Discus: SAT/ACT Tests and Test Preparation: July 2003 Archive: Zerg - Where is your answer? Two days have passed!
 By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 12:23 am: Edit

Q5

---- ----
| | |
---------
| | | |
---------

You have a box like this (there are no breaks, just connect all the places where there are breaks) 2 boxes on the top and 3 boxes on the bottom. How can you with one single unbroken line go through every single like in these boxes. You can't cross anyone line twice. (e.g. the very top horizontal line is 2 lines, not 1. The middle is 4 lines, and the bottom is 3 lines. And you have to cross out the vertical lines in between as well.)

That's enough for now..

 By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 10:51 am: Edit

Keeping this way upppppppppp

 By Zerg_Vvins (Zerg_Vvins) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 11:23 am: Edit

draw a line through the top middle line. from the very top into the bottom middle box, and that's how you get rid of that line and the rest will be easy.

it's a trick question
don't always rely on your math xiggi

 By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 12:16 pm: Edit

Quote:

it's a trick question
don't always rely on your math xiggi

That is not an answer and do not try to patronize me by copying one of Serene's comment. To begin with, there is math proof for the problem since it IS a Euler derived problem.

You posted a "classic" problem and now, you offer a first-grade answer that makes only sense to you. At least have the intellectual integrity to try to formulate something intelligible.

As far as I know, you copied the problem from one of the puzzle sites and did not even understand the problem. Just the same way as the math problem from a few days ago where you offered K = infinity as an answer.

I have made my point. Time to move on!

 By Zerg_Vvins (Zerg_Vvins) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 12:22 pm: Edit

er... this is my unique statement.

first of all this is a puzzle from a book I read about 8 years ago. And it's not the same as the bridge problem, so why are you trying to force the bridge problem upon this one? also my first grade answer solved it whereas your college math didn't provide you with an answer?

can a line not be crossed both vertically and horizontally?

I am just saying that I think you are too ingrained in what you have learned that you refuse to come out of the box...

 By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 02:09 pm: Edit

Wrong, you did not solve ANYTHING. Your so called "answer" means absolutey nothing.

can a line not be crossed both vertically and horizontally?

What kind of dumb question/statement is that? If you have a vertical line and you follow it down (by tracing it), you never cross it.

I am just saying that I think you are too ingrained in what you have learned that you refuse to come out of the box...

I love to think "out of the box" but thinking "out of the box" still requires a modicum of knowledge and the intelligence to apply a different theory.

By now, we all have seen that you are unable to provide any "proofs" but that we should recognize you as some kind of genius or savant. Well I have one recognition for you: IDIOT SAVANT!

 By Serene (Serene) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 02:13 pm: Edit

Well.... i believe the original question is "through" and not "cross", so if you trace a line, that counts as 'through' but not 'crossed' =)

 By Zerg_Vvins (Zerg_Vvins) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 02:18 pm: Edit

you can go through the line vertically as well as horizontally.
xiggi, get a peice of tape. can you draw a line horizontally across it? can you draw a line vertically across it? yes yes

I don't want to argue with you guys on this problem.

 By Zerg_Vvins (Zerg_Vvins) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 02:19 pm: Edit

just in case I am not clear, you can draw a line very wide or very skinny.

 By Serene (Serene) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 02:27 pm: Edit

zerg: though I'd like to argue on xiggi's behalf, a line technically has only one dimension. It's not a long long rectangle ^^

 By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 02:34 pm: Edit

Did I write the following sentence?

And you have to cross out the vertical lines in between as well

What is next? Try to find an obscure definition of "through" a la " a river runs through it"? As far as I concerned, we are through with this. Let's move on! I'll stick to my lacking knowledge about identical lines and intersecting lines.

It is a done deal and my conclusion won't change.

 By Zerg_Vvins (Zerg_Vvins) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 02:41 pm: Edit

serene, consider it from a bacteria's point of view
xiggi, I told you it's a trick question. Lets leave it at that ok??

 By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 03:20 pm: Edit

This is not to have the last word, but you may also look at this issue.

Let's assume that one does accept that a fat line is drawn to separate the 2 two top boxes, and that your line runs through it from top to bottom and finally also accepts that it counts as "crossed". Good news until you realize that the moment you are crossing the TOP horizontal lines of the TWO boxes and/or the top horizontal line of the middle of the three boxes. Actually when you "penetrate" the middle bottom box by "tracing" the middle line, you also crossed both top boxes since the top boxes share that point with the middle horizontal line.

Oh well !

 By Zerg_Vvins (Zerg_Vvins) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 03:22 pm: Edit

ah but you see... the beauty of it is

the point is where one line ends and another starts.

 By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 03:37 pm: Edit

.

 By Zerg_Vvins (Zerg_Vvins) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 03:38 pm: Edit

once