Sunday, January 13, 2008

64 = 65 ?

Could it?

It could...


Shak said...


The 5x13 diagram is fraudulent. Blue and Red (or Green and Orange) do not a true triangle make - ie BlueRed is not mathematically similar to Red. Proof by trig if you're bothered, or alternatively just compare the ratios of the relevant triangle sides (2/5 vs 3/8).

The areas of each respective shape do still add up to 64 of course, the extra bit comes from a sliver of area along the opposite corners - you can see it most by looking at the bit between Red and Green.

All credit goes to Johnny Ball by the way. He was (and still is) my hero. In fact I don't think I'd have been a mathematician if it wasn't for him.

asikha said...

Think Johnny Ball was a bit before my time, it's all about the Singh for me, Simon Singh that is.

Another one? 2=1

Shak said...

Of Fermat and Big Bang? Humph you youngsters and your mathematical pop-idols :(

Shak said...

And the only good bit about that video is the comments thread after :D

They should make Johnny Ball required reading you know.

asikha said...

What, Johnny Ball didn't teach you how to prove that one? :P

Simon Singh is my idol, indeed. He should teach maths(/physics/science) to Britain I say, y'know. Forget training teachers, put Singh up on a large screen and he will solve Britain's maths problem.

Shak said...

Or alternatively bring up a new breed of mathematicians who find inane tricks like "64=65" and "1=2" so amazingly thrilling :)

asikha said...

I'll have you know such mathematical problems are profoundly philosophical. It teaches us not only nothing is as it appears but it encourages an inquisitive mind. Such a breed would be welcomed I would imagine.



Anonymous said...

Mathematician: 64=65? hmm need to work out why that's the case. Guys quit the singing(, we have a mystery to solve!!

Engineer: 64=65? 2% error, who cares.