question more clear?

absolutiontheory98 Uhm... I'm an engineer, so..
Btw, how is it any relevant? I don't know why you even bring it to the discussion. Also, do you have any way to make the question more clear?

absolutiontheory98 "Exam questions are purposely designed to test the concept and not on the understanding of the statement."

But if you know the concept of Pythagorean triples, you should be able to understand this statement. stop getting mad just because you're bad at interpreting worded math problems. how do you suppose they should have phrased it then, since you claim this one is so "unclear" and "terribly phrased?" give us an example of how you think it shouldve been phrased

Eric Pive <br>Have you taken CIE A levels sir or IB exam or frankly undergraduate degree in Maths??If your knowledge in Maths does not transcend after middle school,you have no right to call me full of shit when you have no idea how real maths question are asked.Exam questions are purposely designed to test the concept and not on the understanding of the statement.

Eric Pive
Have you taken CIE A levels sir or IB exam or frankly undergraduate degree in Maths??If your knowledge in Maths does not transcend after middle school,you have no right to call me full of shit when you have no idea how real maths question are asked.Exam questions are purposely designed to test the concept and not on the understanding of the statement.

absolutiontheory98 How did you originally interpret it?

absolutiontheory98 How did you originally interpret it?

than obviosly all numbers are sum of SOME unknown squares.

than obviosly all numbers are sum of SOME unknown squares.

IMO it was not said that the number had had to be natural.

IMO it was not said that the number had had to be natural.

"It could have easily been 5,12,13"<br>Then you don't know what "easily" means. This is a game show.

"It could have easily been 5,12,13"
Then you don't know what "easily" means. This is a game show.

Blood Bath and Beyond - Pop Goes Metal Covers

it was a fair question you have to read it all the way though and really think, i get why people would think 16 it makes sense, those werent the squares they were looking for.

it was a fair question you have to read it all the way though and really think, i get why people would think 16 it makes sense, those werent the squares they were looking for.

absolutiontheory98 Please, explain which interpretations you can give to the question, otherwise, you are just full of shit.

absolutiontheory98 Please, explain which interpretations you can give to the question, otherwise, you are just full of shit.

OHP77

Because questions are not asked like that in real maths exams.Someone like me who's used to Cambridge Maths questions for A levels,I interpret it in many ways and I didn't know which interpretation they are asking for.Maybe I also tried solving it under 1 min and I gave up under the pressure.After the answer was given only then I know what they're asking for.It's something to do with the pythogaras concept.

How was it poorly phrased? I'm terrible at math but I understood it just fine.

How was it poorly phrased? I'm terrible at math but I understood it just fine.

+absolutiontheory98 thats because a real math test that involves the addition of square numbers would be labeled as a Pythagorean Theorem test, because Pythagorean Theorem is usually its own unit in a math curriculum.

but this isnt a math test. it's a game show. and honestly, in the real world, youre probably gonna get unusually phrased problems thrown at you all the time

clutchmamba<br>It's phrased not in the same way as real maths exam questions tend to be.

clutchmamba
It's phrased not in the same way as real maths exam questions tend to be.

it's honestly phrased fine, youre probably just lacking in comprehension skills.

it's honestly phrased fine, youre probably just lacking in comprehension skills.

Koe0 how am i arrogant? everyone is completely missing my point (the question can easily be understood) and talking about wether i knew or i didnt know the answer when this thing has already been clarified and was never interesting anyway.

Koe0 how am i arrogant? everyone is completely missing my point (the question can easily be understood) and talking about wether i knew or i didnt know the answer when this thing has already been clarified and was never interesting anyway.

@Eric Pive You are so arrogant it's unreal. We get it, you have the right answer and you deserve to get the 15.000 that this guy lost. Please get over yourself.

@Eric Pive You are so arrogant it's unreal. We get it, you have the right answer and you deserve to get the 15.000 that this guy lost. Please get over yourself.

Eric Pive I'd assume other options would just be multiples of the 3,4,5 number so. for example 6*6+8*8=10*10

Eric Pive I'd assume other options would just be multiples of the 3,4,5 number so. for example 6*6+8*8=10*10

Oh my fucking god, this people are so dense. I DIDN'T KNOW THE FUCKING ANSWER, I JUST KNEW THE MOST SIMPLE SOLUTION AND THAT HAPPENED TO BE THE CORRECT ONE, CAN WE JUST MOVE ON NOW? I can't believe we are still talking about that thing.

Oh my fucking god, this people are so dense. I DIDN'T KNOW THE FUCKING ANSWER, I JUST KNEW THE MOST SIMPLE SOLUTION AND THAT HAPPENED TO BE THE CORRECT ONE, CAN WE JUST MOVE ON NOW? I can't believe we are still talking about that thing.

Eric Pive You say that so smugly. there's more than one Pythagorean triple dude.

Eric Pive You say that so smugly. there's more than one Pythagorean triple dude.

Eric Pive oh its definitely his fault and he doesn't deserve the money but like people shouldn't be shitting on the guy in these comments hahaha the dude made a mistake I'm sure he knew how to do it!

Eric Pive oh its definitely his fault and he doesn't deserve the money but like people shouldn't be shitting on the guy in these comments hahaha the dude made a mistake I'm sure he knew how to do it!

tenrecc How? 25 could have easily been replaced with 100 or 169 it's not asinine. Just admit you were wrong. Nobody could know for sure what the answer was, even if they think they knew what the answer most likely was

tenrecc How? 25 could have easily been replaced with 100 or 169 it's not asinine. Just admit you were wrong. Nobody could know for sure what the answer was, even if they think they knew what the answer most likely was

+citrisprime I wasn't even considering that, because it's asinine. It's a program about general knowledge, not doing mental math. And there's only one feasible and correct answer to that question. Not only couldn't you figure it out, you still can't figure out how others could. I'm sorry, but you're the idiot here.

+citrisprime I wasn't even considering that, because it's asinine. It's a program about general knowledge, not doing mental math. And there's only one feasible and correct answer to that question. Not only couldn't you figure it out, you still can't figure out how others could. I'm sorry, but you're the idiot here.

citrisprime Well, I thought I knew the answer, and I happened to be right. It just came to my mind, before I could think that there could be other solutions, I saw 25 as a possible answer so I knew it was B, since only one answer can be correct... I don't know why we are still talking about this though, it's not relevant to anything.

lamakicker69 Reading wrong is the worse excuse to fail a question. First thing to answer anything, is to make sure you understood what you are asked. If you can't do this, you don't deserve any money tbh. He should be happy he kept 1.000

lamakicker69 Reading wrong is the worse excuse to fail a question. First thing to answer anything, is to make sure you understood what you are asked. If you can't do this, you don't deserve any money tbh. He should be happy he kept 1.000

citrisprime That's like... Exactly what I said? I only said that I knew one solution, which happened to be the correct one. I'm sure it isn't the only one, but it's the most simple.

citrisprime That's like... Exactly what I said? I only said that I knew one solution, which happened to be the correct one. I'm sure it isn't the only one, but it's the most simple.

Yeah dude I agree with you it wasn't for you lol

Yeah dude I agree with you it wasn't for you lol

Eric pave said he only knows one solution and he knew the answer for sure before seeing the options. I'm saying that's not possible

Eric pave said he only knows one solution and he knew the answer for sure before seeing the options. I'm saying that's not possible

Well actually, technically speaking, 5,12,13 or 6,8,10 can be easily ruled out before the timer runs out. It wouldn't be likely but the option could be other than "25". You can't be sure but believe it's most likely 25. Besides, every school teaches these special triangles

Well actually, technically speaking, 5,12,13 or 6,8,10 can be easily ruled out before the timer runs out. It wouldn't be likely but the option could be other than "25". You can't be sure but believe it's most likely 25. Besides, every school teaches these special triangles

tenrecc you're an idiot, obviously those numbers squared. 25 + 144 =169

tenrecc you're an idiot, obviously those numbers squared. 25 + 144 =169

+citrisprime It couldn't have been any of those numbers, since none of them are themselves square numbers. 25 is the only numbers that's both easy enough to be feasible and also correct, so yeah, anyone familiar with basic math concepts knew the answer before the options popped up.

+citrisprime It couldn't have been any of those numbers, since none of them are themselves square numbers. 25 is the only numbers that's both easy enough to be feasible and also correct, so yeah, anyone familiar with basic math concepts knew the answer before the options popped up.

Eric Pive I know but under pressure like that it's you can't blame a guy for messing up, and it's not like all those people that didn't say B didn't know how to solve the problem...most of them probably just read it wrong

Eric Pive I know but under pressure like that it's you can't blame a guy for messing up, and it's not like all those people that didn't say B didn't know how to solve the problem...most of them probably just read it wrong

Eric Pive It could have easily been 5,12,13 or any other right triangle for that matter. There's no possible way you could know for sure what the answer was, before the options were read to you. Maybe you had an idea of what one solution was but you needed the choices to know they were looking for 25.

Eric Pive It could have easily been 5,12,13 or any other right triangle for that matter. There's no possible way you could know for sure what the answer was, before the options were read to you. Maybe you had an idea of what one solution was but you needed the choices to know they were looking for 25.

+Orhun Sevindi No it couldn't, they needed something the contender could've figured out if he hadn't known about it beforehand, and 25 is literally the only feasible option for that question. Anyone remotely familiar with basic math concepts would know the answer before the options were shown.

+Orhun Sevindi No it couldn't, they needed something the contender could've figured out if he hadn't known about it beforehand, and 25 is literally the only feasible option for that question. Anyone remotely familiar with basic math concepts would know the answer before the options were shown.

+Eric Pive How did you knew the answer before the options were shown? It could also be 100,225,279,400 etc.

+Eric Pive How did you knew the answer before the options were shown? It could also be 100,225,279,400 etc.

lamakicker69 Well, I knew that 25 could be a solution, I'm sure other solutions exist, but I don't know any more.<br>People should know that they shouldn't read a math question quickly, they have very precise wording that needs to be understood exactly ^^"

lamakicker69 Well, I knew that 25 could be a solution, I'm sure other solutions exist, but I don't know any more.
People should know that they shouldn't read a math question quickly, they have very precise wording that needs to be understood exactly ^^"

Eric Pive yeah but most people just kinda read it quickly and can often make a simple mistake. Also it's impossible to know the answer before they put up the options because you wouldn't know which numbers you were working with

Eric Pive yeah but most people just kinda read it quickly and can often make a simple mistake. Also it's impossible to know the answer before they put up the options because you wouldn't know which numbers you were working with

lamakicker69 That's what I meant to say. I knew it before they showed the options. Not that it is any relevant anyway.

But yeah, everything can be misunderstood, although if you read the sentence carefully, there is no ambiguity, that's why I think it isn't terribly phrased as some people say...

lamakicker69 That's what I meant to say. I knew it before they showed the options. Not that it is any relevant anyway.

But yeah, everything can be misunderstood, although if you read the sentence carefully, there is no ambiguity, that's why I think it isn't terribly phrased as some people say...

Eric Pive I'm not saying it can't be understood...I'm saying I can see how it can be misunderstood. And once again if you understand it then it's not very impressive to know the answer is 16 before they tell you it's 16 because you have well over a minute to solve it before they say which answer is right...unless you are trying to say you somehow knew the answer before they even put up the options

lamakicker69 My point is that the question can be successfully understood. <br>And yes, I did, but only because I already knew that 3*3+4*4=5*5.

lamakicker69 My point is that the question can be successfully understood.
And yes, I did, but only because I already knew that 3*3+4*4=5*5.

Eric Pive okay so you read the question correctly...I didn't at first....i don't know what your point is? Also if you understood how to do the problem immediately then I would hope you would have been able to know the answer before they revealed it, there was almost 2 minutes between the question and then revealing the correct answer...

lamakicker69 Im also an engineer and I inmediately understood what they meant, and also I knew the answer before they showed it. 3*3+4*4=5*5 is a thing that even ancient egyptians knew ...

lamakicker69 Im also an engineer and I inmediately understood what they meant, and also I knew the answer before they showed it. 3*3+4*4=5*5 is a thing that even ancient egyptians knew ...

mohaed96 which of these square numbers (16, 25, 36, or 49) also happens to be the sum (addition) of two smaller square numbers (1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36).

mohaed96 which of these square numbers (16, 25, 36, or 49) also happens to be the sum (addition) of two smaller square numbers (1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36).

I'm an engineering major and therefore pretty good at math and at first glance I would have also said A. It is phrased very weirdly

I'm an engineering major and therefore pretty good at math and at first glance I would have also said A. It is phrased very weirdly

I'm not a native speaker but it seemed like a pretty accurate explanation.

Edit: I'm also an engineering student.

I'm not a native speaker but it seemed like a pretty accurate explanation.

Edit: I'm also an engineering student.

How is it terribly phrased? Dude, if you didn't understand it you are just lazy.

How is it terribly phrased? Dude, if you didn't understand it you are just lazy.

mohaed96 seemed like a decent explanation to me. It was clearly B

mohaed96 seemed like a decent explanation to me. It was clearly B


everybody knows the right triangle side pair 3, 4, and 5.


The audience was thinking 2^2 * 2^2 = 16. That's the product, not the sum X(

I think the audience chose 16 because it was choice A. Most members probably have no clue what it means to square a number.


I would've said the same thing. The question was poorly worded.

I would've said the same thing. The question was poorly worded.

@Paul Shin Im not really understanding the paragraph "Therefore we must have x > 1 and y > 1.
Are you saying that, because we can't square an irrational number?

I understand the wrong use of the definition "square number", I got that now, but it seems like with your example you're also trying to disprove, that we can represent any natural number by the sum of two squared numbers.
Or did I misunderstand something?

@Nico-v11 R u sure that u still remembered the statement of the qsn when u claimed so? Not meant to mock u or even insult u, yet the case of misinterpretation that u addressed didn't really make any sense to anyone aware of basic English grammar, understood the definition of "square number" and "sum", had experience working out fundamental mathematical qsns. Even the primary school students I've ever assisted won't misinterpreted such a qsn in ur addressed way.

@Ferry Hömig what you are saying does not alone with the conditions of the question.

1) What you are doing is taking the root of a number and then squaring it,thats like saying 1+1-1 = 1

2) the question asks for 2 NATURAL numbers, the sum of whose squares result in the square of another natural number.

Ok,really sorry about that last one
That was even more complexly worded than the question

@Ferry Hömig how else could it be worded

@Ferry Hömig how else could it be worded

@Ferry HömigWell yes but they probably mean a number which can be written as the sum of the squares of two NATURAL numbers

@Ferry HömigWell yes but they probably mean a number which can be written as the sum of the squares of two NATURAL numbers

No,the sentence is complexly worded which does not mean it is badly worded,YOU are the one who is not able to understand

No,the sentence is complexly worded which does not mean it is badly worded,YOU are the one who is not able to understand

Wasn't poorly worded, it was perfectly concise

Wasn't poorly worded, it was perfectly concise

Ferry Hömig - the phrase "square number" has a specific meaning in mathematics. A "square number", by definition, is the square of an integer. 12 is not a "square number" because there is no integer which squares to 12.

James Alvarado - "sum" means the result of addition. Your line of reasoning would be the product (result of multiplication) of square numbers, not the sum of square numbers.

James Alvarado - "sum" means the result of addition. Your line of reasoning would be the _product_ (result of multiplication) of square numbers, not the _sum_ of square numbers.

James Alvarado it’s the square root of 4 those are 2 different things

James Alvarado it’s the square root of 4 those are 2 different things

James Alvarado 2 is not the square of a whole number

James Alvarado 2 is not the square of a whole number

@JFrog it says the sum of two smaller square numbers. It doesn't say anything about whole numbers. Besides, they are all whole numbers. Which would actually be 2 that would give you 4 and can produce 16 when squared... This question is really worded poorly

James Alvarado I kinda understand but the question is asking the sum of two numbers (that can be square rooted to get a whole number).

@JFrog 4 square equals 16 obviously 4x4=16. It said which square number also happens to be the sum of two smaller squares. 2 square equals 4, because obviously 2x2=4. Which that squared equals 16. And like the question ask which of these squared numbers is the sum of two smaller squared numbers.....

@Art3M1s 3 squared + 4 squared = 25. The question is worded fine.

@Art3M1s 3 squared + 4 squared = 25. The question is worded fine.

Should've said two different smaller numbers.

Should've said two different smaller numbers.

@Ryan Hutchinson
2 squared =4
4 squared = 16
4+16 = 20
So the sum of 2 squared and 4 squared is 20 not 16.
The question is asking for the sum of 2 squared numbers.
(3 squared)9 + 16(4 squared)= 25
9 and 16 are both smaller than 25.
Therefore 25 is the only possible awnser.

This sounds more like a LANGUAGE problem rather than a MATH problem.

This sounds more like a LANGUAGE problem rather than a MATH problem.

@Ryan Hutchinson did you skip the word sum? It's not poorly worded, people just have poor comprehension skills.

@Ryan Hutchinson did you skip the word sum? It's not poorly worded, people just have poor comprehension skills.

Archie Brew<br>2 squared is 4 and 4 squared is 16. So 16 is made up of two square numbers 2 and 4.

Archie Brew
2 squared is 4 and 4 squared is 16. So 16 is made up of two square numbers 2 and 4.

No, the question is worded perfectly fine..If you would have given that answer, 16, please explain how it could possible be right or make any sense.

English is my 2nd language. I still got the answer.

English is my 2nd language. I still got the answer.

I didn’t read ‘sum’ in that question and I was like ‘lmao what?’ I would’ve said 16 because 4^2= 16 and a square has 4 sides (this was still when I didn’t read the question properly and didn’t understand it) and then after like 3 minutes i was ‘sum’.. I’m like wtf, why am I so blind.

No you just don't understand the question its easy tbh

No you just don't understand the question its easy tbh

@EBOJFM DBOOJOH just stop trying to be pedantic then and accept that that this was a question on a game show, not a maths exam

@EBOJFM DBOOJOH technically every number is an other number squared however something only counts as a square number if the number you square to get it is a whole integer

@EBOJFM DBOOJOH he's talking about numbers that aren't whole integers, that square to bigger numbers, e.g. 16= 3 squared (9) + √7 which is something like 2.6 or 2.7 : basically he's trying to look like he's smart, and technically he's  right, but hes just being pedantic and annoying

@Muhammad Nuruddin you mean Pythagoras theorem?

@Muhammad Nuruddin you mean Pythagoras theorem?

@Ferry Hömig ye but no one likes people who want to show that they look really smart so stop being pedantic

@Ferry Hömig ye but no one likes people who want to show that they look really smart so stop being pedantic

@John C J Yeah, well some people cant be reasoned with. I cant help it if people can't grasp what people are telling them. I'm not the best at maths but this is pretty basic maths

EBOJFM DBOOJOH Not this again. The exact same discussion is going on another thread (its a month old now) and it's pure chaos.

I answered the question as soon as I saw the thumbnail without even seeing the options. But only because I still studying and I come across squares and cubes and roots all the time. And also a Pythagores Triangle of sides 3,4,5 is the most common example.

But that guy or probably me in 5-10 yrs wouldn't get that under pressure.

@Ferry Hömig The square root of 12 would be a decimal number and therefore not a square number. Using your theory you could just add up any 2 numbers that add up to 16. For example you could pick 15 + 1 or 7 +9  etc. I admire the way you like to challenge things but at some point you must use common sense. You can't make a square number just by squaring it's root.

@EBOJFM DBOOJOH I am not talking about 12 but about the squareroot of 12

@EBOJFM DBOOJOH I am not talking about 12 but about the squareroot of 12

Not really. In simple it would be asked as "Which of these is a pythagorean triplet?" and people still wouldn't be able to answer it.

@Ferry Hömig But 12 is not a square number.

@Ferry Hömig But 12 is not a square number.

@EBOJFM DBOOJOH 1 can be (sqrt(0.5)^2)*2

And I still am in school xD

The principle above would work on ever number. Its possible to really pick any 2 numbers of which the sum is the wished number. For 16 we could pick 12 and 4 for example which would then be sqrt(12)^2 + sqrt(4)^2 which would be 12 + 4 which is 16.

@Ferry Hömig  I think you need to go back to school. Please explain how the number 1 for example can be the sum of 2 smaller square numbers. Also please explain how 36, 49, and 16 can be the sum of 2  other square numbers

@Nico-v11 Well the question is clearly asking for the sum of two square numbers.  4+2 clearly equals 6 not 16.  Secondly all the awnsers are square numbers. There is nothing misleading or ambigious about this question for anyone who has any basic knowledge of Maths. Thirdly you say the question should be phrased. "Which of these numbers is the sum of two square numbers"<br>But isn't that exactly what the question says. Why does the fact that they are square numbers alter what the question is asking.

@Nico-v11 Well the question is clearly asking for the sum of two square numbers.  4+2 clearly equals 6 not 16.  Secondly all the awnsers are square numbers. There is nothing misleading or ambigious about this question for anyone who has any basic knowledge of Maths. Thirdly you say the question should be phrased. "Which of these numbers is the sum of two square numbers"
But isn't that exactly what the question says. Why does the fact that they are square numbers alter what the question is asking.

It's not really poorly worded. It seems pretty self explanatory to me. 3 squared (9) plus 4 squared  (16) equals 5 squared (25). So the awnser is clearly 25.

Remembering the right triangle formula is so important in this scene.

Remembering the right triangle formula is so important in this scene.

The question is not poorly worded. It's just you misunderstood the question. Your fault there.

The question is not poorly worded. It's just you misunderstood the question. Your fault there.

Every number has a square root, but if every number is going to be a square number, there’s no reason to qualify any number as such. It’s just a waste of a word. Just as it would be to define a set of integers as evenly divisible by 1.

@Brek Martin but it could only be assumed. Questions that could be interpreted so differently that the answers also would be different shouldnt be asked in quizshows. The questions should be specified enough that stuff like this cant happen

asdf asdf If your definition of a square number is different to everyone else’s. It was fair to assume perfect integer squares.

@Brek Martin actually every number can be represented by the sum of two smaller square numbers so every answer is correct

@Brek Martin actually every number can be represented by the sum of two smaller square numbers so every answer is correct

@Nico-v11 When you're on millionaire, you kinda need to be able to take the question as a whole or you aren't gonna win. I sort of get where you're coming from but I doubt that everyone followed that process to get 16. Most are probably just idiots.

Fire Boogaloo what I’m saying is that 4 also being a square number distracts the person at first glance making them think that’s the answer.

It’s not really even being able to solve the answer in the first place though.

@Nico-v11 Ah ok, Im with you now. You're saying that 4 is the square root of 16 and 4 can also be square rooted to make 2. That doesnt really make sense though since the question asks you to sum. I dont get how you come to 16 as the answer from that logic unless you dont know what 'sum' means. Then again, if you dont know what sum means and know what square rooting is, you have bigger problems to worry about.

Also, I thought you meant 25, 36 etc. weren't square numbers but 16 was, not that 4 is a square number and 5 and 6 aren't.

Fire Boogaloo no. The square root of 25 is 5 which is not a square number.

Which is why at first glance people would think that 16 is the answer when at first glance it is the ONLY answer that has both factors when square rooted to also be perfect squares (being 4).

@Nico-v11 But....But they're all square numbers anyway...

@Nico-v11 But....But they're all square numbers anyway...

JFrog it’s worded in a way to make people think that the answer is 16 or makes you lean there.

By mentioning that the answers are all square numbers and repeating that makes you THINK that the importance is that the square number answer should be composed of what makes it a square number which is also a square number.

The square root of 16 is 4, with 4 also being a perfect square number. That makes the question misleading but not wrong. It’s just tricking you that’s all.

The better way to rephrase the question in order to orient your mind in the right direction would be “Which of these numbers is the sum of two square numbers?” Thus not making you think that being a square number is  the MOST import part of the problem.

Anyway that’s how I took it anyway

Carolyn R No it’s extremely easy to understand if you know basic high school math

Carolyn R No it’s extremely easy to understand if you know basic high school math

It isn’t poorly worded. There are only 2 squares smaller than those displayed too. Can’t blame the guy being under pressure though.

how was it poorly worded? how can it be interpreted differently?

how was it poorly worded? how can it be interpreted differently?

How else could it be worded? It seemed pretty clear to me.

How else could it be worded? It seemed pretty clear to me.

That's a bad excuse, the question was worded badly but you have to be a complete idiot to not understand it

That's a bad excuse, the question was worded badly but you have to be a complete idiot to not understand it

Carolyn R can you tell me how you got that answer. It seemed easy to me but so many people got the same answer as you.

Carolyn R can you tell me how you got that answer. It seemed easy to me but so many people got the same answer as you.


If he was smart he would have realized that the majority of the audience were probably also bad at math.

This has almost nothing at all to do with being "bad at math";
I have studied and passed courses in partial differential equations and numerical approximations of integrals, and I still found this question a bit confusing for a while.

This has almost nothing at all to do with being "bad at math";
I have studied and passed courses in _partial differential equations_ and _numerical approximations of integrals,_ and I still found this question a bit confusing for a while.


Just an excuse because you didn't solve that XD

Just an excuse because you didn't solve that XD

Tarek701, the question couldn't be more precise though. If a person knows the definition of a square number, wording is pretty clear then.

english is not my native language buteventhough i can unferstand the question. Don't make an excuse

Bullshit. It was so clear. Square which is sum of two other squares. In what universe is that terribly worded?

that's the point, it's an easy question.

that's the point, it's an easy question.

Well, if you don't understand the connection, that doesn't mean there isn't one.... The question literrary means "find the third number of the smallest Pythagorean tripplet"

mrkv4k Pythagorean Theorem has nothing to do with this. If it was a triangle and they asked to find the hypotenuse then Pythagorean Theorem would but no, it doesn't in this case

From that alone, you have either a really bad school, or you just forgot. I think it's the second one...

:D :D :D Pythagorean theorem has everything to do with this... How the hell did you passed primary school (or did you?) ONLY numbers that are SUM of squares of two smaller numbers make the lenght of the longest part in right angle triangle with all sides lenght sin whole numbers...<br>Btw I knew its gonna be 25 before she finsihed that question and I am not a native speaker, how the hell is that bad wording?

:D :D :D Pythagorean theorem has everything to do with this... How the hell did you passed primary school (or did you?) ONLY numbers that are SUM of squares of two smaller numbers make the lenght of the longest part in right angle triangle with all sides lenght sin whole numbers...
Btw I knew its gonna be 25 before she finsihed that question and I am not a native speaker, how the hell is that bad wording?

Maybe a bit unclear question but COME ON. These are grown up people in the audience that probably have all graduated... What the fuck do they do at school?? I dont even speak English natively and it took me maybe 10 sec to figure out what the question meant... And then another 10sec to solve it.

IVI The correct term is square number, not squared number. There was no reason to add a d.

It was horribly phrased instead of saying "Which of these 'squared' numbers...", they said "Which of these 'square' numbers...". All they needed was 1 letter.

"When it says "two smaller square numbers", people tend to think of 16, because 4 itself is a square, and 16 is 4*4."

What the hell? It says THE SUM of two square numbers, not the product. So no, there's no way it could be 16. It took me half a second to get it right, I didn't even have to wait for C and D to appear. As soon as answer B appeared, I know it was the right one. It's not very difficult to do 16+9.

guys dont bully him. He just wanted an excuse for getting the question wrong

i live in non english speaking country and understood this question immediatly

Irakli008 don't waste your time they voted trump

Irakli008 don't waste your time they voted trump

Doesn't give the definition. He still had to figure 1,4, and 9 were square numbers. Probably couldn't because he was confused.

+MisterBinx

"I've taken differential equations and have never called 25 or 16 "square numbers" in all the college math courses I've taken. I guess I'm ignorant of that. I've taken trig, 4 calculus classes, linear algebra, and more. It could have been worded better."

Not a good argument for the question being badly worded when the question literally gives the definition of a square number away by saying "Which of these square numbers" and then proceeding to give the answer choices as"16, 25, 36, and 49".

+Danny B Your point being? 8 is not a square number nor is it in the answer options.

but it says the sum of two smaller square numbers and 4+4=8.............

Its not terribly worded, the audience and guy didnt know what the definition of a square number is

MisterBinx square number is a number that you get when you multiply a number with itself so
1×1=1
2×2=4
3×3=9
4×4=16
5×5=25
6×6=36
7×7=49
8×8=64
9×9=81
10×10=100
 I learned this when I was 13 or younger I'm 20 now can't remember exactly when

Ketroc 9th grade? I learned that in 5th...

Ketroc 9th grade? I learned that in 5th...

MisterBinx your lack of understanding what you read is terrible

MisterBinx your lack of understanding what you read is terrible

MisterBinx, it's simple. Get a list of square numbers (4,9,16,25,36,49) and look at ABCD in the question asked and see what square numbers you can use to make either ABC or D. 16+9 = 25 therefore B is the correct answer.

Ketroc I'm in 7th grade and I know this. We haven't gone over it in school yet.

You're confused because she gave the answer as 3^2 + 4^2 = 25.  Of course 3 is not a square number so you think that it is poorly worded.  However, the question is "... the sum of two smaller square numbers."  9 is a square number and 16 is a square number.  She should have simply said, "9+16 = 25"

While the Pythagorean Theorem is deeply connected with the question, I would take pause before saying that the question "is exactly the Pythagorean theorem" or that the "Pythagorean theorem has everything to do" with the question.

After all, you can have a right triangle where the hypotenuse has a length of 16, even though 16 is not a correct answer to the given question.  Certainly, the whole reason that Pythagorean triples are interesting is because of the Pythagorean theorem (hence the name Pythagorean triples), and certainly, most people who remember the famous 3-4-5 right triangle from geometry (which can be proven to be valid lengths of the sides of a right triangle using the Pythagorean theorem) would know the answer immediately.  But I would still not be ready to say that the question is the Pythagorean theorem or has everything to do with it.

While the Pythagorean Theorem is deeply connected with the question, I would take pause before saying that the question "is exactly the Pythagorean theorem" or that the "Pythagorean theorem has everything to do" with the question.

After all, you can have a right triangle where the hypotenuse has a length of 16, even though 16 is not a correct answer to the given question.  Certainly, the whole reason that Pythagorean triples are interesting is because of the Pythagorean theorem (hence the name Pythagorean triples), and certainly, most people who remember the famous 3-4-5 right triangle from geometry (which can be proven to be valid lengths of the sides of a right triangle using the Pythagorean theorem) would know the answer immediately.  But I would still not be ready to say that the question _is_ the Pythagorean theorem or has everything to do with it.

Cheis "Pythagorean theorem definitely had nothing to do with this lmfao."

No. Pythagorean theorem has everything to do with this. The IDEA of the theorem is a^2 + b^2 = c^2, which is exactly what the question was asking (which of these numbers, 16, 25, 36, 49, can be c^2?)

+Cheis This is exactly Pythagorean theorem.  The answer is the basic 3/4/5 triangle we've all used a thousand times, which is why you don't even have to figure it out, you can just recall it from memory.  It also doesn't imply anything.  It clearly says "square number" which by definition is a number which is a square of an integer.

"Which of these square numbers also happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers?"
So many people in the comments seem to be confused. Let's break this down.
"Which of these square numbers..." -> all the following answers must be square numbers, i.e. the result of one number multiplied against itself (aka its square root). If there had been any NON-square numbers in the answers, like 13 (the sum of 4+9), it could be dismissed immediately.
"...also happens to be the sum..." -> this means that the answer must be the result of at least two other numbers ADDED together.
"...of two smaller square numbers?" -> this means that the answer must be the result of only two other numbers added together. These two numbers are both SMALLER and SQUARE, meaning they are of less value than the answer, and when square-rooted, will also produce an integer (i.e. no decimal places needed to express them).

This, to me, is not a difficult question. But if the person being questioned hasn't had to do any math for a long time, they may be out of practice. This applies to the audience too... though it's pretty disturbing, nonetheless, to see that so many people could fail a grade 8 Pythagorean Theorem (c^2 = a^2 + b^2) question. Add the pressure of being on national television and the chance to win a million dollars at stake, and I think it's understandable why he messed up. Still don't understand why the mob failed, but hey, just more proof for why popularity doesn't make a thing right.

MisterBinx you either undestand it or you don't. The wording of the question is fine.

Ketroc Pythagorean theorem definitely has nothing to do with this lmfao. And it is terribly worded because they never said you had to square the 2 smaller numbers. The question implies that the 2 smaller numbers have a square root

EscapeVelocity "sum" 4 + 4 = 8, where 9 + 16 = 25.  Also, anyone who's done grade 9 math knows this from that basic 3/4/5 triangle used so often in the Pythagoras theorem.

When it says "two smaller square numbers", people tend to think of 16, because 4 itself is a square, and 16 is 4*4. It probably should've been worded "two smaller distinct square numbers" or something along those lines.

Definitely not terribly worded, but they had thrown a Red Herring in there by clarifying that they are square numbers, that isn't necessary knowledge.


To be fair, this question was horribly asked..

Not at all people, it was perfectly asked if you are familiar with math. If not, fuck you, you should be. It's not too late to learn.

Also if your kid said they were all right your kid is very wrong UNLESS he said that they were all square numbers than he is right YOU are stupid and used that information incorrectly.

+Santiago Ferrari as Daniel already stated a square number is a number multiplied by itself, like 20x20= 400. And the question asked is what number is a square number that can be made using 2 other square numbers so 25 is correct because 5x5=25 (so it's a square number) 4x4 + 3x3 (2 other square numbers) = 25.

Santiago Ferrari you're stupid there's only one right answer since you can use only two smaller square numbers than what the answer is. It says it in the question.

Square Number definition: The product of a number multiplied by itself
Examples of Squares:

1x1 = 1
2x2 = 4
3x3 = 9
4x4 = 16
5x5 = 25

Integer definition: Any number that is not a fraction
Examples of Integers:

-200, -477, -8096, 0, 1, 373, 99, 5302, 1000...

*****<br>I think it's about time you went back to an English speaking college, not a Spanish speaking one, then they might be able to teach you Maths correctly. I seriously doubt that though. You can't teach planks.

*****
I think it's about time you went back to an English speaking college, not a Spanish speaking one, then they might be able to teach you Maths correctly. I seriously doubt that though. You can't teach planks.

***** are you all right there? you appear to be very annoyed at something. are you trying to validate yourself by demeaning other people on the internet? at the moment, it's no longer about you telling me i'm wrong, and more about you just trying to be better than me. i don't want to converse with people like you, who can't prove to themselves that they're worth something without trying to make everyone else seem like trash. also, i'm not a woman.
thread muted

***** are you all right there? you appear to be very annoyed at something. are you trying to validate yourself by demeaning other people on the internet? at the moment, it's no longer about you telling me i'm wrong, and more about you just trying to be better than me. i don't want to converse with people like you, who can't prove to themselves that they're worth something without trying to make everyone else seem like trash. also, i'm not a woman.
*thread muted*

***** shit, you're right. however, your thinking outside of the box is an example of your own intelligence making you ignorant. the question has only one answer that would be seen by everyone as correct. don't overthink it.

How are you supposed to interpret this question? Easy. Are you looking for the same numbers or do they have to be different? Either as long as they're square numbers! Are you looking for cubed or prime numbers? Again another stupid question from you as the question says which of these SQUARE numbers add up to make a SQUARE number, so you're looking for SQUARE numbers. Now to show how stupid you are as a uni student here's it broken down. A square number is a number where 2 numbers have been multiplied by themselves. The answers are 4 square numbers. The question wants the sum of TWO SQUARE numbers that are smaller than the 4 possible answers. A sum is 2 numbers which have been added together. Here's some smaller square numbers: 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49. Now you have to work out which TWO of those add together to make one of the answers. 9+16 = 25

RKBock im italian and i got the answer in the thumbnail

llllllllllama tell us how it should be worded to be easier to understand for you?

Not really, I got it right away. Easy question

Jegvilhavespamnu couldn't have said it better myself

Fine. I'll explain why it was an ok question. According to wikipedia, the definition of a square number is as follows:

In mathematics, a square number or perfect square is an integer that is the square of an integer;[1] in other words, it is the product of some integer with itself. For example, 9 is a square number, since it can be written as 3 × 3.

"Which of these square numbers also happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers?"
Let's list all the square numbers from 0-49, since 49 is the highest number from the possible answers

0^2=0 1^2=1, 2^2=4, 3^2=9, 4^2=16, 5^2=25, 6^2=36, 7^2=49

Using the process of elimination we can eliminate 49, because it has to be the sum of two smaller square numbers therefore 49+0=49 is not valid, and so on. 36 and 16 can be eliminated similarly.

Nowhere does it say the numbers that we add together has to be different from eachother, but they don't have to as 8,12,5, 18 nor 24,5 is a square number. Therefore we end up with the answer, B: 25.
Good luck with your academic degree.

Fine. I'll explain why it was an ok question. According to wikipedia, the definition of a square number is as follows:

In mathematics, a square number or perfect square is an integer that is the square of an integer;[1] in other words, it is the product of some integer with itself. For example, 9 is a square number, since it can be written as 3 × 3.

"Which of these square numbers also happens to be the sum of two smaller square numbers?"
Let's list all the square numbers from 0-49, since 49 is the highest number from the possible answers

0^2=0 1^2=1, 2^2=4, 3^2=9, 4^2=16, 5^2=25, 6^2=36, 7^2=49

Using the process of elimination we can eliminate 49, because it has to be the sum of two _smaller_ square numbers therefore 49+0=49 is not valid, and so on. 36 and 16 can be eliminated similarly.

Nowhere does it say the numbers that we add together has to be different from eachother, but they don't have to as 8,12,5, 18 nor 24,5 is a square number. Therefore we end up with the answer, B: 25.
Good luck with your academic degree.

square numbers are... well 16 is a square number because it's 4². the question is, which square number is also the sum of two smaller square numbers (as it's not specified, they can be the same or not). in this case, the answer is 25, because:
16+9=25 & 16=4², 9=3²
the question is not horribly asked if you are a native speaker and visited 5th grade maths (maybe 7th).
(i'm german, so... it's also well asked if your english is well enough and you know every word in the question)

I am actually from Czech Republic and english is not my first language.
And how am i supposed to interpret this question? Am i looking for same numbers, or do they have to be different?
Are they already to be cubed or am i looking for prime numbers?
Not american, not defending american stupidity, stupid ppl are everywhere, in America there is just a lot of people and i am in uni, so i guess jokes on you.

leave it to a fucking american to blame the question and not his/her stupidity.


Imtotallydiggingthis and D D - the terminology "square number" is very old. It dates back to Euclid. It comes from a time when the only things that were considered to be numbers were the positive integers. So in Euclid's time "square of a number" meant what we would say as "square of a positive integer" today.

Nowadays, our conception of number is much broader than Euclid's, but the terminology remains used the way Euclid used it, since the terminology is pointless if we expand it to our modern notion of "number" (every complex number is the square of some complex number, for example).

Champ of Champs OHHHHH I GET IT , I'M SO STUPID FOR JUST NOW REALIZING ITS PATHAGOREAN. A squared + B squared= C squared

Pythagorahas would die again if he saw the audience's answer.

@Imtotallydiggingthis Oh, yeah. No worries. I should've seen it myself.

@Daniel Rinnunga

I guess I stated it in a misleading way. 16 has already been squared. I said 16 because that was the option in the question. Bu the number in the triplet would be 4 of course. (√7)^2 + 3^2 = 4^2

@Syn Celestial Read the question, 'sum of two smaller square numbers'. 4^2 is not smaller than 16.

@Imtotallydiggingthis Wait let me do the math quick:
 root 7 squared + 3 squared=16 squared.
7+9=256
16≠256
Therefore root 7, 3 and 16 are not pythagorean triplets as they do not satisfy Pythogorean theorem?(Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong)

Thumbs up OP! I take it you're not an American? 😂

The show's questions are normally geared towards questions of memory and not solving puzzles...   That said, the question was not hard given the level it came at.

Smaller square numbers? Serious?

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

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

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

Hi from Russia! And russian educations! LOL

Smaller square numbers? Serious?

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

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

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

Hi from Russia! And russian educations! *LOL*

Иван Васильев

@A random marvel fan - you need to learn how to read.

I never said there is nothing like "perfect square". I said there is nothing like "perfect square number". Big difference.

Perfect square is an actual mathematical term and has a definition in english vocabulary. Perfect square number is not a mathematical term.

Imagine if we, instead of "root", started saying "root number". Don't you think that you would sound idiotic? It's quite important to use proper terminology in mathematics, because sometimes some terms are pretty similar and can make a confusion when people use those terms, yet they are not familiar with it.

@D D <br>Really? There is nothing like perfect square? What is wrong with your education system?

@D D
Really? There is nothing like perfect square? What is wrong with your education system?

@scoob All of the solutions are right going like that..

Just genuinely curious if I'm overlooking something, but wouldn't 0^2 + 4^2 = 16? Is that not why the audience said A?

It is not completely different. Just like a blue car means something different than a red car, but not completely different. A prime number is something different than an irrational number. If we could not categorize things, and numbers, it would be very annoying to communicate :P.

even if that would be the case, so what?

That's the thing I've got beef with. It's stupid that the word number means completely different things in those two cases.

according to wikipedia they got the question right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_number

personally I have only encountered square numbers as something that can be created by multiplying a natural number "with itself". I guess you can make a difference between a square number and a squared number.

the important thing is that √7, 3 and 16 is not a pythagoran triplet as those three numbers are not all natural numbers.

Obviously they meant that, and apparantly English makes no sense so the way they stated it seems to work after all.

@Imtotallydiggingthis maybe they mean natural numbers?

Лeвківський Володимир

Not my fault they named it like that. I do agree it is weird, but doesn't change the fact that question was properly asked.

That would be a very strange nomenclature then. Square is when you take something to the power of two, and a number is any number, not just the natural numbers. So if the meaning of those words change when you combine them, then the English language failed to make sense at that point.

there is not such term as "perfect square number".

there is only a "square number" and there is already a definition of it.

@Imtotallydiggingthis 3 and √7 are not perfect square numbers tho lol ==

√7, 3 and 16 is also a pythagoran triplet. ;)


Bruh i thought it was talking about shapes


Ok, thanks to a comments I did solve this but damm, it was not an easy question to me, im not sharp in maths, I can get sharp but still im to idiot to get this at first sight.


indian and asian people- tell me your reactions 😆😆


4th grade Indians would be able to solve it correctly if time isn't a restriction, and they said knowing algebra wouldn't help you out in real life.


The question is pretty clunky. Blows my mind that the audience was that bad though.


What are they clapping for? For failing him with some middle school math?


All are clapping by making themselves fool 🤣


Pythagoras die again in heaven after watching this clip,


They tricked him with that whole AOL crap too.. and take your time..Pfftt🙄 they were steering him to lose


25 = 16 + 9 <br>For those who didn't get it.

25 = 16 + 9
For those who didn't get it.


He probably flunked in maths in elementary school but at least he will forever think he lost 15 cents instead of 15000 dollars


Why is the audience applauding? 😂<br>It's like they're trolling themselves.

Why is the audience applauding? 😂
It's like they're trolling themselves.


WTF.... That's basic Pythagoras.... Didn't even needed to think for it 🗿


It's funny how the question could simply be.

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


It's a set up 🤣🤣🤣 cos why the hell are the audience clapping so cheerfully?


sorry but if you think this question even have  any difficulty and could not figure out in 5 seconds…it’s an IQ problem, not even about math😅


In the defense of the audience/player, the question was i think purposely adjusted to mistaken sum with product


Kya kiya yaar 15000$ dooba diya yaar<br>Simply quit kardetta . Samajh gaya "Lalach".

Kya kiya yaar 15000$ dooba diya yaar
Simply quit kardetta . Samajh gaya "Lalach".


its 4^2 + 3^2 = 5^2, knows that from the pithagorem infirom or whatever its called


If he had answered correctly, he would have $16,000. Because he was wrong he only won $1,000. That’s $15,000.


The answer is B, because 16 + 9 (both square numbers) are equal to 25.


I mean, just how stupid were the people in the audience that only 30% knew the answer and this is such an easy question, WOW. He could have just squared the first 5 numbers and he would have figured it out.

It's not as easy as you seem to think to be able to process this kind of question under a lot of pressure.<br>And I am saying this as someone who has juggled partial differential equations and numerical approximations of integrals at university for several years, and currently work with Maxwell's Equations in a course on electromagnetic field theory (which by the way uses the Pythagorean Theorem all the time, since it involves a lot of distances between charges - in fact, it involves the Pythagorean Theorem INSIDE INTEGRALS), so I am obviously very good at math, and I still felt somewhat confused by this question for a while.

It's not as easy as you seem to think to be able to process this kind of question under a lot of pressure.
And I am saying this as someone who has juggled partial differential equations and numerical approximations of integrals at university for several years, and currently work with Maxwell's Equations in a course on electromagnetic field theory (which by the way uses the Pythagorean Theorem all the time, since it involves a lot of distances between charges - in fact, it involves the Pythagorean Theorem INSIDE INTEGRALS), so I am obviously very good at math, and I still felt somewhat confused by this question for a while.


That's not such an easy question under pressure....

The 72% were under significantly less pressure than the dude.


Shit, My man really had faith in americans


It's not knowing how to read.<br>People think 16 because 4 x 4 and 4 is a squared number. They assume the wrong question

It's not knowing how to read.
People think 16 because 4 x 4 and 4 is a squared number. They assume the wrong question


!when knowing math costs you to die like your in hell , but i just take the stress and i let the machine do the math. " boy your going to get it. dude---------
\
2)a good wake up feelng . like had dreams about monkeys. it's like not a great thing , but like dude what if there were girl monkeys?!  would you kiss them? if they dropped a knee and like put out a hand , i'd try to teach them to dance. "tap your feet" and they'd be like in our common language. " i just got hands and they'd be clapping and I'd be stomping on a rock and then we'd have music and then the party went. huhuhuhuhuhu. as the wind passes overhead and then we all look up and there is a giant rock passing over head and then we all go silent and go uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu. " a sudden collapse of trees and we would have forests or rain anymore. , but luckily we all went to check up on the crater and turned into dinosaurs , cause they were like way after , that humans wern't worth it and it was so much better, but we checked up on it and found out it wasn't actually dinosaurs and you just started to peel and were actually a snake. There was this one guy who really hated us way in the future called" hell snack" and he was like "your the 15th victim of my high lvl attack! and I was pulling shedding monkeys out of the fire that this what I can recall as the santa clause of the santi maria. Our language changed and we were suprised they didn't understand us. It was all in the brain chemistry of that huge rock that fell from the sky.  Global warming never happened because it left a huge crater in the ocean and we all went to it's jaccuzi   - lw

(1)when knowing math costs you to die like your in hell , but i just take the stress and i let the machine do the math. " boy your going to get it. dude i got this thing, so long ago and we were like fly to singapore! i really love that one~. o mi to fo nan mo guan gong.  rocks don't fail when they fall gemmed super computers do.


Americans Maths is next level hat's of to them. #superpower 😂😂😂


Cogito ergo sum, or something like that! Haha...


Can anyone explain what does it mean, "the sum of two smaller square numbers?".

Two numbers, both of which are squared, that added together, make another square number.

Square 1 + square 2 = square 3.


this also how democracy works, the people elect the wrong person confidently


Ask the audience a maths question lol ... Below par


English version is not as dramatic as the Indian version of the show.


Lesson learned? He will fit right in with 50% of the population.


nah i didnt understand the question i swear it was 16 :'( i thought it was the product not sum


Not really a question you should be asking the audience.. honestly

Ask the audience is reliable on pop culture stuff


In India a second grader would know this lol. Not exaggerating


me:B
wait i’m correct! yay
at least he got 1,000  dollars better than 0 dollar
because 1,000>0


The answer was 25<br>It was from 3^2(9)+4^2(16), give a results of 25

The answer was 25
It was from 3^2(9)+4^2(16), give a results of 25


Big sad 3^2 +4^2 = 5^2 know it by memory bois it might win you 16k


isn’t 36 also valid. 3 to the power of 2 plus 5 to the power of 2?


Meanwhile Asians : this doesn't require even 0.1% of my powers


If the question said squared instead of square it would’ve been much easier to spot


I instantly found 25 in like 5 seconds. 25 is the answer because 16 and 9 are the smaller square numbers. 16 + 9 = 25


For all the smug math experts here, the audience is not bad at math at all.
They are bad at english. The sentence is confusing and i had to read it five times to know what it ment.
If it was written in x y = z format (you know, actual language math uses) most would know.


he was right though, because all of the answers are true as 0 is a square number and 4x4 + 0x0 = 16

The answer must be the sum of two smaller square numbers. Because a number cannot be smaller than itself, you cannot derive the answer by summing it with 0.


25 is square number, 16+9, there 16 and 9 both also square number and there sum is 25.


Tbh the way the question was pharsed is very confusing, I dont blame the contestsntas


It took me a while to work this out in my head because I was using the same “smaller square number”. I got it eventually but it wasn’t the easiest question in the world.


I work with the Pythagorean Theorem in 3 dimensions all the time, even in the forms of VARIABLE factors, and I still found this question a bit confusing for a while.<br>How do you explain that?

I work with the Pythagorean Theorem in 3 dimensions all the time, even in the forms of VARIABLE factors, and I still found this question a bit confusing for a while.
How do you explain that?