Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Puzzle time - cover the square with circles

Puzzle time - cover the square with circles

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
4 Posts 3 Posters 42 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Suppose you have a unit square. If you also have four identical circles that can overlap, they would need to have a radius of 0.25·√2 to completely cover the square, as shown:

    BDCD6468-20D9-4D65-9391-99C973FC0490.jpeg

    Now suppose that, instead of four identical circles, you have five identical circles that can overlap. What is the minimum radius they would need to completely cover a unit square?

    Extra credit: Suppose you have six identical circles that can overlap. What is the minimum radius they would need to completely cover a unit square?

    The whole reason we call them illegal aliens is because they’re subject to our laws.

    1 Reply Last reply
    • MikM Offline
      MikM Offline
      Mik
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Fucking geometry.

      "You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell

      1 Reply Last reply
      • KlausK Online
        KlausK Online
        Klaus
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Hm, I don't find it obvious that the fifth circle even helps.

        So let me put out the null hypothesis that the needed radius is still 0.25·√2

        1 Reply Last reply
        • KlausK Online
          KlausK Online
          Klaus
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          OK, I accidentally stumbled upon the solution in a 1997 math paper...

          1 Reply Last reply

          Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

          Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

          With your input, this post could be even better 💗

          Register Login
          Reply
          • Reply as topic
          Log in to reply
          • Oldest to Newest
          • Newest to Oldest
          • Most Votes


          • Login

          • Don't have an account? Register

          • Login or register to search.
          • First post
            Last post
          0
          • Categories
          • Recent
          • Tags
          • Popular
          • Users
          • Groups