Will proof of an optimal packing of 17 or fewer squares in a square be shown for any currently unproved packing before 2024?
22
614
430
resolved Mar 3
Resolved
YES

Resolves YES if Erich's packing center (https://erich-friedman.github.io/packing/squinsqu )

lists that the packing of 11, 12, 13, or 17 squares in a square is "proved" (contrast with "found") at any time before 2024.

Currently proven smaller packings are 1-10 and 14-16.

Get Ṁ200 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
1Ṁ650
2Ṁ200
3Ṁ162
4Ṁ80
5Ṁ41
Sort by:
bought Ṁ500 of YES

I'd like to claim credit for the email, unless someone else contacted him before Monday? Haven't gotten a response myself.

bought Ṁ500 of YES

@kenakofer I have confirmed that 13 squares in a square is now listed as proved.

bought Ṁ333 of NO

Base rate is really low. Every proved optimal packing on the list was proved in either 1979, 1999, or 2002.

predicted NO

@tom For a larger sample size, you can check out other shape combinations here: https://erich-friedman.github.io/packing/

Even there the most recent update is from 2019

It’s possible there will be renewed interest in these packings in particular, because they have been trending on Twitter lately. I agree it seems unlikely though.

Maybe someone here will see this as a bounty if it gets bid down far enough?

13 might be the easiest.

predicted YES

@JimHays 13 has, purportedly, already been proven and published in the Electronic Journal of Combinatorics (the same place which published Erich Friedman's survey.)

sold Ṁ11 of NO

@Nadja_L Since it’s already proved, that points out a bit of disagreement between the question and description. I will side with the more concrete market description here, so if before 2024 the website is updated to show 13 is proved, I will resolve YES, even though it’s not “currently unproved”.

Sounds like free mana for anyone who can convince Erich to update the site based on this paper.