See the Forest Through the Trees
Is it possible to arrange 10 trees into 5 rows such that each row consists of exactly 4 trees?
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
4 solutions
Log in to reply
you rock bro
Grow some wings and fly away
I would debate your statement that "nothing is impossible" - I hope that was meant in jest :-)
Log in to reply
nothing Is Impossible... Because the Word Itself say that "I'm Possible"..
Well Nothing is impossible because of quantum fluctuations and entropy.
Log in to reply
@Sharky Kesa – You might need to read up on what Quantum Fluctuations and entropy actually mean. Niether of them change Mathematics or Topology. I agree the it is possible (although extremely unlikely for my chair to suddenly move 5m to the right, but even that doesn't change whether 1+1 = 2 in normal space.
Log in to reply
@Tony Flury – Haha, in certain algebraic forms (my teacher mentioned this), 1 + 1 = 0
Log in to reply
@Adam Jamil – Which has nothing to do with Quantum fluctuations or entropy. That is simply different rules for performing calculations and/or different meanings for the common operators and symbols.
Have you tried slamming a revolving door?
Yeah, well, slam the revolving door, duh
Nothing is impossible means that everything may or may not be possible. Converse statements are not necessarily true.
good ... but i thought rows should be parallel but they are perpendicular so isn't it rows as well as columns
Log in to reply
Well, they aren't perpendicular technically. They just intersect. Rows means lines. You just assumed that the rows had to be parallel.
Log in to reply
I just find it wrong that each rows intersection shares an element. Doesn't it not become a row at that point when it shares an element? All you've done is create one GIANT line/row with shared elements technically. Or at the least you've created it such that each "row" has 7 elements when you "unbend" them. Or even better for every row with 4 elements, the one connected to it only has 3, which goes against the rules of your problem.
Idk, it just feels like cheating, and one of those times where one simply used the lax definition of a mathematical term to trick others, but the logic of which behind it is pretty faulty and can argued either way. Bending a row does not simply split it into two rows is what I'm saying, since those two rows share a common element.
can you please explain ... i mean rows should be parallel but u are saying no ..how ?
Is it possible to arrange 10 trees into 5 lines such that each line is consist of 4 trees? Would have been clearer...because rows are almost always parallel.
Log in to reply
I agree. The question is not clear enough.
This is exactly what I thought when I saw the solution.
These are lines of trees. In my mind rows are parallel...
Logic says yes.
Log in to reply
What was the logic process that you used ? Logic isn't just a thing - it is a process to determine an answer.
The title is a hint.
Cool..!! Really a gud one..!!
It was tricky 😅😅
I knew that it was possible I just haven't practiced thinking outside the box enough to figure it out.
Damn it... My first mistake on this site. I am so limited... :D
I had a reading comprehension problem
Tricky but good question
interesting question..!!
if this is the way to do such question then this also is possible - plant 10 trees in 5 rows so that each row has just 3 trees each... isnt it???
Draw a star and plant trees at every intersection You will get 5 rows each having 4 trees
plant as a star and plant on the cross point
Yes, it is possible.
If a tree is planted at every intersection, we have 10 trees planted along 5 rows of 4 trees.