Yeah, I guess number 2 is obvious. I guess I’m just paranoid. As for 3, yep, squares it is. Now I’m going to go look up stuff about vectors from number 1, because I have no idea about them!
#1 could also use somewhat esoteric set theory. If “=” represents “has a cardinality of” and “+” represents “union”, then { a, b, c } for A and { b, c, d, e } for B would fit the bill.
In #3, are the dots supposed to be arranged in a square? Because as viking hints, that makes a difference.
Well damn. One of my math classes last year had all that cardinality and union stuff in it and I didn’t even think about it looking at the problem! So its either that, vector math, or The Weak Force’s theory…
For number three, you can only separate them into nine squares if you’re using rectangles. You can separate them into nine triangles using two squares, though.
#1 – Vectors? Why complicate it? The numbers plug into the Pythagorean theorem quite nicely, describing the lengths of the sides of a right triangle. Where C = the length of the hypotenuse, A^2 + B^2 = C^2. Thus, if A=3 and B=4, then C=5 every time. Carpenters use this all the time to lay out walls that are square; it works equally well with multiples, like A=12, B=16, C=25. Custom countertop makers will still ask for the ‘C’ measurement so they can cut a proper miter joint.
#2 – Pretty obvious; again, why complicate it?
#3 – I’ll wait for a better layout of the puzzle. The ASCII version isn’t up to snuff.