16341 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Devils advocate, or is the devil in the details? The OP's statement that most people get this wrong at the same time attempted to put chess players as a group to the same task. The diagram dealt with squares and one was asked to deduce a number of squares of various size using basic spatial reasoning. I wonder why I ever thought chess players would just simply answer the question; the one about squares? LOL
Chess players take their squares very seriously ok!? Sure the average person can get away with a sloppy square here or there, but we have 64! If you don't have uniform size and proper alignment the diagonals and files go all crazy. Any person who truly loves chess also loves a properly formed and placed square.
as a whole the I thought chess players scored very well here very little coloring outside of the lines. A+ I was suprised no one proferred the amount of possible squares that would be possible on a chess board, assuming of course the board was made up of matchsticks..
There was a topic like this already. They answered how many squares, rectangles on a chess board and then some of them came up with formulas or programs they'd written to find the answer and then they also posted generalized formulas for boards of nxn size and how they came up with them... lol
Here it is (I'm sure it wasn't the first)
I'm sorry I was too lazy to read your last post could you repeat that?
The nice thing about reading it is you can repeat it for yourself
or even if he says he never lies ?
I got this one wrong xD Got 15 but didn't see the 3x3 square oO
That's the one I missed at first.
the question is so dull and non chess you should all forget it. Better to consider an even better non chess Q, if a man says he is a liar , do you believe him?
Yes, I do. Because if the man is indeed not a liar, he would not lie. which he would need to do in order to state that he was, in fact, a liar; even though he werent. So even if was not before, he is now.
I can see plainly 12 squared in the figure!
You need more definitions rather than implying. You will be wrong if you say anything other than 9, because a square has four sides. If you are implying that the other partitions are squares, that is nonsense according to the definition of a square. This reminds me of the hoops I had to jump through academically to get a good job. Multiple guess questions are irritating.
Then I think this forum got longer and longer...........
Isn't it time to get the answer from the one who started out asking
I think yes would probably be correct in either case depending on how you define liar. If he's telling the truth that he is a liar, well, obviously believing that he was a liar turned out to be correct (obviously if you're a liar it doesn't necessarily mean you can't still tell the truth sometimes... if you use the assumption that a liar must be someone who tells only lies, perhaps he can't be a pure liar because a person who has always lied but now saying that he lies must be making a true statement [at the time he is saying it.]).
Even if he said he was a liar when he in fact has never lied in his life, by him making the statement that he is a liar, he is perhaps now turned into one since that statement at the time was a lie (I guess it depends on how many lies it takes for someone to count as a liar ).
so that is it, just 16 boxes, after 10 pages down the road, has any one gave you that figure before, or correctly answered with that same answer. thanks for answer!
What's wrong with people on chess.com?
by HessianWarrior a few minutes ago
Is it possible to checkmate with two rooks?
by PawnShaped 3 minutes ago
by ylblai2 4 minutes ago
Women aren't smart enough
by A-Tail-Of-2-Kittehs 6 minutes ago
Is this what Chess has become? Blitz vs. Classical
by BettorOffSingle 7 minutes ago
Game sites with chess variants.
by musketeerchess2015 9 minutes ago
How to deal with parents who hate chess ?
by bombingburrito 13 minutes ago
2/14/2016 - Quick And Painless Mate
by snbarkman 24 minutes ago
Guess the losing move
by chessperson2222222 28 minutes ago
Time vs Quality in a chess game.
by askyumuda 30 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!