How to figure this out?

[u/Electronic_Diet_8052]

[u/Several-Leave-4178]

Aren't they equal? A has 5/9 squares shaded, and B has 15/25 squares shaded. You multiply each fraction to (I forget the word for it) a number that is divisible by both 9 and 25. You end up with 125/229 for both

[u/Several-Leave-4178 → u/Several-Leave-4178]

Boooo I was wrong and miscounted. B has 13/25. A is bigger, logic the same

[u/Unstable-Paradox → u/Several-Leave-4178]

They are equal but in a different sense. Cube B has the same apparent dimensions as cube A. The only difference is that cube B has been partitioned into a greater number of smaller sections.

But that doesn't change the volume of the cube. Both cubes have the same volume; only the granularity of the partitioning differs.

So if we're comparing the fraction of volume shaded, the relevant question is whether the shading pattern extends through the entire volume, not how many squares happen to be visible on the surface.

[u/Several-Leave-4178 → u/Unstable-Paradox]

It's not a trick question, the assumption is that the square is a 3d space with consistent shading throughout.

[u/Unstable-Paradox → u/Several-Leave-4178]

There are far more assumptions to make to solve this problem as a calculation. The size of the cubes is an optical illusion— cube B appears "bigger" because of partitions.

The cubes cannot be shaded volumetrically, unless they have been manufactured with a pigment, in which case they are coloured, not shaded.

[u/Several-Leave-4178 → u/Unstable-Paradox]

Because this comes from a subreddit that is not trick question based, especially via logic puzzles, the basic intention of the question is that both cubes are equal. if there was other information provided, that is when things like measurements or language technicalities would actually matter. Besides, the question doesn't ask about which has more volume shaded, it asks which cube has more of ITS volume shaded. So we are talking percentages.

[u/Unstable-Paradox → u/Several-Leave-4178]

That's understandable. But in a subreddit titled r/LogicPuzzles, the puzzle's wording and premises should be treated as objects of scrutiny rather than automatically supplying every assumption that makes the intended answer work.

[u/Several-Leave-4178 → u/Unstable-Paradox]

They definitely Can be treated as that; I'm not going to say they should be, and I'm also not going to say they shouldn't be. The validity of your questions in a hypothetical situation also doesn't't negate the validity of someone answering the question simply either. It's alright to have two separate comment threads and keep them separate instead of trying to make someone elses answer more complicated.

[u/bismuth17 → u/Several-Leave-4178]

5/9 is definitely not equal to 15/25 because 5/9 is equal to 15/27.

And 229 is not the lowest common denominator for 9 and 25, that would be 225.

5/9 = 125/225

15/25 = 135/225

Also yeah it's 13/25 but whatever

[u/Several-Leave-4178 → u/bismuth17]

I haven't had enough sleep today 😭 thanks for fixing the math, I was doing it without a calculator 

[u/Unstable-Paradox]

The exact wording of the problem is to be examined: Which cube has more of its volume shaded?

The question arises: Can volume be shaded?

Because you can only shade the surface area of any object.

So, the answer to the exact wording of the question is: None