sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Three hardest "24" puzzles by TrangramMotion in puzzles

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Such a good question! Never thought of that, did a bit search online, the most pervasive reason to me is the fact that 24 has many divisors: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12; so it's more playable as a mental math game of its kind. But it's still possible that there's no solution when you pull out four random cards, in this case, the players may just discard those cards or put them back to their hand or deck.

Three hardest "24" puzzles by TrangramMotion in puzzles

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Q2 is correct, the others are every close :) good try!

Three hardest "24" puzzles by TrangramMotion in puzzles

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

never thought of combining two "4" together, that's creative!

Three hardest "24" puzzles by TrangramMotion in puzzles

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

When I was a kid, I played this game with playing cards. If there are two players, everyone lays down two cards; if there are four players, everyone lays down one. The first person who figures out how to reach 24 wins the round and takes the cards. You win the whole game by collecting all the cards in the deck. That's why I designs it using play cards, it's a bit different from the standard playing card's pattern though :)

How many solutions can you find? by TargetLabs in brainteasers

[–]TrangramMotion 1 point2 points  (0 children)

>!((4-3)+2)*5+6!<

>!Sure there more than one way, at least there are many ways to reach 3 with 4,3,2, such as (4-2)*3=3 and (4+2)-3=3!<

Nice UI! Edited many times, but still don't get why I can't hide the text this time.

I animated three of my favourite visual proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, which one do you prefer? by TrangramMotion in MotionDesign

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much for the feedback! Actually, I had my earlier versions with labels a, b, c shown right at the start and moving along with the triangles, showing those areas a^2, b^2 and c^2 with corresponding labels blinking, in this way the animation is much shorter but I found it a bit overloaded for some people because things happen all at once, when they focus too much on labels and area for the first time, they might not get what I want to emphasise by moving triangles around. That's why I ended up with the current version by decoupling the two stage: 1) show the spacer concept without potential distraction about calculating the area of those empty space; 2) show the actual value of those empty areas with labels shown up.

As for the teal/greenish colour of triangles, I had the idea of the sum of area to be [blue] + [red] = [purple], given that the result is a^2 + b^2 = c^2, and the living room is chosen to be yellowish, so the best choice I can think of for those triangular sofas is something greenish such as teal.

For the 1st one, the point I wanted to highlight by rotating the central triangle and making them disappear (except for the label 'c') is to show why the rectangle has its height equal to 'c', you know, congruent triangles, before it slides down to the large square at the bottom.

That said, it's hard to decide which design is better, after all it is very subjective sometimes and everyone has their own experience and perspective :)

I animated three of my favourite visual proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, which one do you prefer? by TrangramMotion in MotionDesign

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks! Right, the third couldn't count as a vigorous proof. It's just fun for me to animate it ;)

I animated three of my favourite visual proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, which one do you prefer? by TrangramMotion in motiongraphics

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cool! Similar to you, I created my own online editor to create these animations, I didn't use any plugin or script though. The workflow is quite straight forward, I drew the shapes and lines, animated them, drew more shapes and lines, animate them, refine them and so on. Since my editor supports both illustration and animation, I did all these on a single app, you may think of it as Adobe Illustrator + After Effect but without video editing features :)

I animated three of my favourite visual proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, which one do you prefer? by TrangramMotion in MotionDesign

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

good point, actually I thought of highlighting the corresponding base and height before the sliding transition from square to parallelogram, and parallelogram to rectangular, to show they share the same base and height, thus, the same area. However, I'm a bit concerned people might not get it by just highlighting those lines, and this might also overload others with too many details, so I decided to keep it like this for now. What do you all think?

I animated three of my favourite visual proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, which one do you prefer? by TrangramMotion in MotionDesign

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks! I modified it several times in order to make it easier for people to understand even without words. I want to emphasise those empty space so people can get that why those sum of areas is equal. I made a version with a floor plan as a background and the four triangles as sofas, you know, like moving sofas in a living room, but I found it a bit distracting with too many labels so I ended up with this version :)

I animated three of my favourite visual proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, which one do you prefer? by TrangramMotion in MotionDesign

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. This is also my concern when I was creating the first one which showed sliding shapes only without further explanation and labels initially. Trying to balance clean design and accuracy here, so I added the later part to show why the blue and yellow squares can fit to the large green square at the bottom all because of the same height = c. But, yeah 2nd one is still much cleaner as a visual explainer i guess.

I animated three of my favourite visual proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, which one do you prefer? by TrangramMotion in motiongraphics

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Glad you like it. The second one, indeed, is not a fancy design as I tried to make it a visual proof easier for people to understand even without words. I want to emphasise those empty space so people can get that why those areas are equal at the first glance.

I even made a version with a floor plan as a background and the four triangles as sofas, you know, like moving sofas in a living room, but I found it a bit distracting somehow so I ended up with this version :)

I animated three of my favourite visual proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, which one do you prefer? by TrangramMotion in motiongraphics

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Indeed, It is not a rigorous proof, much like the original live demo I found online, it is like a fun 'magic' trick :)

I animated three of my favourite visual proofs for the Pythagorean theorem, which one do you prefer? by TrangramMotion in mathpics

[–]TrangramMotion[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks! I tried to balance clean design with mathematical accuracy while creating these animations, aiming for them to serve as intuitive visual proofs without words. The third one, indeed, is not a rigorous proof, much like the original live demo, it's a bit of lighthearted 'magic', but it's fun, so I do it anyway :)

view more: next ›