By re-arranging the four segments we gain a square

velocirafter · 12-12-2008 6:28pm #1

can anyone explain this???

Cokehead Mother · 12-12-2008 6:42pm

The answer is disappointing.

It's just a crap drawing.

LeixlipRed · 12-12-2008 6:42pm

Hint: Work out some angles in the triangles! They're almost the same but not quite...

velocirafter · 12-12-2008 7:23pm

i went into an image editor and trasferred the shapes from the 1st image to the second one and they fitted perfectly!!

LeixlipRed · 12-12-2008 7:31pm

Now now, you know maths is more exact than that

Draw it out ten times the size and you'll see it doesn't fit. Or just use basic trignometric formulas to prove.

Cokehead Mother · 12-12-2008 7:39pm

velocirafter wrote: »

i went into an image editor and trasferred the shapes from the 1st image to the second one and they fitted perfectly!!

A line has one dimension.

The lines in both pictures have two but you get the idea.

velocirafter · 13-12-2008 12:00am

ya that makes sense. we eventually did the trig to confirm. i was kinda hoping for something a bit more anomalous...oh well.

LeixlipRed · 13-12-2008 12:21pm

velocirafter wrote: »

ya that makes sense. we eventually did the trig to confirm. i was kinda hoping for something a bit more anomalous...oh well.

A bit more anomalous like the collapse of geometry as we know it??

Where did this crop up in your study btw?

velocirafter · 13-12-2008 1:06pm

LeixlipRed wrote: »

A bit more anomalous like the collapse of geometry as we know it?? Where did this crop up in your study btw?

i just stumbled upon it

MathsManiac · 14-12-2008 1:32am

I've a very old Martin Gardner book (1956) called "Mathematics Magic and Mystery" with a chapter in it about fallacies of this kind.

There's a java version of this puzzle here: http://www.cut-the-knot.org/Curriculum/Fallacies/FibonacciCheat.shtml, along with a few other similar ones (linked further down the page).

By re-arranging the four segments we gain a square

Comments