22 Jan
2008
22 Jan
'08
11:30 a.m.
Huh? Equilateral -> 120-30-30s.
That's what I said at first too--it's just the scope of the word "congruent" in the statement is ambiguous.
Anyway the presumably-intended harder puzzle is the pieces must also be congruent to the original triangle.
They might be similar, but they can't possibly be congruent. I think both equilateral -> 120-30-30 and 30-60-90 -> 30-60-90 are solutions to the original puzzle. Only Dan knows for sure, but it's certainly legitimate to ask whether there are any other examples, even allowing the smaller congruent pieces to be of a shape unrelated to the original big triangle. --Michael Kleber -- It is very dark and after 2000. If you continue you are likely to be eaten by a bleen.