Can a Cube Be Cut into Smaller Cubes of the Same Size?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MalayInd
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
A cube cannot be cut into a finite number of smaller cubes without at least two being the same size. This conclusion is supported by examining the two-dimensional case of a square, where partitions can lead to similar results. The argument hinges on the properties of the smallest square touching an edge, which must be less than half the size of the whole square. While it is possible to partition a square into smaller squares of different sizes, known as 'squared squares,' this does not apply to cubes. Ultimately, the reasoning confirms that any final cut to create two cubes must result in cubes of the same size.
MalayInd
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
:smile:
If a cube is cut into finite number of smaller cubes, prove that at least two of them must be of same size.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Consider the 2 dimensional case. If this is true in 3 dimensions then it works in 2 dimensions too for partitions of a square (a cross section of the cube will be a partition of the square with the same property). Now (under the assumption that a partition exists with no two squares the same size) consider the left side of the square and the smallest square of the partition that touches that side. You know that an edge of this square must be less than half the size of the whole square, or it must be equal to the size of the whole square (why?). Discarding that second case for now because it is a trivial partition, consider the rightmost edge of this smallest square. How can you re-apply the same argument to this edge? Where does re-applying the argument a large number of times lead you?
 
I am not sure how to expess this formally.

You must make a last cut to create 2 cubes. The cube faces you create with this last cut must be the same side length. Therefore the cubes are the same size.
 
The same type of argument Orthodontist suggested can be applied directly to the cube case. While this argument fails in the case of the square due to what might happen if the smallest square lies on an edge, as shown in the attached picture, it can be shown to still work in the cube case if you show that the smallest square of a tiled square (with all tiles being squares of different sizes) cannot lie on the edge of the square. This can be shown by exhausting a few possibilities.
 

Attachments

  • square.GIF
    square.GIF
    1.3 KB · Views: 561
Last edited:
The answer is in rhj23's second link.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
2
Replies
93
Views
6K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top