Current Events > This Math Question is SO HARD that only a 2% of People can get it!! Can you??

(+) Yeah! (+)

This is one of those questions that will stump a massive majority of people as no one will get or even understand but for those math geniuses, they can get the answer if you just use your mathematical skills.

This is a question from asia where someone was working in a math book and came across this very difficult question that has people stumped...but can you get the answer?

https://i.imgur.com/a6WtLYl.jpg
---

No

---

BloodMoon7 posted...

No

---

https://stomp.straitstimes.com/singapore-seen/can-you-solve-this-primary-1-math-question

there's the answer for people who are curious

---

Wetterdew posted...

https://stomp.straitstimes.com/singapore-seen/can-you-solve-this-primary-1-math-question

there's the answer for people who are curious

Interesting. I got the answer by a different process that I think is more intuitive than what is shown at the link. Basically, I noticed that each column of a square has the same sum, so you're looking for the number to pair with 8 to add up to 11+12=23. Same principle, different way of spotting the pattern.

tiornys posted...

Interesting. I got the answer by a different process that I think is more intuitive than what is shown at the link. Basically, I noticed that each column of a square has the same sum, so you're looking for the number to pair with 8 to add up to 11+12=23. Same principle, different way of spotting the pattern.

Yeah, I got it this way as well

literally unsolvable if there's no attempt to solve

---

I got 15

The first 4 blocks add up to 4+5+7+6=22

The second adds up to 7+8+10+9=34 (12 higher)

so to get 12 more again you need 15+11+8+12=46

---

Wetterdew posted...

https://stomp.straitstimes.com/singapore-seen/can-you-solve-this-primary-1-math-question

there's the answer for people who are curious

this doesnt make sense because the logic they used is TL+BL-BR=TR.

but in the second example they said TL+BL-BR was 8, and the TR number was 6.

soooo?

edit: for the picture in that link where they actually break it down. The original two photos have 8 so not sure why they switched it for that article.

---

It's not so much "hard" as it is confusticating. The reason we have standardized notations for math is so we can use them to communicate the language of math as efficiently as possible. This isn't a practical "math problem," more of a puzzle or riddle.

---

I can legitimately make 5 a correct answer (the number in the column below it minus 3) and 15 as the correct answer, but in a different way (both columns add up to the same number in both of the other boxes.)

---

Lmfao you can actually justify making various other numbers the right answer... The first column can be the bottom number being the top number added by 3, thereby making the answer 5... which wouldn't be a wrong pattern in the slightest. But you can also do the both columns add up to the same number thing in which would be 15

If this was an answer test question to a legitimate school, they should be fucking ashamed. Ambiguity can exist in the sense that you can take divergent steps to solve a proof for example but the logic should be consistent

Unless there are some other context where this is a test to see if they can solve a a+b = x+y question, then it's more obvious, but there isn't such a hint.

So really only 2% was lucky enough to read the question writer's mind. Wow, great accomplishment

---

Zeeak4444 posted...

edit: for the picture in that link where they actually break it down. The original two photos have 8 so not sure why they switched it for that article.

I believe it's the answer from the book the question was taken from. By the logic they're using, 8 is the correct digit.

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

This guy gets it.

---

tiornys posted...

Interesting. I got the answer by a different process that I think is more intuitive than what is shown at the link. Basically, I noticed that each column of a square has the same sum, so you're looking for the number to pair with 8 to add up to 11+12=23. Same principle, different way of spotting the pattern.

I got the answer by looking at the differences between opposite squares diagonally (6-4),(7-5),(9-7),etc, and looked to maintain that ratio for the last block.

Seems like a coincidence that it held up. I didn't think the riddle was clever though.

---

I just added the columns and noticed they matched on the first 2 squares, so assumed 15.

---

I only took a glance asnd not thinking it, but my vote is 5

---

looks like a tie so far
---

Mistere Man posted...

I got 15

The first 4 blocks add up to 4+5+7+6=22

The second adds up to 7+8+10+9=34 (12 higher)

so to get 12 more again you need 15+11+8+12=46

I went with 15 as well.

Didn't see any other pattern besides this.

the answer. see if you're a winner!

https://theindependent.sg/math-question-in-primary-1-assessment-book-stumps-netizens/
---

---

I got 15, but now I'm starting to think this is a trick and the missing number is actually 2 since that's what's written at the bottom

---

So the problem with this problem as presented, is that we don't instantly know what were supposed to be looking at. It's very abstract and hard on problem solving skills because as we see it, there is literally no information at a glance. Now, the student had it easier because schools teach to exams rather than actually teaching, so he or she had less of an excuse, but if you placed that in front of me, I'd probably agonize over it for some time before remembering I'm 27 and therefore don't have to take math tests anymore.

---

unless the arithmetic explanation is set up off screen, this is a logic puzzle, not math.

---

Medussa posted...

unless the arithmetic explanation is set up off screen, this is a logic puzzle, not math.

But it was probably in a math exam. Also, I never really felt schools teach proper logical thinking.

---

The answer is 5

Look at the blocks vertically instead of horizontally


---

Crazyman93 posted...

But it was probably in a math exam. Also, I never really felt schools teach proper logical thinking.

math and logic are closely related. so seeing logic questions in a math test isn't unthinkable. but it could just as easily be an arithmetic test and there's an example of the necessary additions and subtractions before the kids get a few to do on their own. tough to know for sure without seeing the rest of (that section of) the test.

---

Adding down the first block is a pair of 11, second is a pair of 17, so you know pair of 23 in the third block. Subtract the 8 for 15.

---

Medussa posted...

math and logic are closely related. so seeing logic questions in a math test isn't unthinkable. but it could just as easily be an arithmetic test and there's an example of the necessary additions and subtractions before the kids get a few to do on their own. tough to know for sure without seeing the rest of (that section of) the test.

All valid points, though I'd like to add on that the way I was taught math was less logical and more formulaiac. "Do these steps and the answer will be right." But yeah, my first thought was "without seeing the rest of the test or exam, we have no idea what the question is trying to test."

---

BlueMage279 posted...

What??

Funny enough, it's completely relevant lol. The question is written poorly then is bragging about how so few people got it, which equates to __% of people read the questioner's mind

---

2

---

I'm thinking 5.

Of course I could be adding things up in the wrong way.

4+3 = 7
7+3 = 11
5+3 = 8

---

PrettyBoyFloyd posted...

I'm thinking 5.

Of course I could be adding things up in the wrong way.

4+3 = 7
7+3 = 11
5+3 = 8

10 not 11 but simple typo.

Interesting this thing has many patterns in it.

---

That's a lot harder than any problem I've ever encountered pre calculus.

---

Mistere Man posted...

10 not 11 but simple typo.

Interesting this thing has many patterns in it.

I was looking at it this way.



Now I can see how some will say 10.

---

PrettyBoyFloyd posted...

I was looking at it this way.



Now I can see how some will say 10.

No I wasnt saying the answer was 10 just your 7+3=11 should have been 10 not 11.

---

Well damn.

I see the error now.

Anyway I'm guessing it works like this.




---

PrettyBoyFloyd posted...

I was looking at it this way.

The issue with looking at it like this is that you're ignoring the numbers on the right sides of the squares. This is a pattern between two numbers, not four.

Sad_Face posted...

I got the answer by looking at the differences between opposite squares diagonally (6-4),(7-5),(9-7),etc, and looked to maintain that ratio for the last block.

Seems like a coincidence that it held up. I didn't think the riddle was clever though.

Not a coincidence. The pattern you saw is just an algebraic rearrangement of the pattern I saw, and both of these are algebraic rearrangements of the pattern shown in the solution. They wanted A + B - C = D; I saw A + B = C + D; you saw A - C = D - B.

PrettyBoyFloyd posted...

I'm thinking 5.

Of course I could be adding things up in the wrong way.

4+3 = 7
7+3 = 11
5+3 = 8

That 11 is the one I am saying should be 10

---

Mistere Man posted...

That 11 is the one I am saying should be 10

Well I was half drunk trying to figure this out.

tiornys posted...

The issue with looking at it like this is that you're ignoring the numbers on the right sides of the squares. This is a pattern between two numbers, not four.

Not a coincidence. The pattern you saw is just an algebraic rearrangement of the pattern I saw, and both of these are algebraic rearrangements of the pattern shown in the solution. They wanted A + B - C = D; I saw A + B = C + D; you saw A - C = D - B.

Yea I figured it was trying to trick me.

Fuck... maybe it can work either way.

Maybe it's a test of perception rather than something significant.

---

tiornys posted...

The issue with looking at it like this is that you're ignoring the numbers on the right sides of the squares. This is a pattern between two numbers, not four.

Not a coincidence. The pattern you saw is just an algebraic rearrangement of the pattern I saw, and both of these are algebraic rearrangements of the pattern shown in the solution. They wanted A + B - C = D; I saw A + B = C + D; you saw A - C = D - B.

That's not what the question asks. In fact even if you "ignore" the right side of the column, they're still +1 from the top but simply answered for you. If you took the right side as a hint that the left side stays the same, it's still using the right column. This question is just poorly written. You're neither right or wrong, neither was the guy answering

---

Sure, the "left side add 3" holds for the two boxes with complete left sides and the "right side add 1" holds for all three boxes, but the "left side add 3 right side add 1" hypothesis is not a pattern relating four numbers. It's two different patterns relating pairs of numbers, therefore it lacks explanatory power for the set of four numbers, therefore it's not a good candidate for the pattern in question.

Fifteen.

Yall making this way too hard.

Sum of vertical columns are equal within any square.

---

Damn, now I'm seeing how +3 works the other way.

That's another way to get 10.

---

PrettyBoyFloyd posted...

Damn, now I'm seeing how +3 works the other way.

That's another way to get 10.

No. +3 across the boxes fails because of 7 -> 10 -> 8.

I concluded 5. In each cube, the top left corner number is 3 less than the bottom left. The Top right and Lower right in each cube, a difference of 1.

---