Poll of the Day > If you can solve this SECOND MATH Problem for 6 year olds, i'll be IMPRESSED!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

here is the second Math problem for 6 year olds that can be a bit tricky..but asian mathematicians who designed this said it will be good to increase their ability to do math.....

So if you can get this, i'd be impressed :o

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/21/12/436F595600000578-4809178-image-a-74_1503315086838.jpg
---

If it's not 54 I call math hacks.
---

8
---

The answer should be an easy one unless it's based on nonsense logic or be a trick answer (like one of those American common core problems).
---

This is simple. They already tell you that 2 crcles are 18kg, which cuts it in half for each individual one, making it 9kg each. The second scale has 5 circles and one square. That is 9x5=45. Subtract that from the total, which is 72 and you get 27 for the weight of one square. They want you to find the weight of two squares, so you just multiply 27x2=54.

54. No where near as hard as the other one. try harder.
---

Ragnawind posted...

This is simple. They already tell you that 2 crcles are 18kg, which cuts it in half for each individual one, making it 9kg each. The second scale has 5 circles and one square. That is 9x5=45. Subtract that from the total, which is 72 and you get 27 for the weight of one square. They want you to find the weight of two squares, so you just multiply 27x2=54.

or you could just subtract the smaller number from the bigger one... much quicker..
---

Is it going to have one of those stupid non mathematical tricks like square secretly means square root and 7 equals 9?
---

Not a hard problem. The shocking thing for me is that this is a problem for six-year-olds.
---

2 circles is 18kg
1 circle is 9kg
5 circles is 45kg
72 - 45 = 27
1 square is 27kg
2 squares is 54kg
---

jramirez23 posted...

Not a hard problem. The shocking thing for me is that this is a problem for six-year-olds.

If you dedicate a week to the base reasoning of each element, I think any child that gets addition and subtraction should be able to get it fairly easily.
---

This one was so easy. All I had to do was click view results for the poll and pick the most popular answer

Math is dumb
---

If distance from the fulcrum is not a factor, I'd say 54 kg. If distance is a factor then that would change the results. Please correct me if I am wrong but the center of mass between the two sides would be a factor if the distance mattered, right?
---

I feel bad for you if you're impressed by people who are 13+ solving a problem meant for 6-year-olds.
---

Too hard for six year olds, how are they supposed to know how to calculate the balance based on how close or far from the balancing point
---

this was easier than the first problem
---

See this one is messed up. Not because it's hard, it's easy, if you know multiplication/division etc, but because it would be quite difficult for 6 year olds to figure out using shapes (mainly because it's a number on the left side and not objects).

The number on the left is too large to easily break up into objects as well, making this almost impossible for a 6 year old to solve.

If it was a smaller number, this would be fine. If instead of having each circle be worth 9 and each square 27 (think it was), you made each circle be worth 3, and each square worth 9, then a 6 year old might solve it by doing this.

Start the problem off with two circles on the right sight and 6 triangles on the left. The students can place a triangle on each circle until both had 3, and know each circle is worth 3 triangles.

The students could then do the second problem by taking 3 triangles from the left side on each circle, then placing all the traingles that are left on the square, and then making another square and doing the same thing. They could count all the traingles on both square to get the answer.

Without having something they can use as a counter though, it would be very hard for any 1st grade student to solve that problem.
---

I had to remind myself 6 years old would not be taught concepts like center of mass yet so more than likely the distance from the fulcrum should not be a factor.
---

This is easier than the other one but still pretty tough for most 6 year olds. However, I think with a lot of time and guessing, 6 year old me could have eventually worked it out.

InfestedAdam posted...

I had to remind myself 6 years old would not be taught concepts like center of mass yet so more than likely the distance from the fulcrum should not be a factor.

Based on how the topic was worded I was sort of expecting this.
---