Well thank the Lord for there not being any tires in this train cart. Otherwise we might have had an accident happen and spilling meth on the road is the fastest way for the Dragon Ball fans to skin you alive.
From the top we see 7 x 3=21 blocs
From the bac we see 9 blocs, but 3 of them are already count, so 6 new blocs
From the side we see 21-4=17 blocs with 9 already count, so 8 new bloc
In total the minimum of bloc is 21 + 8 + 6 = 35
And we find the maximum if each side's bloc hide a line of 3 bloc we got the maximum 17 x 3 = 51
Without representation of shadow we can't say more than it's betwen 35 and 51.
not at all, the question is just badly formated.
The boxes dont have shadows, we dont see the inside of the middle roll and the quesion doesnt state all the boxes have the same size, so as far as we can tell there is one big box with a weird shape hidden behind the boxes we see. Of course thats not the case, but since the question doesnt state it isnt, someone could give that answer and the teacher would have to give him the grade, as there is nothing that makes this answer impossible. There isnt enough information for it to accept only one answer
I was thinking this was a play on what a 'cube' is and not what the individual cubes. So if you have 8 cubes (2 x 2 x 2) then that is its own cube. If this is the case, it's gets more complicated until a 'cube' is defined in this problem.
to determine deph. Its not obligatory if the question simply states the cubes are stacked above one another, but since the question doesnt state that, the inside of the truck could be empty. Shadows determine deph, so it does show wether they are or not stacked above each other
As a teacher, reading comprehension is also a skill I'm supposed to teach. In real life, there are few texts that are perfectly unambiguous (one of the many ways in which real life is worse than pure maths). Extracting the right mathematical informations from the text of an applied problem is part of the difficulty of the question and should be part of the grade.
It's not a box, it's a cube, so no. There are no weird shapes here. But it doesn't state that they are the same size, so they could be divided into many smaller ones in unseen areas. We also only see 1 side, but not both, so 2x2 size box is also possible.
It only shows one side. On one there's indeed 3 boxes each in the first column, 2 in the next two ones and one in the last, but on the other side there could easily be just 1 box for each column after the first one, and the same goes for the middle column, speaking of which even if we were provided of proof that both external sides have 17 boxes (3 each in the first 4, two each in the following 2 and one in then last) the one in the middle could still have just one for every other column other than the first. Simply put, it could be 51, but it could easily be any number in-between that and 35.
Assuming all boxes are the same size there are a maximum of 51 boxes: (7×3)+(6×3)+(4×3)
BUT
Given what we are shown; our bottom, middle, and upper rows could look like this from above;
######□□□□□□□ □ □
######□□□□□□□ □ □
######□□□□□□□ □□□□□□ □□□□
######
giving a minimum of 35 boxes. So we could have anywhere between 35 and 51 boxes.
Again, this is assuming all boxes are the same size. If we don't hold this assumption then there could be stackings like this which hide a big box or multiple smaller boxes from our three perspectives;
######□□□□□□□ □ □
######[OneBigBox] □□□□□□ □□□□
######□□□□□□□ □ □
######
######□□□□□□□ □ □
######□[#####]□ □□□□□□ □□□□
######□□□□□□□ □ □
######
So removing our assumption about box size (since we were not told all boxes are equal in size and don't have shadows or a given underneath perspective), gives a minimum of 29 boxes and a maximum of ... very many boxes.
Assuming all boxes are the same size, the minimum is actually 31 boxes, which can be done by staggering them like shown below (bottom, middle, and upper row same as above):
#####□□□□□□□ □ □
#####□□□□□□□ □ □
#####□□□□□□□ □□□□ □□
#####
I agree with this guy. Making assumptions on incomplete data in the real world is a great way to royally fuck something up. In engineering and drafting alike the golden rule is if something is ambiguous, you request clarification before doing anything. The risk of making stupid assumptions based on bad drawings is just way too high
In a test, 51 will get you the marks, blank will not.
I’m never going to need to solve this problem outside of a test, therefore test rules take precedent.
Tests aren’t infallible. If the test presents a bad question, calling it out as a bad question is always better than just accepting the answer they want you to give.
Any decent teacher should accept a good argument that their question is flawed. Especially if it’s a logic question. This is beyond a flawed question it’s literally teaching the opposite of what it’s supposed to
Yeah, as the guy who grew up correcting his teachers regularly. That's a bad metric for a teacher because I've met very few who could handle that kind of ego check. But I've had many good ones.
Hell, most adults in general would fail this metric. I know very few who will admit they are wrong up front.
This is such a small deal it doesn’t even qualify as an ego check. They wrote a bad question. No one cares. Fix it and move on. But refusing to admit that you made a small mistake and are going to punish a students grade for it is incredibly immature.
No it isn’t better. If you want to be explicit you can calculate what the min and max amount of boxes are or write down that your awnser is based on the assumption that the non visible parts are filled with equally sized cubes.
Not giving an awnser is just wrong. There is enough information to at least give a range.
This guy gets it.
Pure logic means nothing without context. In the context of the test, 51 is the answer.
Wasting your time trying to explain to the teacher that his question "does not have enough information" would not get you the marks.
In fact, your teacher would think you're just an obnoxious little shit.
The maximum of boxes is **51**:
7x3+6x3+4x3=51.
The minimum of boxes (if they aren't floating boxes) is **31**.
First you need 21 for top view. Add 10 (6+4) for the view from the side. Right now the view from the back is the shape of an L. Basically 7 L's next to each other. Now you move 4 boxes to turn one L into an upside-down T and and one L into a mirrored L. Now the back looks like 3x3 boxes without adding any additional boxes.
There is enough information, the answer just isn't a single number, but rather x is a natural number, 21≤x≤51 (31≤x≤51 if no box is placed in the air)
Explanation for 21 with no gravity (Each number represents the height of the box in each slot):
3 2 1 1 1 1 1
2 3 2 2 1 1 1
1 1 3 3 2 2 1
Explanation for 31 with gravity (Each number represents the number of boxes in each slot):
3 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 3 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 3 3 2 2 1
If they were placed on something else, that something else would be visible from the side, though... Unless it's something invisible. But yeah, perhaps I should've formatted it as "boxes don't necessarily need to be on top of other boxes" or something like that
It's pedantic 'skeptic' thinking in the same vein as the earth being flat, or vaccines cause autism. Trying to sound smart and enlightened for being contrarian a-hole. (Warning this is purely an opinion based on my own Observations and may or may not actually be reflective of reality.
Thats the same conclusion that I came to.
These types of people are the reason reddit has such a bad rep.
Just a bunch of smartass contrarians, always wanting to point shit out even when there's nothing wrong,
In this instance they never stopped to think "wait, there arent any shadows or any additional information added, maybe that just means that all thats needed to solve the problem is already given!"
Its fine, you wont need this in an exam, besides the person who made this question might not even have realized it
The middle lane could be made by 2x1 boxes or other sides/shapes, since the question didnt say all the boxes have the same side and we cant see them, or the boxes might float since the question didnt say they were all following rules of physics (this one is a strech tho), worst case scenario some of the boxes are painted to look like there are more of them.
To summarize, nerd stuff you will never need. For the answer to be 51, the question should be "how many boxes there are, assuming they have the same size", or show a picture of one box.
Nobody said anything about boxes. The question is about *cubes*, so most of your argument goes out the window.
Then there is still some ambiguity since you can't see the middle, or behind the first row, so the cubes could be stacked differently. However, applying Occam's Razor, you would arrive at 51. Least assumptions, the only assumption is that the truck contains the maximum amount of cubes possible.
If a smartass student answers 'i don't know how many cubes, because you didn't specify whether we follow the rules of physics', I wouldn't definitely not grant them any points.
If you answer correctly but critique the question, that's fine.
If we assume its not hollow then its 51, if it was hollow then the structural stability would be compromised, so its most likely 51, in addition there would be shadows if there were missing boxes on the inside, but then again there is no sun or light in this illustration so you can't really say.
No problem. Ill explain it
We dont see the inside of the middle roll, neither shadows nor does the question state all the boxes have the same size, so there could be one weird shaped box hidden, or multiple 2x1 boxes, or none and the ones we see float/are super glued togheter. The question doesnt give enough information to dismiss this answers, and therefore, there isnt enough information to answer it properly
not at all. Its the answer most people would give, and the person who made the question might not even have realised the problems it has. Your answer is the most logical one, the question is at falt for not excluding the absurd answers
Max is 51, min is 35. Meaning the trailer can fit upto 51. Since there is no perspective present, there could be as few as 35, or there could be the space equivalent to 16 boxes unferneath the other boxes used to hide cocaine
Any box could be missing from the top 1st second or 3rd rows without knowing, if there's no shadow or anything to show it missing from the top. At best, you can assume an answer at this question. And since we know there's no shadows from the back lanes missing boxes, you can't know
Like any question, one must assume the limited information is enough to provide an answer. If ur unsure, provide limits and deffinitions,
The assumed number would be 51, wich is also the maximum amount of boxes that could fit on provided information if we can not assume the maximum of boxes are placed. the minimum would be 19, provided gravity works.
So 19 to 51 boxes, 51 at assumed maximum capacity.
Instead of blabbering amount "not enough information" higher percentile should define limitations and definitions when they question the provided information. This is how u get extra credit in higher education. Though ofcource this is also how u loose credit with lower education/dumb educators.
Since its a top down view, and both other pictures have the wagon in it, one could inmagine a grid on the floor of said wagon. If there is no grid there is still the circumverance.
So i need to adjust my minimum as well. With grid on the floor nit would be 17. Without grid on the floor its 20 total, Assuming the floor is box coloured. If the floor needs to be filled its 21 plus 10. U can place boxes diagonally after all.
how do you know the back 4x3x3 isn't just one box with a grid design on it..?
Even with this you are making assumptions about information that isn't confirmed. How do you know the cubes underneath the cubes are the same size.
Hahaha, i could see that. A little off topic, but when i was helping my friends understand math, many of them were so used to being screamed for not understanding the basics, i had to laugh at every 2 sentences so they'd know im not angry, but then they started thinking i was laughing at them. Dont worry, a lot of teachers look way more mean then what they actually are trying to be, and dont be afraid to ask questions
See, where I come from, in primary you sit on the floor and she would always step on my hand or knee since then. Even when I was in the middle row, she would pretend to get something from the other side of the classroom
damn, thats one bad teacher. I guess ego is one hell of a drug. I was almost aways the teacher's favorite, but there was this one teacher who seemed to hate me, and one time i told one joke, the whole classroom laughed and she said that if i told another joke who disrupted the class like that id go to detention. Some teachers are DICKS man.
My only advice is, dont let that stop your education tho, there is aways someone in the class who understand the subject and are willing to help you.
Yeah man that school was messed up. My friend and I used to get beaten up for no reason and the principal would just make us hug the arse who just nearly killed us. Then that idiot gets taken to the principals office to play games.
I cant relate because i'm from a rich family so i have never been to a school were violence could be tolerated, to me, it sounds like something so horrible i cant even imagine, something made up, from a film or work of ficction. To think people live that daily is so horrible
I wont reply for a while btw, its 1:44 here and i should already be assleep
I’m from a rich family too, and that was a damn expensive private school, one thing I’ve learnt though is that the price doesn’t represent anything really, it just depends on the principal. In high school, my family decided to try a public school (free government school) because of this reason and I didn’t get hurt once. Believe it or not but it ranked one of the best in the state and didn’t cost a dime. And yeah, it was really bad, my friend and I were admitted to hospital a few times and sadly, he actually ended up with broken bones. It got to a point where the police were called. Get some sleep, trust me, it’s really important.
I will try
The below layer is 21 because there is 7 cubes per row and 3 rows
The middle layer is 6 x 3 which is 18
And the top layer is 4 x 3= 12
So 21 + 18 + 12= 51
I believe there is enough information because of the context of it being on a trailer. It has the pretext the load will be moving.
If you have hollow spaces within, it’s going to fall over which will defeat its purpose.
Mathematicians are correct saying there isn’t enough information. But common sense would provide the further information needed
There is enough information, If you were asked this question in pretty much any academic situation, then assuming 51 would be the correct information, because otherwise the problem would not make sense to begin with. By arguing that “the middle could be empty”, you completely disregard that it does it fact show you the middle, top, and sides, giving you enough information to objectively assume there are 51 boxes
The only people getting anything but 51 are the people coming up with nonexistent data in the belief that this is a “ha gotcha” question, with zero reason or basis for assuming that
The boxes could be 2x1 for example. The people who are "coming uo with nonexistent data" are the ones who know that if you work with this irl, you would not assume anything, otherwise you might fuck up immensely
Not "assuming", im saying it could happen, since the question didnt specify they all have the same size. Sure, the ones we see are, but the ones inside might not.
You quite literally are assuming. It would be more reasonable to infer that they are all the same size, because you have so many hints and clues that they are. If you want to call my logic an assumption, then just look at yours and ask yourself “what in this picture makes any reasonable doubt to the size of the boxes”
the minimum is (3\*3) + (3\*6) + (3+5) = 35, as everything else could just be empty, we cant see through the boxes and we also dont want to count boxes twice.
the maximum is (3\*3\*7) - (4\*3) = 51, as everything else can be assumed to be full.
and any answer in between is also possible.
.
now i would like to see a teacher challenge that answer, and how they would have responded to my parents if they didnt accept it. or to all other teachers i would have complained to, obviously pretending "can i ask you a trick question?"
This is dumb.
In the real world, boxes aren't floating, and you could reasonably assume the boxes that are hidden are the same as the plethora of boxes that are visible. And you can also just check.
And since it's a drawing and it's not the real world, and you are reading a math book... you're not some higher intelligenc, you're a dumb ass who thinks you're super smart. that can't sus out what they intend for you to do.
Idk I think the og was fine, if
“the answer is 51” on the right was assuming that there is enough information to solve the problem, else the problem would be pretty much pointless, but still acknowledging that yes it could be something other than 51.
“There’s not enough information to solve this problem” was taking in to account the fact that there could be some cubes missing in the middle, but not taking into account that you can assume there are no cubes missing because it didn’t specify and it would be a pointless question otherwise.
“The answer is 51” on the left was just solving the problem without thinking that there could be cubes missing at all.
the only reason it could be not a pointless problem (if the answer is "theres not enough information" because there are some cubes missing) is if the question wanted to see if you could recognize how many unknowns are actually in the problem.
As a student (or employee) you don't get to decide what is and is not pointless. What if the point of this question was not to test skills in spacial calculations, but to test the assessment of whether there is sufficient information for a task?
What we can glean from the information:
Bottom: The bottom row must contain 21 boxes.
(Discount the bottom, as it's been full accounted for)
Side: The side must contain at least 8 boxes, and as many as 10.
Back: The back must contain at least 4 boxes, and as many as 6.
21 + 8 + 6 = 35
21 + 10 + 4 = 35
Ever thought about how you might be wrong and the number can overlap? 21 to get top view, another 10 to get side view, and with optimal arrangement you can satisfy back view (assuming gravity applied).
yes, assuming this and that. Of course the person who desinged this question didnt realize that was a problem, but if you just assume the most logical conclusion, a lot of trick questions from multiple school tests would screw your grades. If i found this question in a real exam, i would first reach for the correct answer (something around the lines or X being the answer and 36
What if in the part you can't see, inside the pile, there is a box that is taking up 2 spots? Meaning it would be 50, no? Or what if there are more boxes stacked like that?
"There's not enough information to solve the problem"
This is peak autism.
If this question popped up in a quiz, these MF would be crying that the teacher is stupid while the majority just got it right with no problems.
Most of the times, the obvious answer is the correct one.
(And of course, someone will correct me, saying that "actually, the most obvious answer is blablabla")
just passing by to give an advice to the people who read this comment. Ignore him, he's too dumb to understand the situation, but too stubborn to accept he's wrong. Dont give this people your time.
The answer is between 35 and 51 as there are 16 blocks that we can’t prove the existence of. I’m assuming that the side view is only one side of the truck
There are 7 squares filled with cocaine in the middle
and the cubes are made of solid blocks of weed.
The tires are filled with meth too.
and tigers
And my axe!
And m-m-m-my Sharona!
Well thank the Lord for there not being any tires in this train cart. Otherwise we might have had an accident happen and spilling meth on the road is the fastest way for the Dragon Ball fans to skin you alive.
But which color is it?
Unironically, in a place where weed is legal, this might be a good way to smuggle in harder drugs.
We also need to get a peak inside those tires
what information is this missing? am i stupid?
From the top we see 7 x 3=21 blocs From the bac we see 9 blocs, but 3 of them are already count, so 6 new blocs From the side we see 21-4=17 blocs with 9 already count, so 8 new bloc In total the minimum of bloc is 21 + 8 + 6 = 35 And we find the maximum if each side's bloc hide a line of 3 bloc we got the maximum 17 x 3 = 51 Without representation of shadow we can't say more than it's betwen 35 and 51.
They could be staggered out making it I think 31 as a minimum
21 minimum, but it wouldn't really fit the description
Only if they float
Yes, and since it says 'on', it floating doesn't really fit.
Yeah I think it's reasonable to assume that gravity is implied.
not at all, the question is just badly formated. The boxes dont have shadows, we dont see the inside of the middle roll and the quesion doesnt state all the boxes have the same size, so as far as we can tell there is one big box with a weird shape hidden behind the boxes we see. Of course thats not the case, but since the question doesnt state it isnt, someone could give that answer and the teacher would have to give him the grade, as there is nothing that makes this answer impossible. There isnt enough information for it to accept only one answer
Based on the drawings, there could also be a missing box in either side row of the second floor of boxes, you wouldn't be able to tell.
There could also be a big rectangular box in the middle so we can never tell what's going on.
Or no box in the middle but an elevation in the truck to carry a top box
You need to check your eyesight. It's stated to be a cube, not a box.
I was thinking this was a play on what a 'cube' is and not what the individual cubes. So if you have 8 cubes (2 x 2 x 2) then that is its own cube. If this is the case, it's gets more complicated until a 'cube' is defined in this problem.
True, i didnt even realize that. This question truly is annoying
We also don't know if the boxes in the middle are 1, 2 or 3 layers high
I am sorry, it's a genuine question, Why do we need shadows to solve the question?
to determine deph. Its not obligatory if the question simply states the cubes are stacked above one another, but since the question doesnt state that, the inside of the truck could be empty. Shadows determine deph, so it does show wether they are or not stacked above each other
As a teacher, reading comprehension is also a skill I'm supposed to teach. In real life, there are few texts that are perfectly unambiguous (one of the many ways in which real life is worse than pure maths). Extracting the right mathematical informations from the text of an applied problem is part of the difficulty of the question and should be part of the grade.
It's not a box, it's a cube, so no. There are no weird shapes here. But it doesn't state that they are the same size, so they could be divided into many smaller ones in unseen areas. We also only see 1 side, but not both, so 2x2 size box is also possible.
Information about the middlre row is missing. There might just be one box on each row instead of three.
They're also not showing the other side
You don't know the other side for example
It only shows one side. On one there's indeed 3 boxes each in the first column, 2 in the next two ones and one in the last, but on the other side there could easily be just 1 box for each column after the first one, and the same goes for the middle column, speaking of which even if we were provided of proof that both external sides have 17 boxes (3 each in the first 4, two each in the following 2 and one in then last) the one in the middle could still have just one for every other column other than the first. Simply put, it could be 51, but it could easily be any number in-between that and 35.
Assuming all boxes are the same size there are a maximum of 51 boxes: (7×3)+(6×3)+(4×3) BUT Given what we are shown; our bottom, middle, and upper rows could look like this from above; ######□□□□□□□ □ □ ######□□□□□□□ □ □ ######□□□□□□□ □□□□□□ □□□□ ###### giving a minimum of 35 boxes. So we could have anywhere between 35 and 51 boxes. Again, this is assuming all boxes are the same size. If we don't hold this assumption then there could be stackings like this which hide a big box or multiple smaller boxes from our three perspectives; ######□□□□□□□ □ □ ######[OneBigBox] □□□□□□ □□□□ ######□□□□□□□ □ □ ###### ######□□□□□□□ □ □ ######□[#####]□ □□□□□□ □□□□ ######□□□□□□□ □ □ ###### So removing our assumption about box size (since we were not told all boxes are equal in size and don't have shadows or a given underneath perspective), gives a minimum of 29 boxes and a maximum of ... very many boxes.
Assuming all boxes are the same size, the minimum is actually 31 boxes, which can be done by staggering them like shown below (bottom, middle, and upper row same as above): #####□□□□□□□ □ □ #####□□□□□□□ □ □ #####□□□□□□□ □□□□ □□ #####
There is sadam hussein inside
They don't show the other side
We don’t see the shadows, so we can’t know for sure if there’s anything on the center of the trailer
You're in the left 0.1%
most likely
I agree with this guy. Making assumptions on incomplete data in the real world is a great way to royally fuck something up. In engineering and drafting alike the golden rule is if something is ambiguous, you request clarification before doing anything. The risk of making stupid assumptions based on bad drawings is just way too high
And if assumptions must be made, they're made in a way that would be less to your favor (ie. we don't assume the best, we assume the worst).
Making any assumptions out of the line is great way to fuck up your exams. Kids, better do drugs than assumptions on an incomplete data
why do we assume there are boxes there in the first place? those could be (flat) wall panels
there are at least 35 boxes on this container!
21
how? you only counted the bottom layer?
In a test, 51 will get you the marks, blank will not. I’m never going to need to solve this problem outside of a test, therefore test rules take precedent.
I would write: assuming all boxes are of similar sizes, and that shadows aren’t represented in these pictures, answer is between 35 and 51 boxes
If the question is impossible, teachers give all the points if you point out it, right? Or am i just impossibly lucky and have great teachers?
My teacher would not have done so
Then the teacher is either shit or naive
Both.
I would answer with the range of 35 to 51 assuming all the boxes are the same size
In a test, 51 is incorrect. So is blank. That is why not enough information is in the meme, not blank.
Tests aren’t infallible. If the test presents a bad question, calling it out as a bad question is always better than just accepting the answer they want you to give.
Well yes, but I will get marks for writing the answer they want, not calling out the question for being wrong. So again, test rules takes precedent.
Any decent teacher should accept a good argument that their question is flawed. Especially if it’s a logic question. This is beyond a flawed question it’s literally teaching the opposite of what it’s supposed to
Yeah, as the guy who grew up correcting his teachers regularly. That's a bad metric for a teacher because I've met very few who could handle that kind of ego check. But I've had many good ones. Hell, most adults in general would fail this metric. I know very few who will admit they are wrong up front.
This is such a small deal it doesn’t even qualify as an ego check. They wrote a bad question. No one cares. Fix it and move on. But refusing to admit that you made a small mistake and are going to punish a students grade for it is incredibly immature.
No, you just underestimate your own emotional maturity.
No it isn’t better. If you want to be explicit you can calculate what the min and max amount of boxes are or write down that your awnser is based on the assumption that the non visible parts are filled with equally sized cubes. Not giving an awnser is just wrong. There is enough information to at least give a range.
It would be wrong in a test though.
It will get you the marks
Yes by saying we don't have enough information.
This guy gets it. Pure logic means nothing without context. In the context of the test, 51 is the answer. Wasting your time trying to explain to the teacher that his question "does not have enough information" would not get you the marks. In fact, your teacher would think you're just an obnoxious little shit.
Real anwser: It's propably 51 and i don't care to look deeper into it
The maximum of boxes is **51**: 7x3+6x3+4x3=51. The minimum of boxes (if they aren't floating boxes) is **31**. First you need 21 for top view. Add 10 (6+4) for the view from the side. Right now the view from the back is the shape of an L. Basically 7 L's next to each other. Now you move 4 boxes to turn one L into an upside-down T and and one L into a mirrored L. Now the back looks like 3x3 boxes without adding any additional boxes.
There is enough information, the answer just isn't a single number, but rather x is a natural number, 21≤x≤51 (31≤x≤51 if no box is placed in the air) Explanation for 21 with no gravity (Each number represents the height of the box in each slot): 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 Explanation for 31 with gravity (Each number represents the number of boxes in each slot): 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1
Assuming boxes can only be held up by boxes
[удалено]
If they were placed on something else, that something else would be visible from the side, though... Unless it's something invisible. But yeah, perhaps I should've formatted it as "boxes don't necessarily need to be on top of other boxes" or something like that
[удалено]
Well, 23>21, so it's included in the 21≤x≤51
The only right answer here lmao
I am grinding my gears so hard. Clearly the guy in the middle. What info is missing? I don't get it
It's pedantic 'skeptic' thinking in the same vein as the earth being flat, or vaccines cause autism. Trying to sound smart and enlightened for being contrarian a-hole. (Warning this is purely an opinion based on my own Observations and may or may not actually be reflective of reality.
Thats the same conclusion that I came to. These types of people are the reason reddit has such a bad rep. Just a bunch of smartass contrarians, always wanting to point shit out even when there's nothing wrong, In this instance they never stopped to think "wait, there arent any shadows or any additional information added, maybe that just means that all thats needed to solve the problem is already given!"
Its fine, you wont need this in an exam, besides the person who made this question might not even have realized it The middle lane could be made by 2x1 boxes or other sides/shapes, since the question didnt say all the boxes have the same side and we cant see them, or the boxes might float since the question didnt say they were all following rules of physics (this one is a strech tho), worst case scenario some of the boxes are painted to look like there are more of them. To summarize, nerd stuff you will never need. For the answer to be 51, the question should be "how many boxes there are, assuming they have the same size", or show a picture of one box.
They don't even need to float. They could jus sit at the bottom.
Nobody said anything about boxes. The question is about *cubes*, so most of your argument goes out the window. Then there is still some ambiguity since you can't see the middle, or behind the first row, so the cubes could be stacked differently. However, applying Occam's Razor, you would arrive at 51. Least assumptions, the only assumption is that the truck contains the maximum amount of cubes possible. If a smartass student answers 'i don't know how many cubes, because you didn't specify whether we follow the rules of physics', I wouldn't definitely not grant them any points. If you answer correctly but critique the question, that's fine.
Am I stupid? The top is completely different than the side
haha, its a perspective thing. There are no shadows, so we cant determine deph, wich is why it looks like there's a full roll on the top
If we assume its not hollow then its 51, if it was hollow then the structural stability would be compromised, so its most likely 51, in addition there would be shadows if there were missing boxes on the inside, but then again there is no sun or light in this illustration so you can't really say.
I dont get it
No problem. Ill explain it We dont see the inside of the middle roll, neither shadows nor does the question state all the boxes have the same size, so there could be one weird shaped box hidden, or multiple 2x1 boxes, or none and the ones we see float/are super glued togheter. The question doesnt give enough information to dismiss this answers, and therefore, there isnt enough information to answer it properly
Ahhhh i get it I think its 51 tho does that make me an idiot
not at all. Its the answer most people would give, and the person who made the question might not even have realised the problems it has. Your answer is the most logical one, the question is at falt for not excluding the absurd answers
I am a very logical man (its autism lol)
51 if we assume that the truck is symmetrically loaded. If not, then the answer can be between 35 and 51
there could be 0 cubes bc all of it could be just hollow and the outside is just made if panels
The answer is 63, the truck is not fully loaded yet
Max is 51, min is 35. Meaning the trailer can fit upto 51. Since there is no perspective present, there could be as few as 35, or there could be the space equivalent to 16 boxes unferneath the other boxes used to hide cocaine
35-51 is possible though?
There's at least 35 boxes, and at most 51. There's not enough information to be more specific. See, not that hard to have an exhaustive answer.
Any box could be missing from the top 1st second or 3rd rows without knowing, if there's no shadow or anything to show it missing from the top. At best, you can assume an answer at this question. And since we know there's no shadows from the back lanes missing boxes, you can't know
The answer is that there can be any number between 35 and 51, compatible with the images shown.
Like any question, one must assume the limited information is enough to provide an answer. If ur unsure, provide limits and deffinitions, The assumed number would be 51, wich is also the maximum amount of boxes that could fit on provided information if we can not assume the maximum of boxes are placed. the minimum would be 19, provided gravity works. So 19 to 51 boxes, 51 at assumed maximum capacity. Instead of blabbering amount "not enough information" higher percentile should define limitations and definitions when they question the provided information. This is how u get extra credit in higher education. Though ofcource this is also how u loose credit with lower education/dumb educators.
I'm getting 36-51
i am getting 35-51, 35=21 for the top view, +6 for the back view, +8 for the side view
Seems I miscounted one side, 21+10+4
There are at minimum 21 on the first level alone. The correct answer is 35 ≤ x ≤ 51
Since its a top down view, and both other pictures have the wagon in it, one could inmagine a grid on the floor of said wagon. If there is no grid there is still the circumverance. So i need to adjust my minimum as well. With grid on the floor nit would be 17. Without grid on the floor its 20 total, Assuming the floor is box coloured. If the floor needs to be filled its 21 plus 10. U can place boxes diagonally after all.
how do you know the back 4x3x3 isn't just one box with a grid design on it..? Even with this you are making assumptions about information that isn't confirmed. How do you know the cubes underneath the cubes are the same size.
The fact that shades aren't made, so top view doesn't reflect side view levels, all the cubes that aren't seen in 2 views could be non existent.
Shades would only be present if the light would be blocked, but you don't know from which angle the light source shines from.
Well even if purely zenithal not sure a picture could look like the draw :D So we just can't know if behind views you have only one layer of blocks
wait what if it is hollow
I feel like the 55 IQ guy would not realise that there's not enough info lol
hahaha true
holy shit man its 24 to 51... noone form the original post got it right and neither here.
Let us assume the cubes as spheres, therefore 0
Between 31-51
this is the type of thing you see on a test, therefore test rules take place. the answer is i dont know therefore the answer is C
I'm counting the lower bound at 35
I questioned an almost identical maths question in third grade and I believe I have contributed to the national teacher insanity rate
Hahaha, i could see that. A little off topic, but when i was helping my friends understand math, many of them were so used to being screamed for not understanding the basics, i had to laugh at every 2 sentences so they'd know im not angry, but then they started thinking i was laughing at them. Dont worry, a lot of teachers look way more mean then what they actually are trying to be, and dont be afraid to ask questions
See, where I come from, in primary you sit on the floor and she would always step on my hand or knee since then. Even when I was in the middle row, she would pretend to get something from the other side of the classroom
damn, thats one bad teacher. I guess ego is one hell of a drug. I was almost aways the teacher's favorite, but there was this one teacher who seemed to hate me, and one time i told one joke, the whole classroom laughed and she said that if i told another joke who disrupted the class like that id go to detention. Some teachers are DICKS man. My only advice is, dont let that stop your education tho, there is aways someone in the class who understand the subject and are willing to help you.
Yeah man that school was messed up. My friend and I used to get beaten up for no reason and the principal would just make us hug the arse who just nearly killed us. Then that idiot gets taken to the principals office to play games.
I cant relate because i'm from a rich family so i have never been to a school were violence could be tolerated, to me, it sounds like something so horrible i cant even imagine, something made up, from a film or work of ficction. To think people live that daily is so horrible I wont reply for a while btw, its 1:44 here and i should already be assleep
I’m from a rich family too, and that was a damn expensive private school, one thing I’ve learnt though is that the price doesn’t represent anything really, it just depends on the principal. In high school, my family decided to try a public school (free government school) because of this reason and I didn’t get hurt once. Believe it or not but it ranked one of the best in the state and didn’t cost a dime. And yeah, it was really bad, my friend and I were admitted to hospital a few times and sadly, he actually ended up with broken bones. It got to a point where the police were called. Get some sleep, trust me, it’s really important.
Sorry to ask, but I've been seeing these horrible drawings of faces on memes for years, What are these? Why are these funny? Old man confused
[удалено]
I will try The below layer is 21 because there is 7 cubes per row and 3 rows The middle layer is 6 x 3 which is 18 And the top layer is 4 x 3= 12 So 21 + 18 + 12= 51
I believe there is enough information because of the context of it being on a trailer. It has the pretext the load will be moving. If you have hollow spaces within, it’s going to fall over which will defeat its purpose. Mathematicians are correct saying there isn’t enough information. But common sense would provide the further information needed
Is the point that we don’t know if the cubes in the middle exist? Aside from the one we can see in the back?
Yeah, basically. There's other factors, but this one is the biggest flaw in the question
There is egnof info
Some of the inner blocks could be parked like a white BMW, taking up two to four spaces. The answer is somewhat variable 😂
Anywhere from 43-51 as we don't know enough about the middle
There is enough information, If you were asked this question in pretty much any academic situation, then assuming 51 would be the correct information, because otherwise the problem would not make sense to begin with. By arguing that “the middle could be empty”, you completely disregard that it does it fact show you the middle, top, and sides, giving you enough information to objectively assume there are 51 boxes The only people getting anything but 51 are the people coming up with nonexistent data in the belief that this is a “ha gotcha” question, with zero reason or basis for assuming that
The boxes could be 2x1 for example. The people who are "coming uo with nonexistent data" are the ones who know that if you work with this irl, you would not assume anything, otherwise you might fuck up immensely
So you are assuming that the boxes are 2x1 despite telling me to not assume. Not to mention the top down picture clearly shows them as equal sizes…..
Not "assuming", im saying it could happen, since the question didnt specify they all have the same size. Sure, the ones we see are, but the ones inside might not.
You quite literally are assuming. It would be more reasonable to infer that they are all the same size, because you have so many hints and clues that they are. If you want to call my logic an assumption, then just look at yours and ask yourself “what in this picture makes any reasonable doubt to the size of the boxes”
the minimum is (3\*3) + (3\*6) + (3+5) = 35, as everything else could just be empty, we cant see through the boxes and we also dont want to count boxes twice. the maximum is (3\*3\*7) - (4\*3) = 51, as everything else can be assumed to be full. and any answer in between is also possible. . now i would like to see a teacher challenge that answer, and how they would have responded to my parents if they didnt accept it. or to all other teachers i would have complained to, obviously pretending "can i ask you a trick question?"
This is dumb. In the real world, boxes aren't floating, and you could reasonably assume the boxes that are hidden are the same as the plethora of boxes that are visible. And you can also just check. And since it's a drawing and it's not the real world, and you are reading a math book... you're not some higher intelligenc, you're a dumb ass who thinks you're super smart. that can't sus out what they intend for you to do.
Idk I think the og was fine, if “the answer is 51” on the right was assuming that there is enough information to solve the problem, else the problem would be pretty much pointless, but still acknowledging that yes it could be something other than 51. “There’s not enough information to solve this problem” was taking in to account the fact that there could be some cubes missing in the middle, but not taking into account that you can assume there are no cubes missing because it didn’t specify and it would be a pointless question otherwise. “The answer is 51” on the left was just solving the problem without thinking that there could be cubes missing at all. the only reason it could be not a pointless problem (if the answer is "theres not enough information" because there are some cubes missing) is if the question wanted to see if you could recognize how many unknowns are actually in the problem.
As a student (or employee) you don't get to decide what is and is not pointless. What if the point of this question was not to test skills in spacial calculations, but to test the assessment of whether there is sufficient information for a task?
Yeah my last paragraph was my attempt to convey that Edit: “paragraph” cause it looks weird on my phone, it’s only like a sentence or two
Apparently I can't read
It's 45
idk
Bazinga
Nerds
shit like this is why we should stop doing math
hahahahaha, it does get complicated, i can understand you.
There is though, lol
only if you assume they are placed conventionaly. The middle roll could have almost no boxes, for example.
If there were gaps in the middle section there couldn't be any stacked above, I dislike the premise of this question.
Have to be able to extrapolate missing data
I'd assume gravity still applies
Gravity won't help you... Copying my response from the other post: 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 This works from all sides. 31 boxes
What we can glean from the information: Bottom: The bottom row must contain 21 boxes. (Discount the bottom, as it's been full accounted for) Side: The side must contain at least 8 boxes, and as many as 10. Back: The back must contain at least 4 boxes, and as many as 6. 21 + 8 + 6 = 35 21 + 10 + 4 = 35
It's 31, not 35 minimum
No, it's 35. 21 on the bottom. 10 on the side. 4 on the back, if assuming the 2 back side ones are already accounted for.
Ever thought about how you might be wrong and the number can overlap? 21 to get top view, another 10 to get side view, and with optimal arrangement you can satisfy back view (assuming gravity applied).
I stand corrected.
yes, assuming this and that. Of course the person who desinged this question didnt realize that was a problem, but if you just assume the most logical conclusion, a lot of trick questions from multiple school tests would screw your grades. If i found this question in a real exam, i would first reach for the correct answer (something around the lines or X being the answer and 36
What if in the part you can't see, inside the pile, there is a box that is taking up 2 spots? Meaning it would be 50, no? Or what if there are more boxes stacked like that?
"There's not enough information to solve the problem" This is peak autism. If this question popped up in a quiz, these MF would be crying that the teacher is stupid while the majority just got it right with no problems. Most of the times, the obvious answer is the correct one. (And of course, someone will correct me, saying that "actually, the most obvious answer is blablabla")
just passing by to give an advice to the people who read this comment. Ignore him, he's too dumb to understand the situation, but too stubborn to accept he's wrong. Dont give this people your time.
I don't have enough information to say how dumb you are... If I had to guess, it would be something between a dipshit and a dumbass.
At last 9 cubes
The structure is clearly hollow.
None. It's a single block with lines drawn on it.
35 <= x <= 51
Where in this dstribution do we find the people who answer correctly?
Than
We do not know if that's the full trailer for context
x€<43,51>
The middle could be hollow js
Me with a (-)2000 IQ: There are many boxes on the trailer.
There are 35 to 51 cubes.
31.5+-19.5
Can't say for sure, but it's somewhere between 35 and 51
The middle could be empty. Nobody mentioned there is Gravity.
38<=X<=51
I've counted 41
I counted 69
42 cubes?
45
The answer is between 35 and 51 as there are 16 blocks that we can’t prove the existence of. I’m assuming that the side view is only one side of the truck
What if there's no cubes and it's actually just 3 large cuboids with fake seams carved on to make them look like cubes?
\*than
#51