Well? The answer you give will determine if you are an

>>26214373
Is that a square or a triangular base?

Do you count the balls underneath that we can't see? The question doesn't specify well enough. "How many balls can we see" or "How many balls make up this structure" would be the proper questions.

>>26214373
There are 16 balls visible in the picture.

>>26214373
See, you WANT me to solve the following equation:

(4*4)+(3*3)+(2*2)+1=x

But if I do that, some redditor who thinks he's really clever will tell me, "But there's only 16 balls in this image, it's le optical illusion, how do you le know there are other le balls behind those ones??? xDDD"

So yeah, fuck you, this is a trap.

>>26214373
there are 17 balls visible

Is it how many balls can be seen or theoretically how many balls are on the pyramid.

This >>26214392 is also important information

How do we know those are even balls? They could actually just be circles and not 2D representations of 3D spheres. We can't know for sure.

>>26214373
30 if squaramid.

>>26214373

the answer is 25. First oen hehehe. Suck my BALLS HEHEHEHE

>>26214373
Since theoretically the balls would have to be in a completed pyramid shape, you take the whole amount of balls required to make the pyramid by the summation of the squared side length. In other words, the total amount of balls required to make a 3D pyramid out of balls.

4^2
+
3^2
+
2^2
+
1
= 30 balls

>>26214373
16 visible balls, 26 in total. (without middle balls) 29 in total(with the three balls in the middle.

File: 74.png (233KB, 327x367px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 327x367px

1^2 + 2^2 + 3^2 + 4^2 = 29 balls.

That wasn't too hard, OP. Theoretically you could take one ball out the second row and two balls out the bottom row, so that actually makes it a range between 26 - 29 balls. It is uncertain.

18 balls I count

>>26214373
30 balls if its square

>>26214483
Fucked up my math, it's actually between 27 and 30 balls.

>>26214510
30 balls. It's 30 balls. 16 plus 9 is 25, plus 4 is 29, plus 1 is 30. That is addition.

16 balls, you can't prove that there are more balls than that.

>>26214449
This
They could even be cones, we have no way of knowing for sure without viewing the structure from all angles

I hope those balls don't count on the question marks.

File: 95.png (89KB, 297x317px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 297x317px

>>26214528
Yeah, but the engineer in me calculates that you could take out a maximum of 3 balls from the structure without it falling apart. I'm already trying hard to figure out if there's some way to make this structure stand with more balls taken out of the back.

>>26214392
It literally couldn't stand if it was a triangle base.

>>26214373
16 balls are certain. Nobody can know for sure what is happening behind them. All those balls could be leaning on a box or some shit.

>>26214373
Is the answer 25 balls?

>>26214373
>95% get this wrong
95% of what?

>>26214590
depends on the coefficient of friction and the mass of the balls

I used to work at an amusement park, attending various game stands. One of the games was throwing balls into the top of a big can.
Anyways, it was incredibly boring, and before I discovered the joy of juggling, I spent a lot of free time making shapes with the balls.

It is entirely possible to make a square pyramid structure like this one with less than 30 balls. The bottom layer could be an empty square, using only 12 balls.
The layer above that could also be an empty square and use only 8 balls. Then you add the 5 remaining balls on top.
25 balls

25-30 balls

>>26214670
I'll show you the friction and mass of my balls :)

>>26214655
95% of balls

ABRACADABRA

4+3+2+1=10
3+2+1=6
2+1=3
1+0=1
1+3+6+10=20


PRAISE KEK

anyone else gay here

30 if 3D

16 if visible/2D pic

>>26214563
Don't forget the two little balls in the percentage sign (%)

answer is 25

An amount smaller than the amount in OP's mouth

there are atleast 25 balls

This thread is like weaponized autism

>>26214655

Its not really surprise that so many people get these things wrong because you have to be pretty retarded to even click these.

37 dicks 37

File: balls.png (24KB, 1498x783px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 1498x783px

suck my balls you wieners

>>26214373
You guys realize these things are designed to bait people into commenting on facebook so people can grow their pages right?

>>26214759
I wonder if autism will ever become sexually transmissible or airborne.

>but it doesn't work like that
A virus can insert DNA it's it's hosts cells. It's beyond our current scientific capabilities but, just imagine 100 years from now you can just spray autism over a city to make the people docile and obsessed with beating videogames from the year 2000 quickly, and solving math problems like OP's.

>>26214777
4+16 = 20
9+1 = 10
20+10=30

how did you fuck that up family?

>>26214701
That's assuming a complete square pyramid, anyways. Depending on how well the balls grip eachother, you could form the shape in OP's pic with even more balls removed. For example, you could take out the farthest ball from the viewer in each layer under the top ball.

>>26214791
the Jews are way ahead of you anon, they're putting hormones in the water at this very moment

File: asgdhasgd.png (2MB, 1799x561px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1799x561px

30, I just calculated

It's 1 + 4 + 9 + 16

What do I win

>>26214856
You're about 50 posts late, slowcuck.

>>26214828
>>26214828
I don't see why people see it as a problem, disregarding the extreme end of the spectrum most high functioning autistics are generally more intelligent.

I don't think the Jews want intelligent people, it'll ruin their plans.

I think it's 30. 16 + 9 + 4 + 1. Unless you only count the ones that are shown, then it's 16.

>>26214856
Anime now is cuter

>>26214881
Well, I had to go to the market and buy 50 balls (I assumed it was less than that) to make the final experiment.

>>26214913
Well alright then. You win 50 balls.

>>26214720
Wtf is this doing here

>>26214392
This.
The question is impossible to answer without this information.

There is only 16. They are all glued together to form the illusion of a pyramid.

File: MagrittePipe.jpg (34KB, 378x264px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 378x264px

There are no balls. It is a picture of balls.

>>26215149
You sure do seem to be an expert on balls

Neutrons, protons, and electrons are all balls. Therefore there are probably trillions of billions of millions of balls in this image.

File: image.png (85KB, 309x300px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 309x300px

>95% get this wrong
>95% get
NINETY FIVE PERCENT OF WHAT GETS THIS WRONG?
>mfw 95% didn't notice that's the REAL problem with this pic

File: balls-math.jpg (75KB, 520x519px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 520x519px

>>26214580
I've thought a bit about it, and I don't think there is. There needs to be equally opposing forces to keep each ball stable. I thought that meant it has to be symmetrical on at least two axes, but I recognized the counter-example of just taking one ball out the middle on the bottom row. So I'm not entirely sure what the rule is. I wish I knew some group theory so I could figure it out.

However, another thought: there are balls behind the structure that don't contribute to it. Some analysis tells me all the balls are the same size, so this picture has been drawn with a very, very distant reference point, possibly an infinite one, which makes this easier. Judging from the reference distance between a ball and the ball in front of it, you could hide two balls in a line behind this structure. Then, I found that there could be two more balls beside them. I tried place a fifth ball on top of these four, but it peeked through.

Therefore, assuming these balls have no adhesion and obey physical reality, there is a range between 27 and 34 balls possible from the information you have given us.

I hope you are satisfied with my engineering consultation, I will charge $5,000 for my services.

If pyramid, thirty. If literal 2D, 16.

>ahaha we defined it poorly on purpose not so smart now lol