3 seconds… no joke.
15-20 seconds for me.
^I regret giving up those 15-20 seconds.
I totally forgot to check in on this! I’m glad I’m not alone in the “Seriously? A genius?” camp. I opened the page, was excited for a challenge, and then realized that this was a disappointment. Sorry to do the same to all of you 
.
Now, do you guys think this is purely a click bait (as someone mentioned) or is it a sign that our education in math and science is pretty weak since “enough” people consider this difficult? From the comments on that page (and our thread), I think it’s primarily click bait, but I also think the US is in a bit of trouble when it comes to math and science education (in particular).
In any case, does anyone have any good sources for logic or math-type puzzles (similar to the logic puzzle below)? I did this one a while back and thought it was pretty cool. It’s labeled as “The Hardest Logic Puzzle in the World.” I don’t think it is, but it was more interesting and thought provoking than the link I started the thread with.
New puzzle: http://www.xkcd.com/blue_eyes.html
Solution to the new puzzle:https://xkcd.com/solution.html
^What is shocking is that people are comfortable bragging about their deficiency in math, like a badge of honor. Similar to boasting about the NYTs being your sole source of news.
I think there are two things going on, 1) decreasing education and reasoning skills, but 2) internet providing “you are average average” feedback. Part of the political correctness “you pooped your pants, here is a trophy” mentality.
OK 
can anyone solve this??? I have tried a few times in my free time but can’t quite get it. I think it is 4 equations, 4 unknowns. I think the small diamond inside the large diamond = small diamond is the key. I think it says the diamond =1 and one shape inside another means multiply. I think the bottom two equalities are proofs to support the top two equations. Seems like one point I solved one and it worked to simplify one of the top equations. Well anyway, can’t crack it. Who can and at least give me partial credit 
.
Not me!! Or at least I assume I can’t, and thus have never tried. They say “please don’t share answers” but since almost nobody can solve this sort of thing, they don’t have much to worry about. Also with questions of this level, even when the answer is explained, most people can’t understand why the answer is the answer, and thus are not able to know if it is the right answer. Fun stuff.
Just plug that in Mathematica, you are just looking for operators/numbers that will make this equation valid. ez
I thought about that, but I don’t currently have Mathematica. maybe I can get a demo download. I want to solve this thing! instructions say computers ARE allowed.
My line of thinking is pretty much same as yours (shape inside the shape is a multiple), what throws me off is the # of unknowns/objects representing different values. Does a 3d shape differ from 2d shape? I.e in second equation small 2D square inside large 3D square equals small 3D square… does small 3D square = large 3D square? now as i’m typing this i see that 2D shapes only appear inside the shapes, so I guess we can assume there are only 4 variables, should be fun to play with once i have a minute to grab a pen and paper.
No offense, but you guys are pretty far off. Want a hint?
YES
Ok, here is one pointer: start with equation five:
circle,square,square,square,square,triangle = 18
this is the simplest (very simple) equation. Check back when you want another.
^ The only thing I can think of is -1 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 3 = 18. But I can’t justify why the circle would be negative instead of addition.
15
duh!
I already did that. Assuming adjacent shapes means add, this one limits the possibilities for variables. I also think it implies adjacent shapes must be addition. (hmmm… unless we are working with fractions as variables???) Anyway, I think I could solve this, it is just my “algebra magic tricks” are rusty.
Igor, 25.
no sir, have another beer