Discussion
51
51
1
The top and side views imply to me that it isn't possible to know for sure. Am I wrong?
This. The middle row height is unknowable for the 2 height and most of the 3 height section.
It could be a single layer with C shaped taller sections for example.
Yeah there are many issues with this. This is exactly how the smartest kid in a class gets an A and the 2nd smartest kid gets an A+
51 unless it's hollow
At least 33 but looks can be deceiving
Did you consider the middle? All boxes may not be the same size
I think I miscounted, it's at least 35(?)
And fuck the middle, I don't have any way to prove it exists. I dont even believe the other side is stacked. A top down view would imply a full bottom layer, but not much else.
Yeah but even the bottom layer could be tricky since there's more than one layer 😂
Between 41-51. There’s 10 blocks we’re unsure of existing
Ah shit I think I missed 10 blocks so it would be between 31-51
Ah dammit now I double counted some. It’s 16 blocks we’re unsure of so between 35 and 51 lol.
Good work. Now consider that some of the unseen blocks may be a 2x2x2. How does that change your answer
Well, that would change the unsure of number of blocks, but not the range, as there are still at least 35 individual blocks. And there could be up to 51 individual blocks. But those 16 individual blocks could be some combination of your 2x2 and other 1x1 or even something like a 2x3 or 2x5
The presence of 2 strategically placed 2x2x2 blocks would reduce the minimum side of the range from 35 to 21
Actually it's possible that there are 0 cubes, and just square panes
Wouldn’t I see those 2x2 blocks on the top, side or back view? Just counting the visible “cubes” leads you to a minimum of 35. 2x2 cubes wouldn’t have a dividing line between them…
I only see enough for one giant rubik’s cube and some stairs
51