12
$\begingroup$

In an old book (*) I found an advert with a puzzle I had never seen before.

Original copy

Unfortunately the book is very rare and it is hard to make out in the scanned photocopy above. I have redrawn it:

Goldman's transformation puzzle

It looks a bit like the classic Tangram puzzle, but it consists of three identical trapezoid/trapezium shapes and three triangles of different sizes.

With these pieces you have to form a square, and then transform it into a triangle by moving only two pieces.

*) The book was The Arithmachinist by Henry Goldman, from 1898. It was a self-published book promoting the mechanical calculator that he invented. A pdf file of the book can be found on this page. I have not been able to find a patent, and assume that the patent application was rejected.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Do we have to start with this particular square ? $\endgroup$ – classicalMpk Apr 11 at 15:05
  • $\begingroup$ @classicalMpk: I didn't think so, but El-Guest's answer shows it can be done with that square too. $\endgroup$ – Jaap Scherphuis Apr 11 at 15:48
9
$\begingroup$

It looks like you should be able to do this as follows:

enter image description here

Edit: it works! Before picture:

enter image description here

And after picture:

enter image description here

Please excuse my lack of scissors. The pieces to be moved are therefore

5 and 6 as per my diagram.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Very good! I hadn't found a solution that started with the original square arrangement, only one with a different square, and I then moved two trapezoids. That's why I phrased my question so as to leave the starting square arrangement undetermined. $\endgroup$ – Jaap Scherphuis Apr 11 at 15:31
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! I was thinking about using a different square to start but I wasn’t clever enough to find that at first. $\endgroup$ – El-Guest Apr 11 at 15:34
-2
$\begingroup$

Square I have in mind.

Possible Solution!

I hope this would be of some help. The question clearly says we have independence of forming our own square 😁

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.