Mistake in the CRACK DAT PAT Cube section?

[spoog74]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

im attaching a photo of a cube counting question, the answer claims there are 3 cubes with 4 painted sides, although im almost sure its 4 cubes. Can someone confirm? They seem to neglect the cube hidden behind the 4 stacked cubes...

 

[jkb53433]

the reason why its 3 not four is the one you are seeing the last row isnt a 4 ...theres actually one cube in front of it so the fourth side (the side facing you) is blocked by the cube behind that tower of cubes... I hope this is making sense...let me know if i can help further

this is a tricky one...

 

[spoog74]

the reason why its 3 not four is the one you are seeing the last row isnt a 4 ...theres actually one cube in front of it so the fourth side (the side facing you) is blocked by the cube behind that tower of cubes... I hope this is making sense...let me know if i can help further

this is a tricky one...

i dont get it... how would we know this though? How do we know there is indeed a cube there?

 

[RCLEE]

Each cube must connect to another another cube by one of its face, NOT the by its edge! I made the same mistake a few days ago.

 

[spoog74]

Each cube must connect to another another cube by one of its face, NOT the by its edge! I made the same mistake a few days ago.

Basically, i understand what you're saying but the problem is this;


What would that exact picture look like WITHOUT the cube behind there? Wouldnt it look EXACTLY alike? I mean seriously what would be the viewable differences?

 

[RCLEE]

If the cube that you think is hidden is not there then there are 4 4 face cubes. NO, they do not look the same. There should be 15 cubes not 14. Go draw it out or play with blocks. I hope it will help to clear things up.

 

[2th Doc]

Basically, i understand what you're saying but the problem is this;


What would that exact picture look like WITHOUT the cube behind there? Wouldnt it look EXACTLY alike? I mean seriously what would be the viewable differences?

I see what you mean, and I think it would look exactly the same because you couldn't tell if it was the forward face of the farthest cube (if there was a void where we're talking about) or the top of the cube if in fact there was a cube there. You wouldn't be able to see any other edges of the hidden cube in question if it were actually there, so I believe it would look the same from this perspective. However, if in fact what RCLEE has said is a known PAT rule (is it? I don't know; seems it would be), then whether it looks exactly the same or not doesn't matter, because a cube MUST be there in order for the cubes to be connected by faces and not edges.

 

[spoog74]

I see what you mean, and I think it would look exactly the same because you couldn't tell if it was the forward face of the farthest cube (if there was a void where we're talking about) or the top of the cube if in fact there was a cube there. You wouldn't be able to see any other edges of the hidden cube in question if it were actually there, so I believe it would look the same from this perspective. However, if in fact what RCLEE has said is a known PAT rule (is it? I don't know; seems it would be), then whether it looks exactly the same or not doesn't matter, because a cube MUST be there in order for the cubes to be connected by faces and not edges.

Im sorry, im still so confused. What does a cube being connected via the face or an edge have to do with the cube being or NOT being there? I just dont get it...

 

[herkulease]

Im sorry, im still so confused. What does a cube being connected via the face or an edge have to do with the cube being or NOT being there? I just dont get it...

If you are able to "connect" cubes edge or corner to corner. theorectically there can be an empty space between pillar and back row.

this question has been discussed before.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=727681

scroll down towards the end. with the picture that is labeled with numbers.

Just know come test day, you will not get a setup where you go is a cube their or not. It will be very obvious.

CDP has a few more gems in the later tests. Not sure if you have the 10 test version or not.

 

[Kobebucsfan]

If you are able to "connect" cubes edge or corner to corner. theorectically there can be an empty space between pillar and back row.

this question has been discussed before.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=727681

scroll down towards the end. with the picture that is labeled with numbers.

Just know come test day, you will not get a setup where you go is a cube their or not. It will be very obvious.

CDP has a few more gems in the later tests. Not sure if you have the 10 test version or not.

could u explain that ?

 

[herkulease]

could u explain that ?

There would be no dispute or questions as to whether "is this one connect to that or not" If no cube is there, then you will definitely see it is not there. there's no ambiguity and no illusions like you'll get some on the later tests on cdp.

 

[rookie80]

I got 4

1 to the very side
and 2 at the very top - if you look at the very top one you will notice 5 sides which will trick you.

 

[UCB05]

Basically, i understand what you're saying but the problem is this;


What would that exact picture look like WITHOUT the cube behind there? Wouldnt it look EXACTLY alike? I mean seriously what would be the viewable differences?

Without the cube, it would look exactly the same, except that it would be two completely separate sets of cubes sitting there. It's stipulated in the instructions that the images given are of a single set of blocks stuck together continuously. Cubes must be connected face-to-face, not edge-to-edge or corner-to-corner.

 

[donnabrenton]

sorry i didn't understand...