Why is this Simple Puzzle impossible to solve?Connect the dotsNetwork connection: Create a network that guides the signal from start to goalSignal-network: Create a network that guides 2 signalsA case of academic misconduct?A moderate visual number puzzle“The Unfinished ________ Waltz”Constructing 0.35 Unit Length$verb|Eight Circles|$What is the optimal strategy for this triangular board game?Is it possible to methodically find the total of ways to read a given phrase making a stack?
Plot twist where the antagonist wins
Construct a word ladder
Why does Mjolnir fall down in Age of Ultron but not in Endgame?
The usage of "run a mile" in a sentence
What are the mechanical differences between the uncommon Medallion of Thoughts and the rare Potion of Mind Reading?
Why is a `for` loop so much faster to count True values?
Where have Brexit voters gone?
Installed Tankless Water Heater - Internet loss when active
Externally monitoring CPU/SSD activity without software access
Count rotary dial pulses in a phone number (including letters)
Is it true that cut time means "play twice as fast as written"?
High resistance, no current. What's the point of a potential then?
Would Jetfuel for a modern jet like an F-16 or a F-35 be producable in the WW2 era?
Alignment: "Breaking out" of environment (enumerate / minipage)
In general, would I need to season a meat when making a sauce?
My employer faked my resume to acquire projects
Do photons bend spacetime or not?
Where's this lookout in Nova Scotia?
NIntegrate doesn't evaluate
Are these reasonable traits for someone with autism?
What is Theresa May waiting for?
What are these arcade games in Ghostbusters 1984?
Which European Languages are not Indo-European?
Why didn't Project Mercury advance to an orbital flight on their second mission?
Why is this Simple Puzzle impossible to solve?
Connect the dotsNetwork connection: Create a network that guides the signal from start to goalSignal-network: Create a network that guides 2 signalsA case of academic misconduct?A moderate visual number puzzle“The Unfinished ________ Waltz”Constructing 0.35 Unit Length$verb|Eight Circles|$What is the optimal strategy for this triangular board game?Is it possible to methodically find the total of ways to read a given phrase making a stack?
$begingroup$
Connect each red circle with each black circle by drawing a line and the lines should not touch.
From each red circle, 3 lines must be drawn which connect red circles with black circles, but the lines must not touch.

I am 32 years old now. When I was in 4th class, a friend of mine challenged me to solve this problem and I still can't solve it.
mathematics visual
New contributor
Navid2132 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Connect each red circle with each black circle by drawing a line and the lines should not touch.
From each red circle, 3 lines must be drawn which connect red circles with black circles, but the lines must not touch.

I am 32 years old now. When I was in 4th class, a friend of mine challenged me to solve this problem and I still can't solve it.
mathematics visual
New contributor
Navid2132 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Connect each red circle with each black circle by drawing a line and the lines should not touch.
From each red circle, 3 lines must be drawn which connect red circles with black circles, but the lines must not touch.

I am 32 years old now. When I was in 4th class, a friend of mine challenged me to solve this problem and I still can't solve it.
mathematics visual
New contributor
Navid2132 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
Connect each red circle with each black circle by drawing a line and the lines should not touch.
From each red circle, 3 lines must be drawn which connect red circles with black circles, but the lines must not touch.

I am 32 years old now. When I was in 4th class, a friend of mine challenged me to solve this problem and I still can't solve it.
mathematics visual
mathematics visual
New contributor
Navid2132 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Navid2132 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 10 hours ago
Rand al'Thor
72.4k14238479
72.4k14238479
New contributor
Navid2132 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 11 hours ago
Navid2132Navid2132
462
462
New contributor
Navid2132 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Navid2132 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is a famous problem called the Three utilities problem, which is part of the mathematical field of graph theory. The problem basically asks for a planar embedding of the utility graph, which does not exist.
While it's not exactly know when the puzzle was invented, it was published at least as far back as 1913 and it took mathematicians until 1930 to solve it. That means it's rather difficult to prove why the puzzle is impossible to solve; it requires some advanced mathematics to do so, beyond the scope of almost all readers here. This is again a case of "it's hard to prove a negative".
Simply put, there are just too many lines which need to be drawn and too few points. This is just a 'fact' of two-dimensional mathematics, just like the icosahedron being the largest (three dimensional) polyhedron.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I would say it is not too difficult to prove once you can assume the Jordan curve theorem. I've essentially outlined the argument in my answer which I think is what they are referring to here
$endgroup$
– hexomino
10 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While many other answers have covered the fact that this is provably impossible as typically understood. I remember as a kid being presented with this as a riddle and the way it was phrased was similar to how you phrased it. In that case it is often acceptable to pass a line through one of the dots, resulting in:

Of course this is a bit of a cheeky answer, but the way it is often worded, especially if intended to actually be solved, this is a solution.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a problem I've thought about quite a bit too and here is my "proof" for why it cannot be done
For convenience, let us label the black circles $B_1, B_2, B_3$ and the red circles $R_1, R_2, R_3$.
Suppose there exists a way to connect all the circles as specified. Then the circles $B_1, R_1, B_2, R_2$ form a closed loop in the plane.
Since the circle $B_3$ and $R_3$ must be connected to each other, they must be both inside the loop or both outside the loop.
Both inside
The interiors of the loops formed by sequences of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ and $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ are disjoint regions whose union is the interior of the original loop. The circle $R_3$ must lie inside one of these loops. If it is inside the first loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_2$ which is outside the first loop. If it is inside the second loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_1$ which is outside the second loop. This is a contradiction.
Both outside
In this case, either the sequence of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ or $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ forms a loop whose finite interior is disjoint from that of the original. Without loss of generality, suppose it is the former. Then $R_3$ must be within this loop or outside of it. If it is within the loop, then there is not way to connect it to $B_2$, which is outside the loop. If it is outside this loop, there is not way to connect it to $B_1$ which is within the larger loop formed by $B_3, R_1, B_2, R_2$. Hence another contradiction.
Further reading
This is a corollary of Kuratowksi's Theorem and is an example of what they call a $K_3,3$ graph.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
so its not possible?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Navid2132 Yes, unless you do something clever like suggested in Tahel's answer. But just as a planar problem, impossible to solve.
$endgroup$
– hexomino
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hexomino, nice proof! +1!
$endgroup$
– Domosed
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It has to do with graph theory and non-planar graphs.
If (and only if) a graph is planar, you can draw it on a flat piece of paper without the lines ever crossing.
On the other hand, Kuratowski's theorem states that a finite graph is planar if (and only if) it doesn't contain the K5 graph or the K3,3 graph in any form.
The K5 graph is the completely connected graph with 5 nodes. The K3,3 graph is the complete bipartite graph with 3 nodes on either side, which is also known as "the utility graph" because of this very puzzle. (It's usually given in the form of connecting utilities to houses.)
So this puzzle asks you to draw one of the two "archetypal" non-planar graphs, and therefore it's impossible to solve it on a flat piece of paper. Which is why some silly guys "fixed" the puzzle by printing it on a mug. :-)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The "If (and only if)" sentence should be replaced by "a graph is said to be.. " or "a graph is called...". It is good practice to keep words involving causality (in one or both ways) for situations that actually involve theorems and not definitions.
$endgroup$
– Arnaud Mortier
40 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am 32 years old now. When I was in 4th class, a friend of mine challenged me to solve this problem and I still can't solve it.
If your friend ask you to do this on paper page, there is a solution with this small "legit hack":
just make a hole in the paper, and draw a line through it, then continue the line on the other side and comme back through another hole !
New contributor
Synn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
not the right answer
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yep but tha't a correct solution on paper page.
$endgroup$
– Synn
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
You could also fold a corner of the paper so that it covers part of a previously drawn edge, creating a gap or bridge for you to go through. This trick is more often used for drawing an impossible Euler path without lifting pen from the paper.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
"Prepare the jump to Hyperspace and inform Lord Vader!"
$endgroup$
– David Tonhofer
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The answer is not so nice but there is nothing to do because this puzzle is unsolvable in 2D.look here ,It's the same principle
(Welcome to Puzzling...)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
so its not possible to slove it?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, its not possible.
$endgroup$
– Tahel
11 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes. - From Review
$endgroup$
– F1Krazy
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "559"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Navid2132 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f84316%2fwhy-is-this-simple-puzzle-impossible-to-solve%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is a famous problem called the Three utilities problem, which is part of the mathematical field of graph theory. The problem basically asks for a planar embedding of the utility graph, which does not exist.
While it's not exactly know when the puzzle was invented, it was published at least as far back as 1913 and it took mathematicians until 1930 to solve it. That means it's rather difficult to prove why the puzzle is impossible to solve; it requires some advanced mathematics to do so, beyond the scope of almost all readers here. This is again a case of "it's hard to prove a negative".
Simply put, there are just too many lines which need to be drawn and too few points. This is just a 'fact' of two-dimensional mathematics, just like the icosahedron being the largest (three dimensional) polyhedron.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I would say it is not too difficult to prove once you can assume the Jordan curve theorem. I've essentially outlined the argument in my answer which I think is what they are referring to here
$endgroup$
– hexomino
10 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a famous problem called the Three utilities problem, which is part of the mathematical field of graph theory. The problem basically asks for a planar embedding of the utility graph, which does not exist.
While it's not exactly know when the puzzle was invented, it was published at least as far back as 1913 and it took mathematicians until 1930 to solve it. That means it's rather difficult to prove why the puzzle is impossible to solve; it requires some advanced mathematics to do so, beyond the scope of almost all readers here. This is again a case of "it's hard to prove a negative".
Simply put, there are just too many lines which need to be drawn and too few points. This is just a 'fact' of two-dimensional mathematics, just like the icosahedron being the largest (three dimensional) polyhedron.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I would say it is not too difficult to prove once you can assume the Jordan curve theorem. I've essentially outlined the argument in my answer which I think is what they are referring to here
$endgroup$
– hexomino
10 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a famous problem called the Three utilities problem, which is part of the mathematical field of graph theory. The problem basically asks for a planar embedding of the utility graph, which does not exist.
While it's not exactly know when the puzzle was invented, it was published at least as far back as 1913 and it took mathematicians until 1930 to solve it. That means it's rather difficult to prove why the puzzle is impossible to solve; it requires some advanced mathematics to do so, beyond the scope of almost all readers here. This is again a case of "it's hard to prove a negative".
Simply put, there are just too many lines which need to be drawn and too few points. This is just a 'fact' of two-dimensional mathematics, just like the icosahedron being the largest (three dimensional) polyhedron.
$endgroup$
This is a famous problem called the Three utilities problem, which is part of the mathematical field of graph theory. The problem basically asks for a planar embedding of the utility graph, which does not exist.
While it's not exactly know when the puzzle was invented, it was published at least as far back as 1913 and it took mathematicians until 1930 to solve it. That means it's rather difficult to prove why the puzzle is impossible to solve; it requires some advanced mathematics to do so, beyond the scope of almost all readers here. This is again a case of "it's hard to prove a negative".
Simply put, there are just too many lines which need to be drawn and too few points. This is just a 'fact' of two-dimensional mathematics, just like the icosahedron being the largest (three dimensional) polyhedron.
answered 11 hours ago
GlorfindelGlorfindel
15.8k46092
15.8k46092
$begingroup$
I would say it is not too difficult to prove once you can assume the Jordan curve theorem. I've essentially outlined the argument in my answer which I think is what they are referring to here
$endgroup$
– hexomino
10 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I would say it is not too difficult to prove once you can assume the Jordan curve theorem. I've essentially outlined the argument in my answer which I think is what they are referring to here
$endgroup$
– hexomino
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
I would say it is not too difficult to prove once you can assume the Jordan curve theorem. I've essentially outlined the argument in my answer which I think is what they are referring to here
$endgroup$
– hexomino
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
I would say it is not too difficult to prove once you can assume the Jordan curve theorem. I've essentially outlined the argument in my answer which I think is what they are referring to here
$endgroup$
– hexomino
10 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While many other answers have covered the fact that this is provably impossible as typically understood. I remember as a kid being presented with this as a riddle and the way it was phrased was similar to how you phrased it. In that case it is often acceptable to pass a line through one of the dots, resulting in:

Of course this is a bit of a cheeky answer, but the way it is often worded, especially if intended to actually be solved, this is a solution.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While many other answers have covered the fact that this is provably impossible as typically understood. I remember as a kid being presented with this as a riddle and the way it was phrased was similar to how you phrased it. In that case it is often acceptable to pass a line through one of the dots, resulting in:

Of course this is a bit of a cheeky answer, but the way it is often worded, especially if intended to actually be solved, this is a solution.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While many other answers have covered the fact that this is provably impossible as typically understood. I remember as a kid being presented with this as a riddle and the way it was phrased was similar to how you phrased it. In that case it is often acceptable to pass a line through one of the dots, resulting in:

Of course this is a bit of a cheeky answer, but the way it is often worded, especially if intended to actually be solved, this is a solution.
$endgroup$
While many other answers have covered the fact that this is provably impossible as typically understood. I remember as a kid being presented with this as a riddle and the way it was phrased was similar to how you phrased it. In that case it is often acceptable to pass a line through one of the dots, resulting in:

Of course this is a bit of a cheeky answer, but the way it is often worded, especially if intended to actually be solved, this is a solution.
edited 2 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
LambdaBetaLambdaBeta
3614
3614
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a problem I've thought about quite a bit too and here is my "proof" for why it cannot be done
For convenience, let us label the black circles $B_1, B_2, B_3$ and the red circles $R_1, R_2, R_3$.
Suppose there exists a way to connect all the circles as specified. Then the circles $B_1, R_1, B_2, R_2$ form a closed loop in the plane.
Since the circle $B_3$ and $R_3$ must be connected to each other, they must be both inside the loop or both outside the loop.
Both inside
The interiors of the loops formed by sequences of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ and $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ are disjoint regions whose union is the interior of the original loop. The circle $R_3$ must lie inside one of these loops. If it is inside the first loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_2$ which is outside the first loop. If it is inside the second loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_1$ which is outside the second loop. This is a contradiction.
Both outside
In this case, either the sequence of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ or $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ forms a loop whose finite interior is disjoint from that of the original. Without loss of generality, suppose it is the former. Then $R_3$ must be within this loop or outside of it. If it is within the loop, then there is not way to connect it to $B_2$, which is outside the loop. If it is outside this loop, there is not way to connect it to $B_1$ which is within the larger loop formed by $B_3, R_1, B_2, R_2$. Hence another contradiction.
Further reading
This is a corollary of Kuratowksi's Theorem and is an example of what they call a $K_3,3$ graph.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
so its not possible?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Navid2132 Yes, unless you do something clever like suggested in Tahel's answer. But just as a planar problem, impossible to solve.
$endgroup$
– hexomino
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hexomino, nice proof! +1!
$endgroup$
– Domosed
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a problem I've thought about quite a bit too and here is my "proof" for why it cannot be done
For convenience, let us label the black circles $B_1, B_2, B_3$ and the red circles $R_1, R_2, R_3$.
Suppose there exists a way to connect all the circles as specified. Then the circles $B_1, R_1, B_2, R_2$ form a closed loop in the plane.
Since the circle $B_3$ and $R_3$ must be connected to each other, they must be both inside the loop or both outside the loop.
Both inside
The interiors of the loops formed by sequences of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ and $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ are disjoint regions whose union is the interior of the original loop. The circle $R_3$ must lie inside one of these loops. If it is inside the first loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_2$ which is outside the first loop. If it is inside the second loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_1$ which is outside the second loop. This is a contradiction.
Both outside
In this case, either the sequence of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ or $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ forms a loop whose finite interior is disjoint from that of the original. Without loss of generality, suppose it is the former. Then $R_3$ must be within this loop or outside of it. If it is within the loop, then there is not way to connect it to $B_2$, which is outside the loop. If it is outside this loop, there is not way to connect it to $B_1$ which is within the larger loop formed by $B_3, R_1, B_2, R_2$. Hence another contradiction.
Further reading
This is a corollary of Kuratowksi's Theorem and is an example of what they call a $K_3,3$ graph.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
so its not possible?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Navid2132 Yes, unless you do something clever like suggested in Tahel's answer. But just as a planar problem, impossible to solve.
$endgroup$
– hexomino
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hexomino, nice proof! +1!
$endgroup$
– Domosed
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a problem I've thought about quite a bit too and here is my "proof" for why it cannot be done
For convenience, let us label the black circles $B_1, B_2, B_3$ and the red circles $R_1, R_2, R_3$.
Suppose there exists a way to connect all the circles as specified. Then the circles $B_1, R_1, B_2, R_2$ form a closed loop in the plane.
Since the circle $B_3$ and $R_3$ must be connected to each other, they must be both inside the loop or both outside the loop.
Both inside
The interiors of the loops formed by sequences of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ and $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ are disjoint regions whose union is the interior of the original loop. The circle $R_3$ must lie inside one of these loops. If it is inside the first loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_2$ which is outside the first loop. If it is inside the second loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_1$ which is outside the second loop. This is a contradiction.
Both outside
In this case, either the sequence of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ or $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ forms a loop whose finite interior is disjoint from that of the original. Without loss of generality, suppose it is the former. Then $R_3$ must be within this loop or outside of it. If it is within the loop, then there is not way to connect it to $B_2$, which is outside the loop. If it is outside this loop, there is not way to connect it to $B_1$ which is within the larger loop formed by $B_3, R_1, B_2, R_2$. Hence another contradiction.
Further reading
This is a corollary of Kuratowksi's Theorem and is an example of what they call a $K_3,3$ graph.
$endgroup$
This is a problem I've thought about quite a bit too and here is my "proof" for why it cannot be done
For convenience, let us label the black circles $B_1, B_2, B_3$ and the red circles $R_1, R_2, R_3$.
Suppose there exists a way to connect all the circles as specified. Then the circles $B_1, R_1, B_2, R_2$ form a closed loop in the plane.
Since the circle $B_3$ and $R_3$ must be connected to each other, they must be both inside the loop or both outside the loop.
Both inside
The interiors of the loops formed by sequences of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ and $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ are disjoint regions whose union is the interior of the original loop. The circle $R_3$ must lie inside one of these loops. If it is inside the first loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_2$ which is outside the first loop. If it is inside the second loop, there is no way to connect it to $B_1$ which is outside the second loop. This is a contradiction.
Both outside
In this case, either the sequence of circles $B_1, R_1, B_3, R_2$ or $B_2, R_2, B_3, R_1$ forms a loop whose finite interior is disjoint from that of the original. Without loss of generality, suppose it is the former. Then $R_3$ must be within this loop or outside of it. If it is within the loop, then there is not way to connect it to $B_2$, which is outside the loop. If it is outside this loop, there is not way to connect it to $B_1$ which is within the larger loop formed by $B_3, R_1, B_2, R_2$. Hence another contradiction.
Further reading
This is a corollary of Kuratowksi's Theorem and is an example of what they call a $K_3,3$ graph.
answered 11 hours ago
hexominohexomino
50.8k4150240
50.8k4150240
$begingroup$
so its not possible?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Navid2132 Yes, unless you do something clever like suggested in Tahel's answer. But just as a planar problem, impossible to solve.
$endgroup$
– hexomino
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hexomino, nice proof! +1!
$endgroup$
– Domosed
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
so its not possible?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Navid2132 Yes, unless you do something clever like suggested in Tahel's answer. But just as a planar problem, impossible to solve.
$endgroup$
– hexomino
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hexomino, nice proof! +1!
$endgroup$
– Domosed
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
so its not possible?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
so its not possible?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Navid2132 Yes, unless you do something clever like suggested in Tahel's answer. But just as a planar problem, impossible to solve.
$endgroup$
– hexomino
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Navid2132 Yes, unless you do something clever like suggested in Tahel's answer. But just as a planar problem, impossible to solve.
$endgroup$
– hexomino
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hexomino, nice proof! +1!
$endgroup$
– Domosed
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hexomino, nice proof! +1!
$endgroup$
– Domosed
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It has to do with graph theory and non-planar graphs.
If (and only if) a graph is planar, you can draw it on a flat piece of paper without the lines ever crossing.
On the other hand, Kuratowski's theorem states that a finite graph is planar if (and only if) it doesn't contain the K5 graph or the K3,3 graph in any form.
The K5 graph is the completely connected graph with 5 nodes. The K3,3 graph is the complete bipartite graph with 3 nodes on either side, which is also known as "the utility graph" because of this very puzzle. (It's usually given in the form of connecting utilities to houses.)
So this puzzle asks you to draw one of the two "archetypal" non-planar graphs, and therefore it's impossible to solve it on a flat piece of paper. Which is why some silly guys "fixed" the puzzle by printing it on a mug. :-)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The "If (and only if)" sentence should be replaced by "a graph is said to be.. " or "a graph is called...". It is good practice to keep words involving causality (in one or both ways) for situations that actually involve theorems and not definitions.
$endgroup$
– Arnaud Mortier
40 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It has to do with graph theory and non-planar graphs.
If (and only if) a graph is planar, you can draw it on a flat piece of paper without the lines ever crossing.
On the other hand, Kuratowski's theorem states that a finite graph is planar if (and only if) it doesn't contain the K5 graph or the K3,3 graph in any form.
The K5 graph is the completely connected graph with 5 nodes. The K3,3 graph is the complete bipartite graph with 3 nodes on either side, which is also known as "the utility graph" because of this very puzzle. (It's usually given in the form of connecting utilities to houses.)
So this puzzle asks you to draw one of the two "archetypal" non-planar graphs, and therefore it's impossible to solve it on a flat piece of paper. Which is why some silly guys "fixed" the puzzle by printing it on a mug. :-)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The "If (and only if)" sentence should be replaced by "a graph is said to be.. " or "a graph is called...". It is good practice to keep words involving causality (in one or both ways) for situations that actually involve theorems and not definitions.
$endgroup$
– Arnaud Mortier
40 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It has to do with graph theory and non-planar graphs.
If (and only if) a graph is planar, you can draw it on a flat piece of paper without the lines ever crossing.
On the other hand, Kuratowski's theorem states that a finite graph is planar if (and only if) it doesn't contain the K5 graph or the K3,3 graph in any form.
The K5 graph is the completely connected graph with 5 nodes. The K3,3 graph is the complete bipartite graph with 3 nodes on either side, which is also known as "the utility graph" because of this very puzzle. (It's usually given in the form of connecting utilities to houses.)
So this puzzle asks you to draw one of the two "archetypal" non-planar graphs, and therefore it's impossible to solve it on a flat piece of paper. Which is why some silly guys "fixed" the puzzle by printing it on a mug. :-)
$endgroup$
It has to do with graph theory and non-planar graphs.
If (and only if) a graph is planar, you can draw it on a flat piece of paper without the lines ever crossing.
On the other hand, Kuratowski's theorem states that a finite graph is planar if (and only if) it doesn't contain the K5 graph or the K3,3 graph in any form.
The K5 graph is the completely connected graph with 5 nodes. The K3,3 graph is the complete bipartite graph with 3 nodes on either side, which is also known as "the utility graph" because of this very puzzle. (It's usually given in the form of connecting utilities to houses.)
So this puzzle asks you to draw one of the two "archetypal" non-planar graphs, and therefore it's impossible to solve it on a flat piece of paper. Which is why some silly guys "fixed" the puzzle by printing it on a mug. :-)
answered 11 hours ago
BassBass
32.2k477196
32.2k477196
$begingroup$
The "If (and only if)" sentence should be replaced by "a graph is said to be.. " or "a graph is called...". It is good practice to keep words involving causality (in one or both ways) for situations that actually involve theorems and not definitions.
$endgroup$
– Arnaud Mortier
40 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The "If (and only if)" sentence should be replaced by "a graph is said to be.. " or "a graph is called...". It is good practice to keep words involving causality (in one or both ways) for situations that actually involve theorems and not definitions.
$endgroup$
– Arnaud Mortier
40 mins ago
$begingroup$
The "If (and only if)" sentence should be replaced by "a graph is said to be.. " or "a graph is called...". It is good practice to keep words involving causality (in one or both ways) for situations that actually involve theorems and not definitions.
$endgroup$
– Arnaud Mortier
40 mins ago
$begingroup$
The "If (and only if)" sentence should be replaced by "a graph is said to be.. " or "a graph is called...". It is good practice to keep words involving causality (in one or both ways) for situations that actually involve theorems and not definitions.
$endgroup$
– Arnaud Mortier
40 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am 32 years old now. When I was in 4th class, a friend of mine challenged me to solve this problem and I still can't solve it.
If your friend ask you to do this on paper page, there is a solution with this small "legit hack":
just make a hole in the paper, and draw a line through it, then continue the line on the other side and comme back through another hole !
New contributor
Synn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
not the right answer
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yep but tha't a correct solution on paper page.
$endgroup$
– Synn
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
You could also fold a corner of the paper so that it covers part of a previously drawn edge, creating a gap or bridge for you to go through. This trick is more often used for drawing an impossible Euler path without lifting pen from the paper.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
"Prepare the jump to Hyperspace and inform Lord Vader!"
$endgroup$
– David Tonhofer
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am 32 years old now. When I was in 4th class, a friend of mine challenged me to solve this problem and I still can't solve it.
If your friend ask you to do this on paper page, there is a solution with this small "legit hack":
just make a hole in the paper, and draw a line through it, then continue the line on the other side and comme back through another hole !
New contributor
Synn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
not the right answer
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yep but tha't a correct solution on paper page.
$endgroup$
– Synn
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
You could also fold a corner of the paper so that it covers part of a previously drawn edge, creating a gap or bridge for you to go through. This trick is more often used for drawing an impossible Euler path without lifting pen from the paper.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
"Prepare the jump to Hyperspace and inform Lord Vader!"
$endgroup$
– David Tonhofer
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am 32 years old now. When I was in 4th class, a friend of mine challenged me to solve this problem and I still can't solve it.
If your friend ask you to do this on paper page, there is a solution with this small "legit hack":
just make a hole in the paper, and draw a line through it, then continue the line on the other side and comme back through another hole !
New contributor
Synn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
I am 32 years old now. When I was in 4th class, a friend of mine challenged me to solve this problem and I still can't solve it.
If your friend ask you to do this on paper page, there is a solution with this small "legit hack":
just make a hole in the paper, and draw a line through it, then continue the line on the other side and comme back through another hole !
New contributor
Synn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 7 hours ago
Omega Krypton
6,7892953
6,7892953
New contributor
Synn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 11 hours ago
SynnSynn
1785
1785
New contributor
Synn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Synn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$begingroup$
not the right answer
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yep but tha't a correct solution on paper page.
$endgroup$
– Synn
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
You could also fold a corner of the paper so that it covers part of a previously drawn edge, creating a gap or bridge for you to go through. This trick is more often used for drawing an impossible Euler path without lifting pen from the paper.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
"Prepare the jump to Hyperspace and inform Lord Vader!"
$endgroup$
– David Tonhofer
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
not the right answer
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yep but tha't a correct solution on paper page.
$endgroup$
– Synn
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
You could also fold a corner of the paper so that it covers part of a previously drawn edge, creating a gap or bridge for you to go through. This trick is more often used for drawing an impossible Euler path without lifting pen from the paper.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
"Prepare the jump to Hyperspace and inform Lord Vader!"
$endgroup$
– David Tonhofer
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
not the right answer
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
not the right answer
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yep but tha't a correct solution on paper page.
$endgroup$
– Synn
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yep but tha't a correct solution on paper page.
$endgroup$
– Synn
11 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
You could also fold a corner of the paper so that it covers part of a previously drawn edge, creating a gap or bridge for you to go through. This trick is more often used for drawing an impossible Euler path without lifting pen from the paper.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
You could also fold a corner of the paper so that it covers part of a previously drawn edge, creating a gap or bridge for you to go through. This trick is more often used for drawing an impossible Euler path without lifting pen from the paper.
$endgroup$
– Jaap Scherphuis
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
"Prepare the jump to Hyperspace and inform Lord Vader!"
$endgroup$
– David Tonhofer
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
"Prepare the jump to Hyperspace and inform Lord Vader!"
$endgroup$
– David Tonhofer
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The answer is not so nice but there is nothing to do because this puzzle is unsolvable in 2D.look here ,It's the same principle
(Welcome to Puzzling...)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
so its not possible to slove it?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, its not possible.
$endgroup$
– Tahel
11 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes. - From Review
$endgroup$
– F1Krazy
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The answer is not so nice but there is nothing to do because this puzzle is unsolvable in 2D.look here ,It's the same principle
(Welcome to Puzzling...)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
so its not possible to slove it?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, its not possible.
$endgroup$
– Tahel
11 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes. - From Review
$endgroup$
– F1Krazy
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The answer is not so nice but there is nothing to do because this puzzle is unsolvable in 2D.look here ,It's the same principle
(Welcome to Puzzling...)
$endgroup$
The answer is not so nice but there is nothing to do because this puzzle is unsolvable in 2D.look here ,It's the same principle
(Welcome to Puzzling...)
answered 11 hours ago
TahelTahel
76212
76212
$begingroup$
so its not possible to slove it?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, its not possible.
$endgroup$
– Tahel
11 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes. - From Review
$endgroup$
– F1Krazy
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
so its not possible to slove it?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, its not possible.
$endgroup$
– Tahel
11 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes. - From Review
$endgroup$
– F1Krazy
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
so its not possible to slove it?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
so its not possible to slove it?
$endgroup$
– Navid2132
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, its not possible.
$endgroup$
– Tahel
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, its not possible.
$endgroup$
– Tahel
11 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes. - From Review
$endgroup$
– F1Krazy
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes. - From Review
$endgroup$
– F1Krazy
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Navid2132 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Navid2132 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Navid2132 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Navid2132 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Puzzling Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f84316%2fwhy-is-this-simple-puzzle-impossible-to-solve%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
