There was an another obscure answer I found in my research that I omitted since I felt it was too complicated. But several people have emailed and commented that they would like this answer to be represented too. So here you go! About 10 people saw this pattern out of 5+ million views this video has gotten. So if you found this pattern, then you're part of a special 1 in 500,000 group! (By the way, some people have emailed me the answer 52 = (first number) + (line number)*(second number). Note if you use the "missing lines" interpretation, the last line is the 8th line, so you end up with 8 + 8*11 = 96 like the video presented.) So here's the obscure pattern. The idea is to evaluate the sums in base 10, and then convert the answer into descending number bases 6, 5, 4, etc. line by line. So the pattern is: 1 + 4 = 5 (base 10) = 5 (base 6) 2 + 5 = 7 (base 10) = 5*1 + 2 = 12 (base 5) 3 + 6 = 9 (base 10) = 4*2 + 1 = 21 (base 4) So if we do the same for the last line, we would need to use base 3 to get: 8 + 11 = 19 (base 10) = 9*2 + 3*0 + 1 = 201 (base 3) So if you got 201, that's another way people have seen the pattern. It's a bit more involved to explain what is going on, and you can't really reconcile the result with the "missing line" interpretation. But several people did see this pattern.
MindYourDecisions Have you seen Radian Math? All degrees of 360. This is the language of the megalithic stone remnants around our planet. String and plumb...
First off a running total does not necessarily need a visible operator when it's stacked as the puzzle is. And second even assuming it should be shown the pattern only uses addition so bringing in other functions is adding information that is not in the puzzle. And from a basic science/ engineering point the simplest and most elegant solution is generally the best one, so adding complex equations or operations that don't appear in the puzzle just seems wrong. I would be much more open to the idea if there were no operations specified as in 1 4 = 5 etc. In that case you are not specifying how the numbers are related. Likewise if there were a gap between the last two lines so that the first three were demonstrating the relationship and then the last line was someplace down the line in that relationship, filling in the "missing" lines would make sense. But the puzzle is presented as a sequence with the fourth step needing an answer and does not imply that you are open to add anything not present. Heck the "solution" involving bases has to add in an extra number to make it work.
OK I was wrong on the adding numbers, the way it was written confused me. They are still changing bases in a way that is kind of questionable but there is some logic there, and changing the base could be considered not adding anything that needed notation so?
I think the lesson here is: if you are seeking accurate answers, ask coherent questions. If your questions are open to interpretation, you are courting inaccuracy
Exactly...again. Is 1 + 4 = 5 a "starting condition" to which you apply a rule line by line, or is it part of a pattern itself. Adding extra information, like altering the bases or adding "missing' lines or columns, changes the question instead of solving it.
That is the difference between science and philosophy and also why philosophers aggravate anyone with a science background. They insist that being vague gets people to think. It might be true but also wastes a lot of time dealing with irrelevant variations when we simply need an answer.
Funny thing is no ones even pointed out that it may be logic or a math problem depending how you look at it, but no one is talking about how its really just a big social experiment to see how different people interpret a pattern in a problem that has no explanation.
Just because you use arithmetic doesn’t make it a math problem. These sort of iq problems with multiple correct answers while interesting make me crazy when testers only select answer A as the correct answer....
Yes. I took a real psych exam to determine such things as IQ, and it was an 8-12 hour process, four hours at a time three days in a row. The task was identify the pattern and solve. This is that. It’s multiply the numbers, then add first value to total. Ie. 8+11= (8X11)+8=96
No but it's literally 96, I have no idea how someone could come to the conclusion of 40. It doesn't follow any pattern and instead relies on guessing rather than patterns
The "correct" answer is whatever you can logically make work with the information provided, because it is a puzzle not a mathematical equation. I immediately came to the 96 conclusion in the same way as the first example, but after seeing the method used to get 40, that actually seems logical too. UPDATE: I changed my mind. The 40 method is only perfectly logical when adding the assumed lines between 3+6 and 8+11. But the puzzle, as shown, most logically comes to 96.
I came up with 40 to begin with, but both 96 and 40 are logical, and therefore correct for the reason you give. I would agree though, that 40 is the better answer, because it solves the problem by the more simple and direct route. I don't buy the explanation in the video, as to why 96 rather than 40 is 'correct'. It involves introducing new assumptions not in the puzzle itself, and saying that if these were applied, then 96 would be the outcome, and therefore 96 must be right. If we add in our own assumptions, not in the puzzle, we could have it saying just about anything.
I got 40 as well. The second way he describes 96 is logical BUT only if you infer that they intend you to go all the way down the path. 40 is the only truly logical answer for the way it is expressly written. The first reasoning to get to 96 is nonsense it adds operations of multiplication not expressly written into the problem.
I got 96, but frankly, when you have someone asking a question which is basically 'what's the missing thing that's in my head?', then the question is pointless.
I approached the same through 3 methods-one is by considering a polynomial function p(x)-we can notice each two numbers differ by 3 digits- like in this case it is (1,4)(2,5)(3,6)-so we can define a polynomial with variable as first number that is 1,2,3=so p(1)=4,p(2)=5 and so on-then u need to find the value of 3 variables as only 3 equations are given-then u end with a^2+4a
I'd say 96 is the most reasonable answer, given the evidence. However, there should only be one logical pattern for a puzzle to be valid, or it is indeed as you say. "What am I thinking here" A simple fix would have been to make one or another pattern not work. 1 + 4 = 5 2 + 5 = 12 4 + 6 = 28 8 + 11 = Now there could be no second guessing. Given the fact the person who made this puzzle was smart enough to make it, I wager it was intentional, to spark 'controversy'
@@lukekim7012 No, because then you are not dependent on a awnser from a different function, wich again is dependent on a awnser from a different function. I belive that the awnser given in this video is wrong. Not only because it is dependent from another function totalt unrelated to it, but if you try to go backwards you will get 0+3=3 wich you also have to add to the 1+4=5 function. In fact you can go infiniet of times back and if you were to include them as well, the awnser to all of these fractions would be - infinity.
@@jkvoot First of all your answer is the left answer of the video cuz 1 × (4+1) means a × (b+1) which can be written as a × b + a × 1 or ab + a which is the solution from the video. And the right method is not wrong. The mistake you made was to consider your example 0+3=3 as a mathematical correct calculation which it is not in this puzzle. If you would go backwards 0+3 would be 0 and -1+2 would be -3 and so on. This has to be the case to match your way to the solution too. Otherwise your own way would be incorrect aswell. Because for a=0 and b=3 a+ab or also a × (b+1) is not 3 but 0. qed
I arrived at 40 when I tried to take a guess at the (moon) logic the puzzle was trying to use. Either way, it is deliberately not providing you with the required information on how it works, so the correct answer is "This set of equations is bullshit."
+SUPER DUCKS Well common core logic is similar. The questions are usually like such: If you have 1 blue bucket and 1 red bucket, how many square feet of roofing do you have? Answer: Potato because yellow. Half the questions make no sense because 1) They weren't written by teachers 2) They're phrased so awkwardly that the even the administrator doesn't know what the question is asking 3) Nobody is required to screen the questions before they're put on the test. 4)Next to none of them provide context How about instead of installing common core we teach kids how balance a checkbook or how to cook or how to not bankrupt themselves immediately after college, you know, life skills. But right now kids are being taught that you should either be insanely good at math and reading for your age or go home.
+lizzy the owl I would agree that kids should be taught how to balance checkbook, cook etc. But they also should be taught Complex maths and common core logic. It will not be useful for most people but it is what helps people think outside the box and come up with new important discoveries. So kids need life skills and logic. This website would not exist if no-one had been taught logic and complex problem solving as we would then have very few competent programmers.
If you're not getting the required info to solve the puzzle, then how are some people (like me) able to solve it? There's plenty of info to solve it. Like every other math puzzle, you have to find the pattern. And the pattern is easily found in the first 3 lines. I solved this puzzle in 2 minutes....piece of cake
LOL.... your dad could be a strict math teacher or an accountant! If I can recall, when I took several IQ tests during some placement tests in my childhood, the arithmetic questions were using non-mathematical symbols such as diagrams, objects, etc. to express any equations and trendings. I call these as "processor" symbols like in the flowcharts. Since in this case the sign symbol is using a "plus" sign i.e. "+", then the mathematical rules govern. Hence, the arithmetic equation of "8 + 11" shall equal to "19". This is the right answer as of the first line. The second and third line equations are wrong but presumably thrown in as to disguise the test takers. The keywords here are, if we are given any arithmetic questions with the right mathematical sign symbols, solve them rightfully by applying the basic mathematical rules and techniques as taught by our primary math teachers.
I’m one of those who got 96, but in a different way. I first looked at how much it adds up to the next number, like what adds 5 to 12, and what adds 12 to 21. I found that 5+7 is 12, and 12+9 is 21. The difference of 7 and 9 is 2, so I added 2 to 9 to become 11, then added that to 21, and so on with that pattern. I used the numbers in the equations as orders, so yeah. 3+6 is 21 4+7 is 32 (21+11) 5+8 is 45 (32+13) 6+9 is 60 (45+15) 7+10 is 77 (60+17) And finally, 8+11 is 96, which is 77+19. The solution is long, I know, but that’s what I’ve come up with.
Basically yeah me too, didn't even bother looking at the second set of numbers... 1 is 5, 2 is 7 and so forth to 8 is 19... Add 5+7+9+11+13+15+17+19 and then you have 96...
I first came up with 40 but, these puzzles usually depend on the intention of the one who wrote the puzzle, in which case it could be either, you'd have to find the originator of the problem and ask them what their intention was.
I believe this Puzzle itself does not have a real solution but. As a programmer I came up with 40, since it makes sense to declare a counter variable starting from 0 then adding up with subsequent results. I am no mathematician but I believe that if the result is 40, it can be easily tested with conditionals: IF a1 + b1 = c1 and x0 = 0 THEN x1 = x0 + c1 so IF a2 + b2 = c2 THEN x2 = x1 + c2 This conditional always takes in consideration the previous result, and it gets the sum of all results independently of the values of each variables, I believe that with the lack of context to prove that 8 + 11 = ?? should really be a8 + b8 = c8, this conditional seems like fair Hypothesis and Conclusion.
I hate such puzzles because they completely ignore the meaning of the signs. Instead, they should be presented as a table of numbers with an empty square to fill according to the pattern.
That's what I eventually came up with as well. There's nothing in the stated problem to suggest following any of the methods presented in this video. Those who come up with anything other than "true, false, false, 19" are operating outside the given parameters.
exactly. the only question asked is 8+11=?. the other equations are already solved, I'll be it 2 of them are wrong, but it doesn't matter. they're only there to exploit people's natural tendency to rationalize
i’m pretty sure this is a joke, but i’m going to explain if anyone doesn’t understand, yes, it does have an addition symbol, but it’s just a “variable” replacing an operation. the answers should have given it away-
The "running total = 96" solution is my least favorite by a huge margin. It requires that you assume, solve, and include the product of 4 extraneous equations based on the previous equations happening to be numerically ordered vertically... Neither of the other presented solutions takes that potential coincidence into account, because it seems immaterial and isn't required to find a solution.
I mean clearly it's a fun mind game, it's not a rigorous mathematical demonstration or whatever, it's def subject to interpretation because of that. I have a hard time arguing 40 is a bad answer although you could argue 96 is the "most correct" answer, whatever that means.
@@jasonsmith4114 you thing 11 + 8 = 96? think about that, if you had 11 apples and some one gives you 8 additional apples if you counted them would you have 96.
Positional multiplier. Multiply the 2nd number on the left by the position of its equation in the sequence = {x1, x2, x3, x4 ...}, thus the 4th equation is 8 + 11x4 = 52.
@@thepsychologist8159 No dunski, it's 40 because that's what it is! Given the information available! This is a flawed & ridiculous exercise! Not clever at all! Neither are you!
The problem with your alternate running total approach, is that it relies on you making assumptions about the authors intention, since the data simply isn't there to confirm it. However the answer 96 and the running total answer of 40 are both correct and supported by the data provided by the author. This question is inherently ambiguous and should have been better framed
96 is not the only answer. It depends on how one configures the numbers. I came up with 40. That’s based on adding the the sum of a line to the two numbers added in the next line. Simple, and correct as well.
I got 92. What I did was multiplying (ex: 2 x 5= 10) and then adding it the layer number (ex: 3 x 6 + 3= 21) (8 x 11 + 4= 92) It made sense and this being a problem with multiple answers I feel kinda proud because I didn't see comments saying any of this.
You can _absolutely_ be proud of that answer, and it really goes to show there's a lot of valid ways to reach different answers when it comes to ambiguous pattern-seeking.
Quite nice. Since you established a pattern (any pattern) that was consistent to the first three lines and applied the same pattern to the last line, your answer is necessarily correct.
Totally. There is only one indicator of missing information and that is the question mark, so you have to treat the sequence as it is given. That means either the formula method that got 96 is possible and the running total method that got 40 is possible, but not the running total method that got 96. That broke the rules by adding lines to the sequence that were not there.
@@TheRealPotoroo No rule broken, Actualy a + ab is short for a(a+1)/2+b(b+1)/2-6 which is a formula for the running total including missing lines with b=a+3. You must substract 6 since the second gaussian sum starts at 4.
Yes, these are expressed with mathematical symbols that have meaning, but it seems to be implied that we are asked to possibly ignore the meaning of some operations. It could be expressed as: 1, 4 ↪ 5 2, 5 ↪ 12 3, 6 ↪ 36 8, 11 ↪ ? Using pattern recognition, show what ? could be.
How he can say that the answer to a math problem is "it seems likely the answer should be" is beyond me. Without new information there are multiple answers and the fact that there are many answers is the answer.
The quesiton is fine, the problem is that there are many solutions because the rules are not restrictive enough, so if no more information is given, all those solutions are correct.
First time I saw the puzzle my answer was 96 in 1 or 2 minutes thinking and it used this way to solve it 1*5= 5 , 2*6= 12 and so on 8*12= 96 like for every one used this way to solve this puzzle
How is it not simply just a run on addition problem? 1+4=5+2+5=12+3+6=21+8+11=40? Why all the scientific difficulties added in? Is it the way we (my schools) were taught to find the simplest expression possible? Is that why I see it as one long run on addition problem?
I got 52. I think that can also be a pattern that can be found. It increases the amount the second number is multiplied by by 1 each time. 1x4, 2x5, 3x6, etc. So I though it would be 4x11. Which would give you 52 once you add the 8.
@@themuffinman147 Positional multiplier. Multiply the 2nd number on the left by the position of its equation in the sequence = {x1, x2, x3, x4 ...}, thus the 4th equation is 8 + 11x4 = 52.
The third digit in the equation is the key. In the first 4=4, in the second 5 is doubled equaling 10, in the third 6 is tripled equaling 18, in the fourth 11 is quadrupled equaling 44 meaning the final equation is 44+8=52.
Me too as soon as i saw the question i immediately solved it. i dont know how, but it makes me feel so good about myself especially the 1 in 1000 thing
What I think is that the "running total" solution with the missing lines is the "intended" answer, and the a + a * b solution happens to come across a mathematical shortcut. It's kind of fascinating, actually. When you look at the running total solution, notice something about each of the numbers being added: 5 is 1 * 5. When you add another five, you get 2 * 5. 12 is 2 * 6. When you add another six, you get 3 * 6. 21 is 3 * 7. So on and so on… It HAPPENS that the running total adds up to the a + a * b solution in a roundabout way, I think that's neat. But what's extra fascinating is that this isn't a fundamental mathematical fact; If you attempt to do the same puzzle starting with (1, 6) instead (to which the solution will be 6), then when you go to (2, 7) the pattern breaks down -- 2 + 7 + 6 = 15, 2 + 2 * 7 = 16. Same for starting with (1, 3) = 3, then (2, 4) = either 11 (running total) or 9 (weird math). So either the puzzle was specifically made with this relationship in mind, or stumbled into it by accident. As an aside: I'm getting really sick of puzzles using defined mathematical symbols like + or x to represent their wacky new mathematical operation. All it does is add confusion to the puzzle, although since this was made for Facebook I suppose it was designed that way…
I don't quite follow your thought process for "1*5 is 5. When you add another 5...", etc. But there is a fundamental mathematical relationship going on here. As long as the first expression in the series is true for both normal addition and "weird math," then the running total and the weird math will continue to be correct for the rest of the expressions. (Assuming you don't leave "gaps," like between 3 and 8.) In order for the first expression to work as both normal addition and weird math, it must be true that a + b = a + ab If you solve that equation you find out that a = 1. So as long as the first expression is of the form 1 + k = (1 + k) then both the running total and the weird math will continue to work out.
I guess you have to use some meta knowledge. I've done enough standardized test to know that people taking the test always think that there is some kind of running total or transference between lines/phrases but the people create the test *never* actually do that.
Woah i got to 96 with a totally different method: I noticed a pattern: the result of the first row was 1(first row) X 5(second row), the second was 2(second row) X 6(third row) and the third would be 3(third row) X 7(if there was a row starting with 4.) Then I just expanded the first to numbers by adding one until i reached 12. 1 + 4 = 5 2 + 5 = 12 3 + 6 = 21 4 + 7 = 5 + 8 = 6 + 9 = 7 + 10 = 8 + 11 = 9 + 12 = Then, to get the answer to the equation, i multiplied the first number with the second number of the row below. So it would go: 4X8=32, 5X9=45, 6X10=60, ... until i reached 8*12=96
I also got to 96, but in another different way lol. The end column is just adding the next odd number in the sequence starting at 5. 5, 5+7 = 12, 12+9=21, 21+11=32, 32+13=45, 45+15 = 60, 60+17= 77, 77+19 = 96
I also got it exactly like this. I immediately noticed the pattern of the diagonal multiplication - 1x5, 2x6, 3x7 was matching the results so I just continued. I don't know why but maybe it's bc I am more of a visual type than analytical.
The equation is already x*y + x where y is always x + 3 Substitute that In gives x(x + 3) +x Common factor of x gives x(x+3+1) Which is x*(x+4), so x^2 + 4x 1 = 1^2 +4 which is 5, 8 is 8^2 + 32 So 64 + 32 So 96, A much better more formulated way
@@smg7602 When people are forced to think outside the box they lose touch with reality. People are perplexed when your response is the most simplistic but yet irrefutable. These are very basic examples of arithmetic sequences, just like geometric sequences, harmonic sequences, or a series of Fibonacci numbers. A person with an average IQ can easily figure this out, however, they are not conditioned to respond in that manner... the answer would be silly and somewhat ridiculed if presented. I thank you for your response cause it is good to know that there are people out there that still have a strong reality-based psyche. Have a great day!
- Based on math it's 19 - Based on logic where everything should have and explanation 40 is the answer to explain line 2 and 3. - people who saw 96 are wizards who can see things
Why would you extend an original condition of only 4 actions to 8 in "running total" solution option? Just because you want and it looks logical for you? That does not make any sense. You can not change the original condition and have to solve it as it is. So those 21+4+7 (and so on) are nonsence...
Brent Thompson Haha thanks for backing this trend of thought, and even more thanks for the indirect compliment! This comment thread just demonstrates the difference between narrow-minded, stubborn thinkers and productive, complex ones such as me and you.
Nice. I got 33. Just by looking at the answer, the first is 5, then 12, a difference of 7. So far we started with 5 and then added 7 to get 12. if you then go to the next odd number the sequence is 5,7,9, so 12 +9 = 21. The next odd number in the sequence 5,7,9,11, so 21 + 11 = 33. If you follow the running totals at least to the left of the equals sign you would have 9+12 = 46 ( 33 + 13) with the sequence of odd numbers 5,7,9,11,13. What do you think?
Well , Mr. Talwalker there is one more method to solve this question which leads to a different answer but the logic is correct, 1+4=5 , (5)+2+5= 12 , (12) +3+6 = 21 , so , (21) +8+11 = 40, the logic here is that the result is equal to the sum of the numbers given and the answer obtained in the answer before it. I think this is also correct , So am I a the only person in 9.5 million to find an alternative answer/ method.
That's exactly what I thought. 89 is what you learn in Harward and Stanford - the trillionaires know the mathematics behind exponential growth - and try to keep it a secret to make simple mathematics sound mystical!
40 and 96 are both correct but at the same time not. There isn’t enough information to determine which is the correct answer. Both are justified by the “running total method” but we can’t assume that the list continues between 3+6 and 8+11 because it wasn’t stated. For me, I would answer 40 on the IQ test if I were to come face to face with it, because it is more logical with the information that we are given.
I can't be 40, because you are skipping numbers. You need to look in between the lines. The answer is definitely 96. Because this whole thing is an input output box. With the formula being ab+a.
@@tonymadeja5670 Because it didn't state it doesn't mean it isn't there. The problem has 3 numbers going +1. That is saying that the pattern is going to be +1.
I just came across this quiz, and felt that 1+4=5 was actually 1x5=5, and so on, so by understanding the pattern, as a pattern is established in 3s...I've seen others post this method as well for coming to the answer of 96. You can also get to 96 with the running total if you add in the "missing" numbers.
96 is a 'higher quality' answer as Robert Pirsig would say, it takes into account the implied missing lines so it's a better fit. 'Higher IQ' people might prefer 96 I'm guessing? Well there's always going to be a few contrarians.....
This is because the puzzle basically asks the question "How am i to be interpreted?". Interpretations WILL differ and still be correct when the the set of rules are not well defined.
I believe the perceived need for interpretation is what makes it interesting. The answer to the question is 19 but everyone overlooks it as to try to conform to the trend previous mathematically incorrect expressions.
Graham - Mathematics is not open to interpretation, at least not in the sense that you mean; clearly expressed mathematics is not ambiguous. You're quite right that it's an exercise in interpretation though. Therefore this puzzle is not 'mathematics', despite the fact that it uses symbols and operations from arithmetic. The puzzle primarily turns on pattern recognition and pattern recognition -is- "open to interpretation" - that is, it's possible to see more than one pattern in a given stimulus.
@@johnshaw6702 I searched "math puzzles" on google, saw this picture in the thumbnail, and came up with 96 in about 15 seconds. 40 was not obvious to me, I did not interpret the puzzle that way at all. However, both approaches are clearly correct given the scope of information provided.
@@TranscendentPhoenix I agree. Without a hint to point you in a particular direction, either or both answers are correct. All the real life math puzzles I have worked on over the years had only one answer; not counting ±n.
It doesn’t really make sense to continue the pattern with 1.2,3…,8 and 4,5,6,…,11 because it’s really 1,2,3 and 4,5,6. So if we wanted to continue the pattern up to 8 it would 1,2,3…,8 and then 9,10,11,…16. And we don’t arrive at 8+11. We end up with 8+16. So continuing the pattern in this way seems incorrect. I do prefer the 40 answer because it’s more like real math than the 96 method. With the running total method, it makes sense in a mathematical sense. I have 1+4 = 5, I want to add 2 and 5 so I’ll write 2+5 = 12 etc… It’s something you could do (even if it’s visually wrong) to add up a set of numbers if you’re trying to get the end result in a fast way. The other method, being a+b = a + ab makes no sense. Why would the + sign even matter? The puzzle could’ve been 1^4 = 5, 2^5 = 12,… and the result wouldn’t change. You would just do a^b = a + ab
The fact that you can achieve different results with different methods or that you can handle the puzzle with a little imagination to match the results says it all
If you look at the intervals between the numbers, they go up + 2. You can also solve it this way by seeing that interval between 5 and 12 is 7, interval between 12 and 21 is 9 (7 + 2) and so on.
Aquarium 7512 the assumption there though is that there are missing steps to the pattern (and there is no clear indication that there is...) that said I originally got 96 too.
In my opinion, the answer should be 40 since that "missing lines" are not given in the problem, so we just focus on answering based only on the given equation
I got to the 96 answer without adding any lines. I used the a + ab approach. It does seem as those both 40 and 96 should be considered correct since both fit the pattern established in the first three lines.
Fairy Dark You must not have seen my 1 in 5,000,000 answer. Rearrange the equations given and follow the same pattern and you will get 40. Without thinking outside of the box.
The puzzle should have been stated this way... GIVEN 1 + 4 = 5 2 + 5 = 12 3 + 6 = 21 CALCULATE 8 + 11 = ? There is only one correct answer and that is 96. There are more than one way to solve the problem. 1) adding the result of the previous answer to the sum of the two number : 2 + 5 = 2 + 5 + 5 = 12. 3 + 6 = 3 + 6 + 12 = 21, etc. 2) realizing the answers are equal to all the previous answers plus the next odd number starting with 7 : 2 + 5 = 5 + 7 = 12, 3 + 6 = 12 + 9, 4 + 7 = 21 + 11 = 32, etc. 3) deriving the formula from the 3 samples which is n * (n + 4) : 1 + 4 = 1 * (4+1) = 5, 2 + 5 = 2 * (4 + 2), 3 + 6 = 3 * (4 + 3) = 21, etc.
I disagree, the answer is only 96. If method doesn't work with the formula then it's incorrect, as he stated if your answer is 40 the method you use will eventually not work
M chapman - but the other totals could be answers too. So how would anyone know it is 96 and not 117 or 77? The only way to know is if someone has given the answer of 96.
@@peacehappyb237 - you could take it to infinity, but.....but.....that puzzle as shown.....to complete the sequence as shown, in my opinion the result is 40.
I did the running total method but added the numbers in the middle of 3 and eight. So 4+7 would be 11 and adding that to 21 gets 32. If you keep adding one to each number in the equation, you will eventually get 8+11 which equals 96. EDIT: I posted this right after he showed us the first two methods and their answers and didn't realize that he would show my idea immediately after.
I got to the answer another way by looking at a predictable pattern here. By looking at the pattern in the answers. First answer 5, second answer 12 which is a difference of 7. Third answer is 21 a difference of 9 from the previous answer. Logically the next answer would be 32 when you add 11. Then add 13 and you get 45, then add 15 and you get 60 & so on. So, it follows a pattern of differences of 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 The next would be a difference of 17 an answer of 77 then the next would be 19, an answer of 96 & so on. I just followed the pattern of "the answers" and used that pattern to determine what the following answers would be. Simple.....
If it was writen like this: 1+4=5 2+5=12 3+6=21 ... 8+11=? Then the next line after 3+6=21 should have been 4+7, but since there are no ellipsis you can't add what you want. So the answer is 40.
When an equation is not bound to equate, the value of its output sits at the mercy of opinion or calculus. The two "approaches" to this problem one concluding a final answer of "40" and the other "96" are Implied Functions. We can randomly name them a(x) and b(x). In the basic sense functions use "inputs" to generate "outputs". In this problem the two different functions or 'approaches' use the inputs (1 + 4) = 5 (2 + 5) = 7 (3 + 6) = 9. They BOTH then output or generate the same values 5, 12, 21. So when their inputs are 5, 7 and 9 their outputs are equal (5, 12, 21). a(1 + 4) = b(1 + 4) a(1 + 4) = 5 b(1 + 4) = 5 a(2 + 5) = b(2 + 5) a(2 + 5) = 12 b(2 + 5) = 12 a(3 + 6) = b(3 + 6) a(3 + 6) = 21 b(3 + 6) = 21 HOWEVER, they do NOT equal each other at the input (8+11) as the two different approaches (functions) to solving the problem output different numbers (40 and 96). a(8 + 11) =/= b(8 + 11) To solve this "problem" we must first address what the problem is. The true problem is that whomever designed the problem did not state which solution approach (function) to use, presumably as a means of creating mass confliction resulting in internet virility and eventual generation of ad revenue.
In a basic sense, if a(x) function equals the same number that b(x) equals, a(x) must equal b(x). These people shouldn't feel retarded over your error.
Occam's Razor. 40 And if you want an additional way to solve the problem, add only the numbers used to obtain the sums; 1+2+3+8+4+5+6+11...which also equals 40 coincidentally. Or not.
My gosh; talk about over thinking it. I fail to see this is IQ related, as it is all interpretation, the missing lines are not assumed by the description.
yeah i got 40 too. i think this is one of those things where there's no absolute right answer, it just shows how different people think. 40 definitely works, so i'm counting it as 'i got it right'
It's obviously designed to make a person look past the obvious... which I can see. But it can be taken either way, so there is no 'right' answer, as our minds tend to look for the simplest patterns. Also many of the numbers, 5, 21, 89 are also all fibonacci sequence. :)
I did this a third way, I did multiplication of a pattern I saw. 1×5=5 2×6=12 3×7=21 4×8=32 5×9=45 6×10=60 7×11=77 8×12=96 Guess I seen it differently.
Coincidentally, adding 1 to the second constant in each equation and continuing as normal results in each equation actually being true. As an example: 1 * (4+1) = 5 2 * (5+1) = 12 3 * (6+1) = 21 8 * (11+1) = 96 I was surprised this wasnt the intended answer but its funny how things work out
That's not really a coincidence, a + ba is the same as (b+1)a. That's the relationship between multiplication and addition of equal terms. Similarly, people who follow the pattern up and add the missing numbers aren't finding the answer of 96 by coincidence either. It'd be a trickier issue if the last term was something like 8+12=?, breaking the pattern. You'd still reach the same answer as Presh' first method though.
I disagree with 96... To arrive at that conclusion you have to add information not given. 40, in my opinion, is the correct answer based on what we're given.
@@pinkmonkey328 Actually no it isn't a pattern. 1,2,3,4,5 is a pattern, just like 0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34 is a pattern but 1,2,3,8 is not a pattern unless you add or ignore information to create a pattern of convenience that will arrive at the answer you want. Using the information supplied, 40 is the only answer that makes sense.
What are you people talking about?!?! Did you not see the part where 96 was the answer with the info given, and then when he filled in the blanks ALSO got 96 AGAIN! It was proven to be 96 twice! The pattern for adding is clearly (n)+ (3+n) as well so you can conclude the 8 + 11 line is the 8th line and not the fourth line.
You will have many frustrated geniuses if you label this an "IQ" test! The problem? Presenting these numbers by themselves and implying mathematical calculations is incorrect because all but the first of the original lines are incorrect mathematically. If you put the heading "a+b = a+ab" you will define the numbers as part of a pattern and not as individual calculations which will lead to a rational result. You omitted the definition of this exercise and because of this, people will read their own interpretation of "what's the problem"? You need to have a bit more respect for math - and for IQ tests!
for some reason doing this works 1 x 4 + 1 = 5 2 x 5 + 2 =12 3 x 6 + 3 = 21 8 x 11 + 8 = 96 just multiply the second term by the first term and then add the first and it gives you the answer. For me there are many ways to finish this puzzle.
Yes exactly 96! In plain text: The individual sums of the various partial additions form a geometric number sequence, where the next sum is the previous sum + the sum of the next addition. Many people miss that some lines are skipped between the last and penultimate addition.
In regards to 40 being incorrect, if the question permits the ignorance of the meaning of the plus and equals signs than surely I can argue (unless you state in the rules somehow) that I don't have to follow the number sequence of 1,2,3,4,5,... and I can skip all in between 3-8. Additionally if 2+5 = 12 and not 7 then I can argue that the number sequence used in this question is fucked up anyway; eg. 2+ (2x5) equals 12 in the riddle, but 2 + (1x5) equals 12 also in the riddle.
That's why it's stupid. There are no rules. You get to make up your own rules. Then someone says ONLY THESE RULES ARE RIGHT HAHA GOTCHA! Even if two answers follow invented rule sets that are equally consistent and reasonable
There are rules, the answers are in descending number bases starting from base 6, thus making all the equations correct. ( answer is 19 in base 3 = 201)
40 because the 2+5=7 and it takes 5 more numbers to get to 12. Then 3+6=9 and it takes 12 numbers to get to 21. Then 8+11=19 then add the answer of 21 from the previous sum to 19 and you end up with the sum of 40.
I got to 96, but not in that way. How I did it is that in every addition except the first I added 1 to the second number and made it a multiplication instead of addition. It’s actually this: 1 + 4 = 5 2 + 5 = 12 --> 2 x (5+1) = 12 3 + 6 = 21 --> 3 x (6+1) = 21 And then: 8 + 11 = ?? --> 8 x (11+1) = 96 And it also works if you keep going: 96 + 9 + 12 = 117 9 x (12+1) = 117 117 + 10 + 13 = 140 10 x (13+1) = 140 140 + 11 + 14 = 165 11 x (14+1) = 165
But what if the point is not to continue with 4+7 (increasing order) but perhaps to trick everybody into thinking that was the point and actually continuing to calculate with 8+11(not skipping the other numbers)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I'm dying, Fuck me man.Hmmmmm let me think of a trick question. What would be the first thing that your parents would do if they could travel back in time? Think you fucking got it? If you said that they were trying to prevent a mistake, you got the first part right! Now, which mistake were they trying to fix? They would prevent you from being born. Lol im kidding.
Protagnis YT to solve it follow these two steps 1.Multiply the numbers 8x11=88 2.Add the first number to the product 88+8=96 11+8=96 It's not a trick question start thinking outside the box
Adding extra lines to the problem is a bit of a leap. I realize that it isn't a true math problem, because each statement other than the first is logically false. A math equation is really a logic statement that is true or false. 1 + 4 = ? is really saying, "complete this statement: 'one added to four is ...'" The student writes 6, and the teacher marks it "wrong" which, is to say from a logical standpoint, "false." (It isn't WRONG per se, but untrue that 1 + 4 = 6). So, in that sense, whether the math in each line is "correct" or not doesn't matter. However, in logic, one can never - ever - assume that information left out is one thing or another, nor can one add information to the supplied data to produce the answer you want. Just because you are capable of getting one of the two possible results by adding data does not add any weight to one of the two possible results being more likely than the other. BOTH interpretations of the data available are equally valid, and therefore, both answers: 40, AND 96 are equally correct.
Except this isn't CS - this is mathematics. It's certainly valid to redefine an operator, however, but if you redefined an operator, you'd need to supply that little piece of information at the beginning of the statement or series of statements to begin with. Whether the operator has been redefined or not, though, is immaterial, because there simply is not enough information one way or another to make an assessment as to which answer is the correct one - because both possible answers are, as I indicated, equally valid.
Problem with these kinds of problems is that they can VALIDLY be interpreted in several different ways, thus arriving at several different perfectly valid answers.
For this kind of puzzle, there are rules: You are presented with one or more statements, which are, by definition, true. The objective is to find the 'code' that makes them true and use that code to solve for another incomplete statement. If it was just: "Here are three lines of jibberish and now solve a simple addition problem," there wouldn't be much point, would there?
Haha it didn't even occur to me that there could be a shortcut... I've added the 'missing' lines without thinking that there could be a problem by doing that...
If we are going to add lines not present, there is another possible pattern that could be used. 1 + 4 = 5 2 + 5 = 12 3 + 6 = 21 7 + 10 = 38 8 + 11 = 57 9 + 12 = 79 That is using the running total and could be continued. It assumes the first number and second number are in grids of three, are sequential in the grid from top to bottom and then continue in the next column before resetting. They would need to be in groups of three since the left number is always three less than the right number. As others have said, what this puzzle illustrates is, given limited information, the "answer" is what works AND can be justified which means there might be multiple answers.
It's 40. To get to 96 you have to calculate in things that do not exist in the problem. Ya cant make up your own equations as you go. you have to work with what your given. This is simply pattern recognition.
While 40 was my initial answer you are still adding in additional information that somehow the answer to the previous problem is relevant to the current. There is nothing that actually says this in the problem so its just an assumption added on
I came up with 40... since the pattern exists, it is obviously relevant to the problem, and spotting the pattern is key 1 + 4 = 5 2 + 5 = 7 (+ the answer to the above line being 5) so 7 + 5 = 12 3 + 6 = 9 (+ the answer to the above line being 12) so 9 + 12 = 21 8 + 11 = 19 Using the same method in the above, one would perform 19 + 21 to = 40 Just my $0.02. IF the idea was for one to change the entire question being asked, that go WAY beyond the "4 Corners" of the problem as written. But I believe that spotting the pattern in the 3 completed problems, and following it to its logical conclusion, is paramount to the questions viability to be included as part of an IQ Test I understand how one might extrapolate the sequence ALL the way out to a drawn out conclusion of 96, however, that was NOT the question put forth by the problem as written. The methodology to achieve 96, while certainly understandable, I believe adds far more complexity to the question rather than accepting the need to address the problem "As Written"
I came out with 40 because we were given a set of facts to deal with to get to one number. We're also giving the operations, so I guess you can stretch it with all the other garbage that went on there but I think that the simplest pattern was leading to 40
I agree, 40 seems correct/more logical by following the addition of 5 to 2 plus 5 to get 12, then adding 12 to 3 plus 6, to get 21, then adding 21 to 8 plus 11 to arrive at 40.
Yeah I don't remember the last part being part of the question. If I'm adding numbers I don't throw in stuff that's not part of the problem 40 is 1000% the correct answer
Yes, I also did that, but it's exactly the same. That method is just a factorisation of what there is in the video : we did a*(1+b), and he did a+ab. The two are equal, of course.
well, I don't like that because in the system up until the third group we have employed consecutive numbers so that one has to supply the missing numbers or 1 + 4 = 5 + 2 + 5 = 12 + 3 + 6 = 21 + 4 + 7 = 32 + 5 + 8 = 45 + 6 + 9 = 60 + 7 + 10 = 77 + 8 + 11 = 96
40 is certainly consistent with the data given. It can’t be a wrong answer. Maybe, there is another right answer too, but that doesn’t negate the logic of 40 as a correct answer.
Only 1 in a 1000 can solve? That's crap, technically no one is right or wrong unless you can get the world's leading mathimaticall minds to determine a "correct" answer.
There are at least two different answers and many ways to solve this. They have chosen "96" to be the "Correct" answer and won't look at other solutions/answers. Not very scientific...should consider all possibilities not just the one that proves your theory.
Myelinator has the best response. Since no 'rules' or assuptions were given with the problem, folks are free to make their own assumptions about how sums were achieved. This isn't really a math problem, but more like an exercise in creative thinking, since there is actually more than one correct answer.
I agree on the answer of a given equation is 96, not 40. A lot of people say it's 40, but it's not. They're using the running total which is equal to 40. The guy said used an equation formula 'a+b > a+ab' and this is why the answer is 96, relating to question.
Say your in a classroom. First kid comes up and writes the answers 1+4=5. Second kid 2+5=12. Third kid 3+6=11. Fourth kid 3+6=21. Now it's your turn... 8+11= X . I know many will want to find a hidden series and come up with 40 or 96. However the solution to 8+11=19 without any separate instructions telling you to complete the series. The second and third answers are simply incorrect. Those kids get a zero for the assignment and spend recess doing basic math facts. Are you going to miss recess too?
There was an another obscure answer I found in my research that I omitted since I felt it was too complicated. But several people have emailed and commented that they would like this answer to be represented too. So here you go! About 10 people saw this pattern out of 5+ million views this video has gotten. So if you found this pattern, then you're part of a special 1 in 500,000 group!
(By the way, some people have emailed me the answer 52 = (first number) + (line number)*(second number). Note if you use the "missing lines" interpretation, the last line is the 8th line, so you end up with 8 + 8*11 = 96 like the video presented.)
So here's the obscure pattern. The idea is to evaluate the sums in base 10, and then convert the answer into descending number bases 6, 5, 4, etc. line by line. So the pattern is:
1 + 4 = 5 (base 10) = 5 (base 6)
2 + 5 = 7 (base 10) = 5*1 + 2 = 12 (base 5)
3 + 6 = 9 (base 10) = 4*2 + 1 = 21 (base 4)
So if we do the same for the last line, we would need to use base 3 to get:
8 + 11 = 19 (base 10) = 9*2 + 3*0 + 1 = 201 (base 3)
So if you got 201, that's another way people have seen the pattern. It's a bit more involved to explain what is going on, and you can't really reconcile the result with the "missing line" interpretation. But several people did see this pattern.
MindYourDecisions Have you seen Radian Math? All degrees of 360. This is the language of the megalithic stone remnants around our planet. String and plumb...
idk but the 40 answer is the only one that only uses the numbers in the problem without adding things to it
First off a running total does not necessarily need a visible operator when it's stacked as the puzzle is. And second even assuming it should be shown the pattern only uses addition so bringing in other functions is adding information that is not in the puzzle. And from a basic science/ engineering point the simplest and most elegant solution is generally the best one, so adding complex equations or operations that don't appear in the puzzle just seems wrong.
I would be much more open to the idea if there were no operations specified as in 1 4 = 5 etc.
In that case you are not specifying how the numbers are related.
Likewise if there were a gap between the last two lines so that the first three were demonstrating the relationship and then the last line was someplace down the line in that relationship, filling in the "missing" lines would make sense.
But the puzzle is presented as a sequence with the fourth step needing an answer and does not imply that you are open to add anything not present.
Heck the "solution" involving bases has to add in an extra number to make it work.
OK I was wrong on the adding numbers, the way it was written confused me. They are still changing bases in a way that is kind of questionable but there is some logic there, and changing the base could be considered not adding anything that needed notation so?
IDk i got 40
8 + 11 = 19. End of story. Doesn't matter if it's preceded by some incorrect sums.
amen
I think the + is just representing a symbol to mislead us. Otherwise, yes.
Alright I'll rephrase it to where it works. What does 8 + 11 = if 1+4=5, 2+5=12, 3+6=21
Finally, the only logical answer! I totally agree. 19......no question.
the rule is 2x5+2, 3x6+3, and so on... well I think so, and it works
I think the lesson here is: if you are seeking accurate answers, ask coherent questions.
If your questions are open to interpretation, you are courting inaccuracy
Exactly. ALL of the answers given are correct, given only the information in the question.
Puzzle : 1+4=5, 2+5=12, 3+6=21, 8+11=?
Answer : th-cam.com/video/xpdTQcmKiEw/w-d-xo.html
Exactly...again. Is 1 + 4 = 5 a "starting condition" to which you apply a rule line by line, or is it part of a pattern itself. Adding extra information, like altering the bases or adding "missing' lines or columns, changes the question instead of solving it.
That is the difference between science and philosophy and also why philosophers aggravate anyone with a science background. They insist that being vague gets people to think. It might be true but also wastes a lot of time dealing with irrelevant variations when we simply need an answer.
Funny thing is no ones even pointed out that it may be logic or a math problem depending how you look at it, but no one is talking about how its really just a big social experiment to see how different people interpret a pattern in a problem that has no explanation.
Just because you use arithmetic doesn’t make it a math problem. These sort of iq problems with multiple correct answers while interesting make me crazy when testers only select answer A as the correct answer....
Yes.
I took a real psych exam to determine such things as IQ, and it was an 8-12 hour process, four hours at a time three days in a row.
The task was identify the pattern and solve. This is that. It’s multiply the numbers, then add first value to total. Ie. 8+11= (8X11)+8=96
Confusing social experiments for real science or logic is the specialty of the left, didn't you know?
No but it's literally 96, I have no idea how someone could come to the conclusion of 40. It doesn't follow any pattern and instead relies on guessing rather than patterns
@@Skelyboss This was a simple KISS problem that was a trap for his interpretation. 40 was a very logic path. See bleow
The "correct" answer is whatever you can logically make work with the information provided, because it is a puzzle not a mathematical equation. I immediately came to the 96 conclusion in the same way as the first example, but after seeing the method used to get 40, that actually seems logical too.
UPDATE: I changed my mind. The 40 method is only perfectly logical when adding the assumed lines between 3+6 and 8+11. But the puzzle, as shown, most logically comes to 96.
Both are logical imo.
I came up with 40 to begin with, but both 96 and 40 are logical, and therefore correct for the reason you give. I would agree though, that 40 is the better answer, because it solves the problem by the more simple and direct route. I don't buy the explanation in the video, as to why 96 rather than 40 is 'correct'. It involves introducing new assumptions not in the puzzle itself, and saying that if these were applied, then 96 would be the outcome, and therefore 96 must be right. If we add in our own assumptions, not in the puzzle, we could have it saying just about anything.
I got 40 as well. The second way he describes 96 is logical BUT only if you infer that they intend you to go all the way down the path. 40 is the only truly logical answer for the way it is expressly written. The first reasoning to get to 96 is nonsense it adds operations of multiplication not expressly written into the problem.
The explanation for 96 allows any answer to be correct. You could add any extra lines and get any answer you want.
I felt so because the question was in a box, if not in a box then I could see the answer being 96
I got 96, but frankly, when you have someone asking a question which is basically 'what's the missing thing that's in my head?', then the question is pointless.
I approached the same through 3 methods-one is by considering a polynomial function p(x)-we can notice each two numbers differ by 3 digits-
like in this case it is (1,4)(2,5)(3,6)-so we can define a polynomial with variable as first number that is 1,2,3=so p(1)=4,p(2)=5 and so on-then u need to find the value of 3 variables as only 3 equations are given-then u end with a^2+4a
I also got 96 since I did 1x4+1 and 2x5+2 and so on
I'd say 96 is the most reasonable answer, given the evidence. However, there should only be one logical pattern for a puzzle to be valid, or it is indeed as you say. "What am I thinking here"
A simple fix would have been to make one or another pattern not work.
1 + 4 = 5
2 + 5 = 12
4 + 6 = 28
8 + 11 =
Now there could be no second guessing. Given the fact the person who made this puzzle was smart enough to make it, I wager it was intentional, to spark 'controversy'
EXACTLY
That's right, true
I got 96, but in a different way.
1 × (4+1)=5
2 × (5+1)=12
3 × (6+1)=21
8 × (11+1)=96
jørgen kvamme That makes sense because a+ab can easily be factorized into a( b+1)
thats eventually the same thing
@@lukekim7012 No, because then you are not dependent on a awnser from a different function, wich again is dependent on a awnser from a different function. I belive that the awnser given in this video is wrong. Not only because it is dependent from another function totalt unrelated to it, but if you try to go backwards you will get 0+3=3 wich you also have to add to the 1+4=5 function. In fact you can go infiniet of times back and if you were to include them as well, the awnser to all of these fractions would be - infinity.
@@jkvoot sorry but im not good at english and i dont understand can you simplifie it a bit for me, please?
@@jkvoot First of all your answer is the left answer of the video cuz 1 × (4+1) means a × (b+1) which can be written as a × b + a × 1 or ab + a which is the solution from the video. And the right method is not wrong. The mistake you made was to consider your example 0+3=3 as a mathematical correct calculation which it is not in this puzzle. If you would go backwards 0+3 would be 0 and -1+2 would be -3 and so on. This has to be the case to match your way to the solution too. Otherwise your own way would be incorrect aswell. Because for a=0 and b=3 a+ab or also a × (b+1) is not 3 but 0.
qed
I arrived at 40 when I tried to take a guess at the (moon) logic the puzzle was trying to use.
Either way, it is deliberately not providing you with the required information on how it works, so the correct answer is "This set of equations is bullshit."
+Vigilant Libertarian This isn't common core
+SUPER DUCKS
Well common core logic is similar.
The questions are usually like such:
If you have 1 blue bucket and 1 red bucket, how many square feet of roofing do you have? Answer: Potato because yellow.
Half the questions make no sense because
1) They weren't written by teachers
2) They're phrased so awkwardly that the even the administrator doesn't know what the question is asking
3) Nobody is required to screen the questions before they're put on the test.
4)Next to none of them provide context
How about instead of installing common core we teach kids how balance a checkbook or how to cook or how to not bankrupt themselves immediately after college, you know, life skills. But right now kids are being taught that you should either be insanely good at math and reading for your age or go home.
+Vigilant Libertarian
Or as the common core officials would say: pineapple.
+lizzy the owl I would agree that kids should be taught how to balance checkbook, cook etc. But they also should be taught Complex maths and common core logic. It will not be useful for most people but it is what helps people think outside the box and come up with new important discoveries. So kids need life skills and logic. This website would not exist if no-one had been taught logic and complex problem solving as we would then have very few competent programmers.
If you're not getting the required info to solve the puzzle, then how are some people (like me) able to solve it? There's plenty of info to solve it. Like every other math puzzle, you have to find the pattern. And the pattern is easily found in the first 3 lines. I solved this puzzle in 2 minutes....piece of cake
I came to 96 however, I got there by multiplying and adding 1 to each of the second numbers. Just seemed quicker.
Same.
I did the same.
same
Yep, and a+a*b = a*(1+b), so the result is exactly same
I interpreted it in the same way. It seemed pretty clear right from the start, but honestly, I don't know how I saw it off the bat. :)
So
i told my father the answer of 8+11 is 96,
Now he doesn't want to pay my school fees.
@Morning Star Check out the latest (not so) comment about that. We're on the ssme page!
Bruh same i thought of it as (a+1)b -3 so (8+1)11-3 so (9)11-3 or 99-3 or 96
LOL.... your dad could be a strict math teacher or an accountant!
If I can recall, when I took several IQ tests during some placement tests in my childhood, the arithmetic questions were using non-mathematical symbols such as diagrams, objects, etc. to express any equations and trendings. I call these as "processor" symbols like in the flowcharts. Since in this case the sign symbol is using a "plus" sign i.e. "+", then the mathematical rules govern. Hence, the arithmetic equation of "8 + 11" shall equal to "19". This is the right answer as of the first line. The second and third line equations are wrong but presumably thrown in as to disguise the test takers. The keywords here are, if we are given any arithmetic questions with the right mathematical sign symbols, solve them rightfully by applying the basic mathematical rules and techniques as taught by our primary math teachers.
Me to
Sounds like a very wise man
Cashier: ur change will be 8+11 which equals 19
Me: actually its 96 here leme show you how
Nice
Indeed it's 96.
4+1=5 so 5x1
Lol nice
I know this is delayed, but in the same way they will hike the line items of your bill, ending up paying more xD
I’m one of those who got 96, but in a different way.
I first looked at how much it adds up to the next number, like what adds 5 to 12, and what adds 12 to 21.
I found that 5+7 is 12, and 12+9 is 21.
The difference of 7 and 9 is 2, so I added 2 to 9 to become 11, then added that to 21, and so on with that pattern. I used the numbers in the equations as orders, so yeah.
3+6 is 21
4+7 is 32 (21+11)
5+8 is 45 (32+13)
6+9 is 60 (45+15)
7+10 is 77 (60+17)
And finally, 8+11 is 96, which is 77+19.
The solution is long, I know, but that’s what I’ve come up with.
Basically yeah me too, didn't even bother looking at the second set of numbers...
1 is 5, 2 is 7 and so forth to 8 is 19...
Add 5+7+9+11+13+15+17+19 and then you have 96...
That was really cool, but bro I pray that your mind not only continues to problem solve, but also begins to problem solve in the easier way lol
Ey thats how i did it nice
Estaba suscrito a ti y te encuentro aquí, el mundo parece pequeño, lol.
Same
I first came up with 40 but, these puzzles usually depend on the intention of the one who wrote the puzzle, in which case it could be either, you'd have to find the originator of the problem and ask them what their intention was.
Actually I think that this answer (40) also would be OK. It has to do with an alternative interpretation which is understandable.
Same
Here, here!!!
I believe this Puzzle itself does not have a real solution but.
As a programmer I came up with 40, since it makes sense to declare a counter variable starting from 0 then adding up with subsequent results. I am no mathematician but I believe that if the result is 40, it can be easily tested with conditionals:
IF a1 + b1 = c1 and x0 = 0 THEN x1 = x0 + c1
so IF a2 + b2 = c2 THEN x2 = x1 + c2
This conditional always takes in consideration the previous result, and it gets the sum of all results independently of the values of each variables, I believe that with the lack of context to prove that 8 + 11 = ?? should really be a8 + b8 = c8, this conditional seems like fair Hypothesis and Conclusion.
I found 40 too
I just solved it by this way in 1min:
(1x4)+1=5
(2x5)+2=12
(3x6)+3=21
(8x11)+8=96
emir said yüzgeç I got 92
emir said yüzgeç correct
I solved it in -1 second, that is, before I even saw it
I did it in my eyes in 2 sec
emir said yüzgeç me too: in my head. Those are too easy 😉
I hate such puzzles because they completely ignore the meaning of the signs.
Instead, they should be presented as a table of numbers with an empty square to fill according to the pattern.
Ekitchi Hoshi ikr
Me too
Ekitchi Hoshi I agree to that is really what throws people off
* can be used as multiplication but it can also be used as a general binary operator.
Ekitchi Hoshi true but, these problemes devolpe your brain, alot
Actually, the real answer to the whole thing is: true, false, false, 19.
Thank You
That's what I eventually came up with as well. There's nothing in the stated problem to suggest following any of the methods presented in this video. Those who come up with anything other than "true, false, false, 19" are operating outside the given parameters.
I'm just saying we are all right here I checked what everyone said the answer was.
exactly. the only question asked is 8+11=?. the other equations are already solved, I'll be it 2 of them are wrong, but it doesn't matter. they're only there to exploit people's natural tendency to rationalize
i’m pretty sure this is a joke, but i’m going to explain if anyone doesn’t understand, yes, it does have an addition symbol, but it’s just a “variable” replacing an operation. the answers should have given it away-
The "running total = 96" solution is my least favorite by a huge margin. It requires that you assume, solve, and include the product of 4 extraneous equations based on the previous equations happening to be numerically ordered vertically...
Neither of the other presented solutions takes that potential coincidence into account, because it seems immaterial and isn't required to find a solution.
Clear pattern and solved in 2 steps. Multiply the 2 factors and then add the 1st factor. 8 x11 =88. 88 + 8 =96. Works for the 3 previous examples.
Yes. I also get answer in the same way.
Yes, same here 🙋🏻♀️ less work
same here its amazing how many of his puzzles i fail at but the sequencing ones i get in literally seconds.
got this pattern too, in about a minute
That's literally the method explained in the video
Who else solved it when they saw the thumbnail
I also
Me too
Mee
following logic:
1. 8+11=96
I did 2x6=12
3x7=21
8x12=96
If we are supposed to add missing lines between rows (3) and (4), there should be ellipses there to indicate the omission .
Sure, if it was formatted by a mathematician instead of a Facebook meme factory.
I mean clearly it's a fun mind game, it's not a rigorous mathematical demonstration or whatever, it's def subject to interpretation because of that. I have a hard time arguing 40 is a bad answer although you could argue 96 is the "most correct" answer, whatever that means.
@@jasonsmith4114 you thing 11 + 8 = 96? think about that, if you had 11 apples and some one gives you 8 additional apples if you counted them would you have 96.
@@flemit35 Well what if you planted one of the apples? It would take a bit of time but time was not excluded from consideration.
@@davidtuer5825 don't be daft
Positional multiplier. Multiply the 2nd number on the left by the position of its equation in the sequence = {x1, x2, x3, x4 ...}, thus the 4th equation is 8 + 11x4 = 52.
This is what I came up with also. Simpler pattern than 96 pattern. Seems more logical with the information given.
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who got 40
same, was pretty easy, just need 2 spend a min on it
All you have to do is look at the thumbnail and it’s obvious
OK. Is the answer 40? Because that's what I got?
@@thepsychologist8159 No dunski, it's 40 because that's what it is! Given the information available!
This is a flawed & ridiculous exercise! Not clever at all! Neither are you!
40 is the most logical answer, screw this guy.
The problem with your alternate running total approach, is that it relies on you making assumptions about the authors intention, since the data simply isn't there to confirm it. However the answer 96 and the running total answer of 40 are both correct and supported by the data provided by the author. This question is inherently ambiguous and should have been better framed
Well said. I stated the same but in a different manner. I think as written it should be 40.
@@BUNKERJR53 no it’s 96 in both situations.
If we’re ignoring assumptions about the author’s intentions than the answer is 19, as I believe other comments have pointed out.
96 is not the only answer. It depends on how one configures the numbers. I came up with 40. That’s based on adding the the sum of a line to the two numbers added in the next line. Simple, and correct as well.
Yeah, same
i concur
I agree at 40, Peter Carrington
another 40 here!
got 40 too
I got 92.
What I did was multiplying (ex: 2 x 5= 10) and then adding it the layer number (ex: 3 x 6 + 3= 21) (8 x 11 + 4= 92)
It made sense and this being a problem with multiple answers I feel kinda proud because I didn't see comments saying any of this.
You can _absolutely_ be proud of that answer, and it really goes to show there's a lot of valid ways to reach different answers when it comes to ambiguous pattern-seeking.
Quite nice. Since you established a pattern (any pattern) that was consistent to the first three lines and applied the same pattern to the last line, your answer is necessarily correct.
Same
My understanding of number puzzles is that you need to add an indicator that there is a break in the sequence:
1+4=5
2+5=12
3+6=21
...
8+11=?
Totally. There is only one indicator of missing information and that is the question mark, so you have to treat the sequence as it is given. That means either the formula method that got 96 is possible and the running total method that got 40 is possible, but not the running total method that got 96. That broke the rules by adding lines to the sequence that were not there.
@@TheRealPotoroo No rule broken, Actualy a + ab is short for a(a+1)/2+b(b+1)/2-6 which is a formula for the running total including missing lines with b=a+3. You must substract 6 since the second gaussian sum starts at 4.
valid point. the answer of the video is 52 and the answer of your question is 96.
There is no break. It is asking you to answer the problem as written. As written it is 40.
I think including an indicator would make it too obvious. The intent was to trick us so that we wouldn't see the jump in the sequence.
Questions should be logically asked. Hence the question is wrong and can lead to many answers
you are the right one
Yes, these are expressed with mathematical symbols that have meaning, but it seems to be implied that we are asked to possibly ignore the meaning of some operations.
It could be expressed as:
1, 4 ↪ 5
2, 5 ↪ 12
3, 6 ↪ 36
8, 11 ↪ ?
Using pattern recognition, show what ? could be.
Yep
How he can say that the answer to a math problem is "it seems likely the answer should be" is beyond me. Without new information there are multiple answers and the fact that there are many answers is the answer.
The quesiton is fine, the problem is that there are many solutions because the rules are not restrictive enough, so if no more information is given, all those solutions are correct.
There’s also a 3rd way, multiply the next second number..
1x5=5
2x6=12
3x7=21
4x8=32
5x9=45
6x10=60
7x11=77
8x12=96
First time I saw the puzzle my answer was 96 in 1 or 2 minutes thinking and it used this way to solve it 1*5= 5 , 2*6= 12 and so on 8*12= 96 like for every one used this way to solve this puzzle
That’s the same as the first method shown. 1 + 4x1 = 1 +1+1+1+1 = 5x1
Thats my way too
If you simplify (a*b)+a you'll get a*(1+b) so it same only, nothing new in your method
yup
How is it not simply just a run on addition problem? 1+4=5+2+5=12+3+6=21+8+11=40?
Why all the scientific difficulties added in? Is it the way we (my schools) were taught to find the simplest expression possible? Is that why I see it as one long run on addition problem?
I got 52. I think that can also be a pattern that can be found. It increases the amount the second number is multiplied by by 1 each time. 1x4, 2x5, 3x6, etc. So I though it would be 4x11. Which would give you 52 once you add the 8.
That makes no sense due to you making a mathematical error and your logical reasoning doesn't properly explain how you got the answer of 52
@@themuffinman147 what exactly do you not understand. I can try to explain although I could be wrong . I am not a mathematician.
@@siddharth.uumachandran9122 everyone's a mathematician. We learn through trial and error, as with all things
@@themuffinman147 Positional multiplier. Multiply the 2nd number on the left by the position of its equation in the sequence = {x1, x2, x3, x4 ...}, thus the 4th equation is 8 + 11x4 = 52.
I got 52 also.
For muffinman147 who doesn't understand, you multiply the 2nd digit by the line number (not by the 1st number in the line).
I got 19-----> 8+11=19
The answers to the middle 2 problems are incorrect.
2+5 =7
3+6=9
I'm glad we both have a brain.
I actually really enjoyed that comment. It made me laugh.
100% agree
I got 40
i do like this:
1+4=5
2+5=12
3+6=21
4+7=32
5+8=45
6+9=60
7+10=77
8+11=96 who do like this?
but i do this before watching this
Máté Makovinyi me
It wasnt clear that this was a sequence, I thought you had the find the pattern of the problem which is why I got 40
Máté Makovinyi 40 is the answer
Máté Makovinyi fuck it..lol
The third digit in the equation is the key. In the first 4=4, in the second 5 is doubled equaling 10, in the third 6 is tripled equaling 18, in the fourth 11 is quadrupled equaling 44 meaning the final equation is 44+8=52.
I got 96 without even starting the video within 15 seconds.... I am so happy and feeling so motivated
But i think it was just luck
Me too
Uhh... You are Indian, it would be weird if you couldn't find it.
It was easy to figure out. I did it in 20 sec
Me too dear✌
Me too as soon as i saw the question i immediately solved it. i dont know how, but it makes me feel so good about myself especially the 1 in 1000 thing
What I think is that the "running total" solution with the missing lines is the "intended" answer, and the a + a * b solution happens to come across a mathematical shortcut. It's kind of fascinating, actually.
When you look at the running total solution, notice something about each of the numbers being added:
5 is 1 * 5. When you add another five, you get 2 * 5.
12 is 2 * 6. When you add another six, you get 3 * 6.
21 is 3 * 7. So on and so on…
It HAPPENS that the running total adds up to the a + a * b solution in a roundabout way, I think that's neat. But what's extra fascinating is that this isn't a fundamental mathematical fact; If you attempt to do the same puzzle starting with (1, 6) instead (to which the solution will be 6), then when you go to (2, 7) the pattern breaks down -- 2 + 7 + 6 = 15, 2 + 2 * 7 = 16. Same for starting with (1, 3) = 3, then (2, 4) = either 11 (running total) or 9 (weird math). So either the puzzle was specifically made with this relationship in mind, or stumbled into it by accident.
As an aside: I'm getting really sick of puzzles using defined mathematical symbols like + or x to represent their wacky new mathematical operation. All it does is add confusion to the puzzle, although since this was made for Facebook I suppose it was designed that way…
I don't quite follow your thought process for "1*5 is 5. When you add another 5...", etc. But there is a fundamental mathematical relationship going on here. As long as the first expression in the series is true for both normal addition and "weird math," then the running total and the weird math will continue to be correct for the rest of the expressions.
(Assuming you don't leave "gaps," like between 3 and 8.)
In order for the first expression to work as both normal addition and weird math, it must be true that
a + b = a + ab
If you solve that equation you find out that a = 1. So as long as the first expression is of the form
1 + k = (1 + k)
then both the running total and the weird math will continue to work out.
I guess you have to use some meta knowledge. I've done enough standardized test to know that people taking the test always think that there is some kind of running total or transference between lines/phrases but the people create the test *never* actually do that.
Math analysis...
OR its just a coincidence
I literally got the correct answer while looking at the thumbnail for 10 seconds.
Same.
this, how was this hard?
Rafael Cole I don't know, he acts like it is so complex :|
wow what a humble genius.
so you saw the answer was 19 then ?
Woah i got to 96 with a totally different method:
I noticed a pattern: the result of the first row was 1(first row) X 5(second row), the second was 2(second row) X 6(third row) and the third would be 3(third row) X 7(if there was a row starting with 4.)
Then I just expanded the first to numbers by adding one until i reached 12.
1 + 4 = 5
2 + 5 = 12
3 + 6 = 21
4 + 7 =
5 + 8 =
6 + 9 =
7 + 10 =
8 + 11 =
9 + 12 =
Then, to get the answer to the equation, i multiplied the first number with the second number of the row below. So it would go: 4X8=32, 5X9=45, 6X10=60, ... until i reached 8*12=96
I also found the result like this
I also got to 96, but in another different way lol. The end column is just adding the next odd number in the sequence starting at 5. 5, 5+7 = 12, 12+9=21, 21+11=32, 32+13=45, 45+15 = 60, 60+17= 77, 77+19 = 96
I also got it exactly like this. I immediately noticed the pattern of the diagonal multiplication - 1x5, 2x6, 3x7 was matching the results so I just continued. I don't know why but maybe it's bc I am more of a visual type than analytical.
Why would you exactly stop at 12?
The equation is already x*y + x where y is always x + 3
Substitute that In gives x(x + 3) +x
Common factor of x gives x(x+3+1)
Which is x*(x+4), so x^2 + 4x
1 = 1^2 +4 which is 5,
8 is 8^2 + 32
So 64 + 32
So 96,
A much better more formulated way
I got 40, given the limited pattern, seems both are correct.
Hans
How did you get 40?
@@ALEXLEE-tc2ee from adding up the numbers from the answers.
1 + 4 = 5
5 + 2 + 5 = 12
12 + 3 + 6 = 21
21 + 8 + 11 = 40
It's 19 and the other two in the middle are wrong.
Fair enough. Lol
Well said
@@smg7602 When people are forced to think outside the box they lose touch with reality. People are perplexed when your response is the most simplistic but yet irrefutable. These are very basic examples of arithmetic sequences, just like geometric sequences, harmonic sequences, or a series of Fibonacci numbers. A person with an average IQ can easily figure this out, however, they are not conditioned to respond in that manner... the answer would be silly and somewhat ridiculed if presented. I thank you for your response cause it is good to know that there are people out there that still have a strong reality-based psyche. Have a great day!
Yes, there's a printing mistake xD
- Based on math it's 19
- Based on logic where everything should have and explanation 40 is the answer to explain line 2 and 3.
- people who saw 96 are wizards who can see things
Why would you extend an original condition of only 4 actions to 8 in "running total" solution option? Just because you want and it looks logical for you? That does not make any sense. You can not change the original condition and have to solve it as it is. So those 21+4+7 (and so on) are nonsence...
96, 40, and 52 are all correct, given the way the problem is presented.
Conferata Nevis SOMEONE SAID IT. THANK YOU. THERES MANY WAYS TO INTERPRET IT. THE HIGH IQ PEOPLE HOWEVER WONT WATSE THEIR TIME WITH THIS
Conferata Nevis no
just 96
Brent Thompson Haha thanks for backing this trend of thought, and even more thanks for the indirect compliment! This comment thread just demonstrates the difference between narrow-minded, stubborn thinkers and productive, complex ones such as me and you.
I got 40
You obviously failed the iq test
:(
In math you should only work with what is known. The running total that arrives at 96 is an assumption .
I agree. I got 40. Who says we were to add something that wasn't there
The givens imply a missing constant or varitable that needs to be solved. That's what math is all about.
1 + 4 = 5 (base 10) = 5 (base 6)
2 + 5 = 7 (base 10) = 12 (base 5)
3 + 6 = 9 (base 10) = 21 (base 4)
8 + 11 = 19 (base 10) = 201 (base 3)
Check this out! ^_^
1 4 5 difference
2 5 12 7
3 6 21 9
4 7 32 11
5 8 45 13
6 9 60 15
7 10 77 17
8 11 101 19
its actually 101..right?
Nice.
I got 33. Just by looking at the answer, the first is 5, then 12, a difference of 7. So far we started with 5 and then added 7 to get 12. if you then go to the next odd number the sequence is 5,7,9, so 12 +9 = 21. The next odd number in the sequence 5,7,9,11, so 21 + 11 = 33. If you follow the running totals at least to the left of the equals sign you would have 9+12 = 46 ( 33 + 13) with the sequence of odd numbers 5,7,9,11,13. What do you think?
Same thing I thought, same explanation
Wowzerz!... AWESOME :O
Well , Mr. Talwalker there is one more method to solve this question which leads to a different answer but the logic is correct, 1+4=5 , (5)+2+5= 12 , (12) +3+6 = 21 , so , (21) +8+11 = 40, the logic here is that the result is equal to the sum of the numbers given and the answer obtained in the answer before it. I think this is also correct , So am I a the only person in 9.5 million to find an alternative answer/ method.
8+11=19 PERIOD.
Unless you work for the Federal Reserve Bank or the Internal Revenue Service.
someone who does know the answer... im not alone
That's exactly what I thought. 89 is what you learn in Harward and Stanford - the trillionaires know the mathematics behind exponential growth - and try to keep it a secret to make simple mathematics sound mystical!
you must be fun at parties.
the test here is how easily you are thrown off by 2 wrong answers.
yes, that is what i was thinking the whole time, like most people must me bad at math these days
40 and 96 are both correct but at the same time not. There isn’t enough information to determine which is the correct answer. Both are justified by the “running total method” but we can’t assume that the list continues between 3+6 and 8+11 because it wasn’t stated. For me, I would answer 40 on the IQ test if I were to come face to face with it, because it is more logical with the information that we are given.
Agree...I didn't state it was a pattern. Could be interpreted both ways.
I can't be 40, because you are skipping numbers. You need to look in between the lines. The answer is definitely 96. Because this whole thing is an input output box. With the formula being ab+a.
@@tonymadeja5670 Because it didn't state it doesn't mean it isn't there. The problem has 3 numbers going +1. That is saying that the pattern is going to be +1.
I just came across this quiz, and felt that 1+4=5 was actually 1x5=5, and so on, so by understanding the pattern, as a pattern is established in 3s...I've seen others post this method as well for coming to the answer of 96. You can also get to 96 with the running total if you add in the "missing" numbers.
96 is a 'higher quality' answer as Robert Pirsig would say, it takes into account the implied missing lines so it's a better fit. 'Higher IQ' people might prefer 96 I'm guessing? Well there's always going to be a few contrarians.....
There's multiple answers which is why it's so controversial.
This is an exercise in interpretation. It seems to me that math should not be open to interpretation.
dis facts
This is because the puzzle basically asks the question "How am i to be interpreted?". Interpretations WILL differ and still be correct when the the set of rules are not well defined.
I believe the perceived need for interpretation is what makes it interesting. The answer to the question is 19 but everyone overlooks it as to try to conform to the trend previous mathematically incorrect expressions.
Graham - Mathematics is not open to interpretation, at least not in the sense that you mean; clearly expressed mathematics is not ambiguous. You're quite right that it's an exercise in interpretation though. Therefore this puzzle is not 'mathematics', despite the fact that it uses symbols and operations from arithmetic. The puzzle primarily turns on pattern recognition and pattern recognition -is- "open to interpretation" - that is, it's possible to see more than one pattern in a given stimulus.
I immediately found out the answer. It's first number times second number , then add first number😊
You know a riddle is bad when it can have multiple answers, and the people telling it are like: no. Your wrong...
you wrong
You're wrong
Yous be wrong
Your mistake
Yo a wong
I got 40 by answering the question put in front of me not reinventing the equation to suit my answer
+1
same
Yeh, I did not watch the video and thought it was obvious. I'm waiting to see if someone disagrees, before watching.
@@johnshaw6702 I searched "math puzzles" on google, saw this picture in the thumbnail, and came up with 96 in about 15 seconds. 40 was not obvious to me, I did not interpret the puzzle that way at all. However, both approaches are clearly correct given the scope of information provided.
@@TranscendentPhoenix I agree. Without a hint to point you in a particular direction, either or both answers are correct. All the real life math puzzles I have worked on over the years had only one answer; not counting ±n.
Oh, I did it another way but got 96. It was...
1x(4+1)=5
2x(5+1)=12
Etc.
+aaryia gunavante Me too
Olatiny well yeah, cause a+ab=a(1+b)
Just facto riding into making it less specific and generalising
He clearly show the exact same thing on the video.
40 answer
Matias Kurvinen
No he didn't.
It doesn’t really make sense to continue the pattern with 1.2,3…,8 and 4,5,6,…,11 because it’s really 1,2,3 and 4,5,6. So if we wanted to continue the pattern up to 8 it would 1,2,3…,8 and then 9,10,11,…16. And we don’t arrive at 8+11. We end up with 8+16. So continuing the pattern in this way seems incorrect.
I do prefer the 40 answer because it’s more like real math than the 96 method. With the running total method, it makes sense in a mathematical sense. I have 1+4 = 5, I want to add 2 and 5 so I’ll write 2+5 = 12 etc… It’s something you could do (even if it’s visually wrong) to add up a set of numbers if you’re trying to get the end result in a fast way. The other method, being a+b = a + ab makes no sense. Why would the + sign even matter? The puzzle could’ve been 1^4 = 5, 2^5 = 12,… and the result wouldn’t change. You would just do a^b = a + ab
I interpreted it as x * (y+1)
1 * (4+1)=5
2 * (5+1)=12
3 * (6+1)=21
8 * (11+1)=96
Truttt Same here
I've used the same logic
Same as a+ab
Same
I like this good thinking
The fact that you can achieve different results with different methods or that you can handle the puzzle with a little imagination to match the results says it all
If you look at the intervals between the numbers, they go up + 2. You can also solve it this way by seeing that interval between 5 and 12 is 7, interval between 12 and 21 is 9 (7 + 2) and so on.
40
I'm pretty simple, so my answer is 19.
Lmao
gj
samee
Aquarium 751
Aquarium 7512 the assumption there though is that there are missing steps to the pattern (and there is no clear indication that there is...)
that said I originally got 96 too.
In my opinion it’s 52 if you consistently continue the pattern of 1+4=5, 2+5+5=12, 3+6+6+6= 21 and 8+11+11+11+11=52 😢
In my opinion, the answer should be 40 since that "missing lines" are not given in the problem, so we just focus on answering based only on the given equation
Park Bo-Young
Advice, Think out side the box and consider all possibilities.
I got to the 96 answer without adding any lines. I used the a + ab approach. It does seem as those both 40 and 96 should be considered correct since both fit the pattern established in the first three lines.
Fairy Dark You must not have seen my 1 in 5,000,000 answer.
Rearrange the equations given and follow the same pattern and you will get 40.
Without thinking outside of the box.
Have you ever heard of showing your work
The puzzle should have been stated this way...
GIVEN
1 + 4 = 5
2 + 5 = 12
3 + 6 = 21
CALCULATE
8 + 11 = ?
There is only one correct answer and that is 96. There are more than one way to solve the problem.
1) adding the result of the previous answer to the sum of the two number : 2 + 5 = 2 + 5 + 5 = 12. 3 + 6 = 3 + 6 + 12 = 21, etc.
2) realizing the answers are equal to all the previous answers plus the next odd number starting with 7 :
2 + 5 = 5 + 7 = 12, 3 + 6 = 12 + 9, 4 + 7 = 21 + 11 = 32, etc.
3) deriving the formula from the 3 samples which is n * (n + 4) :
1 + 4 = 1 * (4+1) = 5, 2 + 5 = 2 * (4 + 2), 3 + 6 = 3 * (4 + 3) = 21, etc.
40 as the puzzle is shown. If the question said complete the running total then I’d say 96.
I disagree, the answer is only 96. If method doesn't work with the formula then it's incorrect, as he stated if your answer is 40 the method you use will eventually not work
@@dumakudegcabashe9187 One could make any number the correct answer depending upon how you wanted to interpret the operation.
M chapman - but the other totals could be answers too. So how would anyone know it is 96 and not 117 or 77? The only way to know is if someone has given the answer of 96.
@@werner5618 Exactly!!!!!
@@peacehappyb237 - you could take it to infinity, but.....but.....that puzzle as shown.....to complete the sequence as shown, in my opinion the result is 40.
I did the running total method but added the numbers in the middle of 3 and eight. So 4+7 would be 11 and adding that to 21 gets 32. If you keep adding one to each number in the equation, you will eventually get 8+11 which equals 96.
EDIT: I posted this right after he showed us the first two methods and their answers and didn't realize that he would show my idea immediately after.
I got to the answer another way by looking at a predictable pattern here. By looking at the pattern in the answers. First answer 5, second answer 12 which is a difference of 7. Third answer is 21 a difference of 9 from the previous answer. Logically the next answer would be 32 when you add 11. Then add 13 and you get 45, then add 15 and you get 60 & so on. So, it follows a pattern of differences of 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 The next would be a difference of 17 an answer of 77 then the next would be 19, an answer of 96 & so on. I just followed the pattern of "the answers" and used that pattern to determine what the following answers would be. Simple.....
If it was writen like this:
1+4=5
2+5=12
3+6=21
...
8+11=?
Then the next line after 3+6=21 should have been 4+7, but since there are no ellipsis you can't add what you want.
So the answer is 40.
Alex Simakos but like you just add 1 to the second number and then times them
Alex Simakos
1+4=5 correct
2+5=12 wrong
3+6=21 wrong
8+11=19 correct
Score 2/4 lol
The answer is 96 it is 8+11= 8*11=88+8=96
Arnisen Desiderio YES! I love your answer!!
96??? I was thinking 40 :-S
Me too
Same. 40 is the most obvious answer tbh.
+Matt G I guess that's why only 1 out of 1000 people got it
same
Fancy meeting you here =P
I got 96, but my process was different than both
When an equation is not bound to equate, the value of its output sits at the mercy of opinion or calculus.
The two "approaches" to this problem one concluding a final answer of "40" and the other "96" are Implied Functions. We can randomly name them a(x) and b(x). In the basic sense functions use "inputs" to generate "outputs". In this problem the two different functions or 'approaches' use the inputs (1 + 4) = 5 (2 + 5) = 7 (3 + 6) = 9. They BOTH then output or generate the same values 5, 12, 21. So when their inputs are 5, 7 and 9 their outputs are equal (5, 12, 21).
a(1 + 4) = b(1 + 4)
a(1 + 4) = 5
b(1 + 4) = 5
a(2 + 5) = b(2 + 5)
a(2 + 5) = 12
b(2 + 5) = 12
a(3 + 6) = b(3 + 6)
a(3 + 6) = 21
b(3 + 6) = 21
HOWEVER, they do NOT equal each other at the input (8+11) as the two different approaches (functions) to solving the problem output different numbers (40 and 96).
a(8 + 11) =/= b(8 + 11)
To solve this "problem" we must first address what the problem is. The true problem is that whomever designed the problem did not state which solution approach (function) to use, presumably as a means of creating mass confliction resulting in internet virility and eventual generation of ad revenue.
Coley Amos 😱😱😱
It's 19 stoopid
Wat a LECTURE...!!😑😶😶😐
Coley Amos You are wrong. For the given functions a(x) = y and b(x) = y, therefore a(x) = b(x).
In a basic sense, if a(x) function equals the same number that b(x) equals, a(x) must equal b(x). These people shouldn't feel retarded over your error.
Occam's Razor. 40
And if you want an additional way to solve the problem, add only the numbers used to obtain the sums; 1+2+3+8+4+5+6+11...which also equals 40 coincidentally. Or not.
A real "genius" is someone who can find different solutions to a problem
Ефто попиновски
I saw 40 right away.... I'll see if I was right now and if I look like a dunce :)
My gosh; talk about over thinking it. I fail to see this is IQ related, as it is all interpretation, the missing lines are not assumed by the description.
I got your same answer. The original solution is far less intuitive.
yeah i got 40 too. i think this is one of those things where there's no absolute right answer, it just shows how different people think. 40 definitely works, so i'm counting it as 'i got it right'
same
It's obviously designed to make a person look past the obvious... which I can see. But it can be taken either way, so there is no 'right' answer, as our minds tend to look for the simplest patterns. Also many of the numbers, 5, 21, 89 are also all fibonacci sequence. :)
I did this a third way, I did multiplication of a pattern I saw.
1×5=5
2×6=12
3×7=21
4×8=32
5×9=45
6×10=60
7×11=77
8×12=96
Guess I seen it differently.
Every people solves it differently
8+11=19 simple 😊
Pretty good solution!
Same.
That is the same as the first solution by the way. Because you are doing a(b+1) which is the same as a + ab. Pretty neat though!
this is the same solution. you factored out the a.
a+ab = a*(1+b)
Coincidentally, adding 1 to the second constant in each equation and continuing as normal results in each equation actually being true. As an example:
1 * (4+1) = 5
2 * (5+1) = 12
3 * (6+1) = 21
8 * (11+1) = 96
I was surprised this wasnt the intended answer but its funny how things work out
That's not really a coincidence, a + ba is the same as (b+1)a. That's the relationship between multiplication and addition of equal terms.
Similarly, people who follow the pattern up and add the missing numbers aren't finding the answer of 96 by coincidence either.
It'd be a trickier issue if the last term was something like 8+12=?, breaking the pattern. You'd still reach the same answer as Presh' first method though.
I disagree with 96... To arrive at that conclusion you have to add information not given.
40, in my opinion, is the correct answer based on what we're given.
It’s a pattern. How is it information not given?
Me too. 40 should be the logical answer.
@@pinkmonkey328 Because 96 is given if it didn't, the rest of the pattern adding on from 40 sequences could have been the answers too.
@@pinkmonkey328 Actually no it isn't a pattern. 1,2,3,4,5 is a pattern, just like 0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34 is a pattern but 1,2,3,8 is not a pattern unless you add or ignore information to create a pattern of convenience that will arrive at the answer you want. Using the information supplied, 40 is the only answer that makes sense.
What are you people talking about?!?! Did you not see the part where 96 was the answer with the info given, and then when he filled in the blanks ALSO got 96 AGAIN! It was proven to be 96 twice! The pattern for adding is clearly (n)+ (3+n) as well so you can conclude the 8 + 11 line is the 8th line and not the fourth line.
You will have many frustrated geniuses if you label this an "IQ" test! The problem? Presenting these numbers by themselves and implying mathematical calculations is incorrect because all but the first of the original lines are incorrect mathematically. If you put the heading "a+b = a+ab" you will define the numbers as part of a pattern and not as individual calculations which will lead to a rational result. You omitted the definition of this exercise and because of this, people will read their own interpretation of "what's the problem"? You need to have a bit more respect for math - and for IQ tests!
Jessica S, NAPLES FL exactl couldnt of have been more transparent
This is more about applying mathematic and logic rather then IQ test.
Jessica S, NAPLES FL I DID IT and i am in yeàr 4
for some reason doing this works
1 x 4 + 1 = 5
2 x 5 + 2 =12
3 x 6 + 3 = 21
8 x 11 + 8 = 96
just multiply the second term by the first term and then add the first and it gives you the answer. For me there are many ways to finish this puzzle.
0:50
BennettCF I figured it by the same way
Yup -- that's how I did it
BennettCF got it that way to, lol thought 96 was false, did not watch the video
my answer is 96
Yes exactly 96! In plain text: The individual sums of the various partial additions form a geometric number sequence, where the next sum is the previous sum + the sum of the next addition. Many people miss that some lines are skipped between the last and penultimate addition.
In regards to 40 being incorrect, if the question permits the ignorance of the meaning of the plus and equals signs than surely I can argue (unless you state in the rules somehow) that I don't have to follow the number sequence of 1,2,3,4,5,... and I can skip all in between 3-8. Additionally if 2+5 = 12 and not 7 then I can argue that the number sequence used in this question is fucked up anyway; eg. 2+ (2x5) equals 12 in the riddle, but 2 + (1x5) equals 12 also in the riddle.
That's why it's stupid. There are no rules. You get to make up your own rules. Then someone says ONLY THESE RULES ARE RIGHT HAHA GOTCHA! Even if two answers follow invented rule sets that are equally consistent and reasonable
There are rules, the answers are in descending number bases starting from base 6, thus making all the equations correct. ( answer is 19 in base 3 = 201)
@@no_peace Yea. Imo 96 and 40 are correct.
The most intelligent answer would be that those statements are false
John P
The intelligent answer is 19
Ayy Lmao thank u
Lily G i think 8 + 11 is 811 :) done ur welcome i solved it all
Lol! That’s true!
40 because the 2+5=7 and it takes 5 more numbers to get to 12.
Then 3+6=9 and it takes 12 numbers to get to 21.
Then 8+11=19 then add the answer of 21 from the previous sum to 19 and you end up with the sum of 40.
blissful ignoramus did you even watch the video?
blissful ignoramus same answer as me
blissful ignoramus. I got the same answer & i feel it should be mentioned in the video its simple lbs
blissful ignoramus this logic doesn't work with 1+4 :)
blissful ignoramus got the same 1 bru
I got to 96, but not in that way.
How I did it is that in every addition except the first I added 1 to the second number and made it a multiplication instead of addition.
It’s actually this:
1 + 4 = 5
2 + 5 = 12 --> 2 x (5+1) = 12
3 + 6 = 21 --> 3 x (6+1) = 21
And then:
8 + 11 = ?? --> 8 x (11+1) = 96
And it also works if you keep going:
96 + 9 + 12 = 117
9 x (12+1) = 117
117 + 10 + 13 = 140
10 x (13+1) = 140
140 + 11 + 14 = 165
11 x (14+1) = 165
96 very easy but how 1 in 1000 i think everyone can solve this in max 1 min
I don't think everyone can solve this
But what if the point is not to continue with 4+7 (increasing order) but perhaps to trick everybody into thinking that was the point and actually continuing to calculate with 8+11(not skipping the other numbers)
The one in a thousand is getting 40
Of course it's simple. Those "only 1 in 1000 can solve it" claims are just to make people interested and feel special.
The claim is wrong
8 + 11 = 19. It's a trick question, don't overthink it
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I'm dying, Fuck me man.Hmmmmm let me think of a trick question. What would be the first thing that your parents would do if they could travel back in time? Think you fucking got it? If you said that they were trying to prevent a mistake, you got the first part right! Now, which mistake were they trying to fix? They would prevent you from being born.
Lol im kidding.
Protagnis YT to solve it follow these two steps
1.Multiply the numbers
8x11=88
2.Add the first number to the product
88+8=96
11+8=96
It's not a trick question start thinking outside the box
lol
this is some stephen hawking shit
Cedora Shields no 11 + 8 is 19. Math has rules... so the one side *HAS* to be equal to the other side.
Adding extra lines to the problem is a bit of a leap. I realize that it isn't a true math problem, because each statement other than the first is logically false.
A math equation is really a logic statement that is true or false. 1 + 4 = ? is really saying, "complete this statement: 'one added to four is ...'" The student writes 6, and the teacher marks it "wrong" which, is to say from a logical standpoint, "false." (It isn't WRONG per se, but untrue that 1 + 4 = 6).
So, in that sense, whether the math in each line is "correct" or not doesn't matter.
However, in logic, one can never - ever - assume that information left out is one thing or another, nor can one add information to the supplied data to produce the answer you want. Just because you are capable of getting one of the two possible results by adding data does not add any weight to one of the two possible results being more likely than the other.
BOTH interpretations of the data available are equally valid, and therefore, both answers: 40, AND 96 are equally correct.
Except this isn't CS - this is mathematics. It's certainly valid to redefine an operator, however, but if you redefined an operator, you'd need to supply that little piece of information at the beginning of the statement or series of statements to begin with.
Whether the operator has been redefined or not, though, is immaterial, because there simply is not enough information one way or another to make an assessment as to which answer is the correct one - because both possible answers are, as I indicated, equally valid.
Which rather renders the entire question pointless, doesn't it? ;)
Steven Britton he did it right the last number 77+8+11=96
thats even because the problem is 8 + 11=? so 77 is the only one add in so it's so right
He obviously got 40 and is upset that he got it wrong, and is trying to justify his lack of problem solving
Spencer Jones who did?
Problem with these kinds of problems is that they can VALIDLY be interpreted in several different ways, thus arriving at several different perfectly valid answers.
Paused at 0:16 my guess is 96 as
1x4+1=5
2x5+2=12
3x6+3=21
8x11+8=96
My thoughts too, it's the same as presented just not distributed
1x(4+1)
2x(5+1)
3x(6+1)
8x(11+1)
same same I know.. but maybe more visual
it's funny how I got to my method and didn't even think there was another way to get to result.
both methods yield 96.
+askpatrick same here. Whenever I see problems like this I start subtracting, adding, multiplying, etc. until I find a pattern.
Got the same method down very quickly.
Let me ask you this, under the same logic:
47 + 302 = ?
The answer should be 19, I can't help it that someone got the second and third line wrong.
👍👍👍😂
That's the correct answer in my opinion too.
lol it's a puzzle. it's okay to think a little instead of assuming it's "wrong"
***** Of course it's still a puzzle. This is a solution.
For this kind of puzzle, there are rules:
You are presented with one or more statements, which are, by definition, true.
The objective is to find the 'code' that makes them true and use that code to solve for another incomplete statement.
If it was just:
"Here are three lines of jibberish and now solve a simple addition problem," there wouldn't be much point, would there?
I came up with 96 using the "running total" method and by not taking the shortcut.
mee too lol
@@mj-lc9db 96 too.
Haha it didn't even occur to me that there could be a shortcut... I've added the 'missing' lines without thinking that there could be a problem by doing that...
I got 96 by taking
A x b + a
8 x 11 + 8
1 x 4 + 1= 5
2 x 5 + 2= 12
3 x 6 + 3= 21
Oof. Didnt watch the video before commenting. Oof
If we are going to add lines not present, there is another possible pattern that could be used.
1 + 4 = 5
2 + 5 = 12
3 + 6 = 21
7 + 10 = 38
8 + 11 = 57
9 + 12 = 79
That is using the running total and could be continued. It assumes the first number and second number are in grids of three, are sequential in the grid from top to bottom and then continue in the next column before resetting. They would need to be in groups of three since the left number is always three less than the right number.
As others have said, what this puzzle illustrates is, given limited information, the "answer" is what works AND can be justified which means there might be multiple answers.
Solved it in like 4 seconds
So simple that only a genius could have done that 😂
Literally was so easy
It wasn't that difficult, was actualy easy ahaha
Me too
🤦♂️
I got 40 when I first seen this puzzle. Honestly
Same here... 40
Me too 40
Same
So no one get 19? Are you guys right in the head?
Same here
It's 40. To get to 96 you have to calculate in things that do not exist in the problem. Ya cant make up your own equations as you go. you have to work with what your given. This is simply pattern recognition.
While 40 was my initial answer you are still adding in additional information that somehow the answer to the previous problem is relevant to the current. There is nothing that actually says this in the problem so its just an assumption added on
AGREE
+sdrawkcabnipyt Your not adding anything. You are simply expected to recognise the mathematical sequential pattern.
The answer is 19 people. 8 + 11 = 19. :p
*****
or the question is about recognizing that statements can lie...
I came up with 40... since the pattern exists, it is obviously relevant to the problem, and spotting the pattern is key
1 + 4 = 5
2 + 5 = 7 (+ the answer to the above line being 5) so 7 + 5 = 12
3 + 6 = 9 (+ the answer to the above line being 12) so 9 + 12 = 21
8 + 11 = 19 Using the same method in the above, one would perform 19 + 21 to = 40
Just my $0.02. IF the idea was for one to change the entire question being asked, that go WAY beyond the "4 Corners" of the problem as written. But I believe that spotting the pattern in the 3 completed problems, and following it to its logical conclusion, is paramount to the questions viability to be included as part of an IQ Test I understand how one might extrapolate the sequence ALL the way out to a drawn out conclusion of 96, however, that was NOT the question put forth by the problem as written. The methodology to achieve 96, while certainly understandable, I believe adds far more complexity to the question rather than accepting the need to address the problem "As Written"
I got 96 for this. Each column goes up by 1 and the answer goes up by the next odd number (+7, +9, +11,...)
I came out with 40 because we were given a set of facts to deal with to get to one number. We're also giving the operations, so I guess you can stretch it with all the other garbage that went on there but I think that the simplest pattern was leading to 40
That's what I got
I agree, 40 seems correct/more logical by following the addition of 5 to 2 plus 5 to get 12, then adding 12 to 3 plus 6, to get 21, then adding 21 to 8 plus 11 to arrive at 40.
The answer is 40!
Yeah I don't remember the last part being part of the question. If I'm adding numbers I don't throw in stuff that's not part of the problem 40 is 1000% the correct answer
1*(4+1)=5
2*(5+1)=12
3*(6+1)=21
8*(11+1)=96
I did the same thing!!!!
I just did 1*4+1. 2*5+2, 3*6+3, which gave me 8*11+8 = 96. Just how i saw this test, we think so different
I did the same within about 20 seconds. This is my answer.
dzozew1 my answer is same but method is different i used ap
Yes, I also did that, but it's exactly the same. That method is just a factorisation of what there is in the video : we did a*(1+b), and he did a+ab. The two are equal, of course.
1+4 +(0) = 5
2+5 +(5) = 12
3+5 +(12)= 21
8+11+(21)= 40
You take the previous answer and add it to the equation.
I used your thing i also got 40
The second method of "running total" is what I used
I’m going to say 40, because that’s what jumps out at me.
me to: = 40
Same here
well, I don't like that because in the system up until the third group we have employed consecutive numbers so that one has to supply the missing numbers or 1 + 4 = 5 + 2 + 5 = 12 + 3 + 6 = 21 + 4 + 7 = 32 + 5 + 8 = 45 + 6 + 9 = 60 + 7 + 10 = 77 + 8 + 11 = 96
40 is certainly consistent with the data given. It can’t be a wrong answer. Maybe, there is another right answer too, but that doesn’t negate the logic of 40 as a correct answer.
40 too.
they are all right depending on interpretation
With an infinite more solutions.
unless you say 19 you're wrong because 11 + 8 is equal to 19.
@@flemit35 lmao i love this comment.
Only 1 in a 1000 can solve? That's crap, technically no one is right or wrong unless you can get the world's leading mathimaticall minds to determine a "correct" answer.
only 1 in a 100,000 gets it wrong, technically, we are all correct if we use common logic.
There are at least two different answers and many ways to solve this. They have chosen "96" to be the "Correct" answer and won't look at other solutions/answers. Not very scientific...should consider all possibilities not just the one that proves your theory.
Myelinator has the best response. Since no 'rules' or assuptions were given with the problem, folks are free to make their own assumptions about how sums were achieved.
This isn't really a math problem, but more like an exercise in creative thinking, since there is actually more than one correct answer.
That's what I got!! 40
I agree on the answer of a given equation is 96, not 40. A lot of people say it's 40, but it's not. They're using the running total which is equal to 40. The guy said used an equation formula 'a+b > a+ab' and this is why the answer is 96, relating to question.
Say your in a classroom. First kid comes up and writes the answers 1+4=5. Second kid 2+5=12. Third kid 3+6=11. Fourth kid 3+6=21. Now it's your turn... 8+11= X . I know many will want to find a hidden series and come up with 40 or 96. However the solution to 8+11=19 without any separate instructions telling you to complete the series. The second and third answers are simply incorrect. Those kids get a zero for the assignment and spend recess doing basic math facts. Are you going to miss recess too?
96?
1+4=5(it means 1x4+1=5)
2+5=12(2x5+2=12)
3+6=21(3x6+3=21)
so if 8+11=96(8x11+8=96)
I commented before watching the video -____-
oh but yeah, I'm right xD
Febybdn i did this aswell but i deleted my comment cuz alot of other people said the answer was 40
I got 96 (havent watched it yet)
Yee boiii
1+4=5 ((1*4)+1)
2+5=12 ((2*5)+2)
3+6=21 ((3*6)+3)
8+11=96 ((8*11)+8)
on first sight wtf 1 out of 1000 people? no way
baba jaga .... Same here i used same formula that you did🎯
This guy got it right too, lit.
Got it first look too
Yeah of course
Yeppp, I got this immediately, it's just the first number times the last plus the first.