4 ms·
There is a solution that requires you to use a semicircle line to join two of the straight lines. You could argue it meets the rule 'just four straight lines',
by alpine 14y ago
There is a solution that requires you to use a semicircle line to join two of the straight lines. You could argue it meets the rule 'just four straight lines', and you would be all the more 'creative' for proposing it. However it is unlikely to be suggested because the convention is to draw lines that directly connect dots.
- vidarh 14y agoIf you make the lines long enough, and take it literally as connecting dots as opposed to points, you can do it with three: Connect the three top (or whichever side) and extend that line out far enough that you can then draw a diagonal line that slopes slowly enough to be able to connect the dots in the next row, and repeat for the last row. But I spent far longer than I "should" have, because I wrongfully just assumed no crossing lines - another common convention that was never stated but that just was too hard to ignore. I did try various diagonals trying to get to something similar to the linked solution before the "three long lines" approach, but didn't get there because of getting stuck on that. I think a lot of the time the bigger problem than getting "creative" is to clear your head of all the unstated assumptions that are very easy to cling to without even realizing. A useful method can be to try solve a problem with fewer restrictions, and then add restrictions back in and see what solutions can be adapted - that makes it harder to get stuck considering rules that don't actually exist.