### Random Post

### Recent Posts

- Enigma 1101: Disappearing numbers
- Enigma 410: Most right
- Tantalizer 475: League table
- Enigma 1102: The Apathy Party
- Enigma 409: Hands and feet
- Puzzle 68: Football and addition: letters for digits
- Enigma 1103: Brush strokes
- Enigma 408: Royal numbers
- Tantalizer 476: Take your partners
- Enigma 1104: Odd and even squares

### Recent Comments

Jim Randell on Enigma 1313: Triangles | |

geoffrounce on Enigma 1313: Triangles | |

Jim Randell on Enigma 1313: Triangles | |

Jim Randell on Enigma 1101: Disappearing… | |

Jim Randell on Enigma 409: Hands and fee… |

### Archives

### Categories

- article (11)
- enigma (1,097)
- misc (2)
- project euler (2)
- puzzle (24)
- site news (42)
- tantalizer (25)
- teaser (3)

### Site Stats

- 161,755 hits

This is one that I’ve not been able to fully solve programatically in a satisfactory way. But by considering a simplified version of the problem I am able to find the required solutions in a reasonable time.

The following Python program assumes that the cut divides the figure along the grid lines shown in to two contiguous pieces, and further instead of considering the full 10×6 grid (48 squares) it considers a scaled down 5×3 grid (12 squares). Any solution thus found can obviously be scaled up to become a solution of the original problem. This program runs in 41ms.

Solution:There are three different ways.There is also a solution that uses non-contiguous regions.

I’ve played with some variations on the above program to attempt the more general problem, but the best I’ve come up with is a program to analyse possible cuts along the grid lines. On the 10×6 grid it examined 34,885,420 cuts in 5h37m, and found the same (contiguous) solutions given above.