fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 6 个月前Cursedmander.xyzexternal-linkmessage-square26fedilinkarrow-up1389arrow-down15
arrow-up1384arrow-down1external-linkCursedmander.xyzfossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 6 个月前message-square26fedilink
minus-squarejeff 👨💻@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6arrow-down2·6 个月前What? No. The divisibility of the side lengths have nothing to do with this. The problem is what’s the smallest square that can contain 17 identical squares. If there were 16 squares it would be simply 4x4.
minus-squarebitjunkie@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·6 个月前And the next perfect divisor one that would hold all the ones in the OP pic would be 5x5. 25 > 17, last I checked.
What? No. The divisibility of the side lengths have nothing to do with this.
The problem is what’s the smallest square that can contain 17 identical squares. If there were 16 squares it would be simply 4x4.
And the next perfect divisor one that would hold all the ones in the OP pic would be 5x5. 25 > 17, last I checked.