Post History
#2: Post edited
by
whybecause
·
2021-12-30T23:34:58Z (over 2 years ago)
- I could argue: Clearly for every white square there is a corresponding black square. This is true row-by-row because the row-length is even and the colors alternate. Therefore it is also true taking all rows together.
But I'm not sure why you can't imagine rotating the board. The upper-left white square would get spun to the upper-right. The black square that's next to it would get spun to the position just below the upper-right. And so on.- Interestingly, both methods involve identifying the white with black squares in a one-to-one fashion.
- I could argue: Clearly for every white square there is a corresponding black square. This is true row-by-row because the row-length is even and the colors alternate. Therefore it is also true taking all rows together.
- But I'm not sure why you can't imagine rotating the board. The upper-left white square would get spun to the upper-right. The black square that's to the right of the upper-left-white would get spun to the position just below the upper-right corner. And so on.
- Interestingly, both methods involve identifying the white with black squares in a one-to-one fashion.
#1: Initial revision
by
whybecause
·
2021-12-30T23:33:44Z (over 2 years ago)
I could argue: Clearly for every white square there is a corresponding black square. This is true row-by-row because the row-length is even and the colors alternate. Therefore it is also true taking all rows together. But I'm not sure why you can't imagine rotating the board. The upper-left white square would get spun to the upper-right. The black square that's next to it would get spun to the position just below the upper-right. And so on. Interestingly, both methods involve identifying the white with black squares in a one-to-one fashion.