O HAI! You must login or signup first!

arborelia is leaving @arborelia you can feel the results of this problem in your soul. You look at the optimal packing of 28 squares in a square and say, oh that's nice, what an ingenious and satisfying solution and then you see 17 squares and you're like, how could a caring god do this to their universe 17. s = 3+2√2 = 5.828+ ALT Found by Frits Göbel 3:59 AM · Dec 12, 2021 s = 4.675+ Found by John Bidwell in 1997. ALT 887 Retweets 75 Quote Tweets 2,869 Likes : ...

28 squares in a larger square Vs 17 Squares


Uploaded by sakshi Feb 19, 2023 at 11:10AM EST

Share Pin Download More

Origin Entry: 17 Squares In A Larger Square

File type: png

Resolution: (1088px x 1134px)

File size: 285 KB


Amo Amo AMMO AMMO Anno O O Amma Ammo AMMO PAMEN It's more efficient!
Nathan is in SF (say hi ) @NathanpmYoung god is dead and the most efficient way to pack 17 squares into a square killed him Traduzir Tweet 17. s = 4.675+ Found by John Bidwell in 1997. 8:16 PM - 14 de fev de 2023 1,3 mi Visualizações
View All 16 Images


Moar:


+ Add a Comment

Comments (0)

There are no comments currently available.

Display Comments

Add a Comment


+ Add an Image

Image Details

2,299 views (14 from today)

Uploaded Feb 19, 2023 at 11:10AM EST

Origin Entry

17 Squares In A Larger Square

Source

Twitter

Tags

17 squares, optimal way to pack 17 squares, most efficient way to pack 17 squares, seventeen squares, 28 squares

Claim Authorship Edit History
Textile Embed