Can you solve it, Veeky Forums?

THIS

do it then

connect the point in the middle with the corners and gg wp

wrong

That was fun. Thanks op.

Your reasoning is basically 'it looks roughly the same size as the one above' yeah?

How come a+d=c+b ?
I'm not saying it's not right, just can't make that leap myself.

t. studied highschool maths over 6 years ago

Because the triangles area is equal to base * height. The base is unchanging, because it's based on the outside square. The height of a + the height of d, and the height of c + the height of b, are always going to equal the base, because the bases are parallel to one another.
An increase in the height of a is a proportional decrease in the height of d. And an increase in a has effect on c or b because they are at right angles to one another.
But again, all of these assumptions are based on parallel and perpendicular lines that are based on the assumption that the large square has all right angles, which is not explicitly stated in op's question.

** increase in a has *no* effect on c or b

>most teachers choose integers because people like integers, so chances are, the total surface area is some integer squared
this is clearly a troll image, so the chances that it has a nice simple solution is negligible.

>surface area looks like the one with 32
>assuming the drawing is to scale

I just measured the areas in gimp (free select tool and then windows->dockable dialogs->histogram gives you a pixel count) after scaling the image up

the values in matlab:
area=[20,32,16]; pixels=[152630, 208366, 126056]; x=179302

x being the mystery area. please note how the 2nd and 3rd area have a 2:1 area, while the measured areas have a 1.65 : 1 ratio. I dont think I fucked the area selection so badly.
therefore the image is not to scale

if the image was to scale we could approximate the area by
coeffs=area./pixels; [min(coeffs),max(coeffs),mean(coeffs)].*x
>22.758 27.536 24.597

so the area is clearly smaller than 32. but again the error seems to wonky for that image to be to scale

could you post the proof as seperate pictures?

working through the gif is a pain

Pic related.
Uhh... fine, give me a moment.

that doesn't prove it mathematically

There.
Why not? Did you skip geometry class, or are you operating on some meta-euclidean shit?
[spoiler]or did I actually fuck something up?[/spoiler]

How do you know it's a square? And it 'looks the same' as 32cm2 area? Pft

pic related is easiest way, i accept donations via paypal

I hereby crown you king of brainlets.

clearly you have evolved beyond Veeky Forums into a higher realm of consciousness.
godspeed, your Highness, godspeed

>not enough information
Wrong.

What you mean is "not enough information for a single value answer".

The more you know.

How do you make gifs like that :O ?
Teach me master

d + a = 16
d + c = 20
b + c = 32
a + b = ?
c+a = d+b
20-d+a = d+b
20+a = 2d+b
20+a = 2d+?-a
20+2a = 2d+?
20+2a-2d = ?
20+2a-2(16-a) = ?
20+2a-32+2a = ?
4a-12 = ?
Fuck. I don't get it, how does this solve it? You've just defined ? in terms of of other unsolved vars.
Stop making fun of me!!! What did I do wrong?
krita

Is beating up and raping Kurisu a solution?

Dude

b + c = 32 (A)
c + d = 20 (B)
d + a = 16 (C)

(A) + (C) - (B): a + b = 28

which is the solution.

It works because triangles with the same height and same base have the same area.

So it's like:
A + C - B = A + C - B
(b+c)+(d+a)-(c+d) = (32)+(16)-(20)
a+b+c+d-c-d = 48 - 20
a+b = 28
Yup, I suck at algebra. Fuck.

25,6 cm2

how did you get that?

b/a=d/b

b/a=1.6
b*d=25.6

b/a=d/c

Nice.

Also, very good to point out that this is assuming it is a square because, if this was just a rhombus, the whole thing kind of falls apart.

Let x be the length of the segment with two slashes and A be the shaded area.
(1) x^2>16 from observation
(2) x^264 from (1)
(5) 4x^264 from (3) and (4)
(7) A+68-4 from (6)
(9) A

ambiguous tbpqh

Is it supposed to be a 3d pyramid like structure or 2D? If 2D you should kill yourself for being unable to solve.