Get our expert's

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your **free** account and access **expert** answers to this and **thousands** of other questions.

I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!

Get this expert

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your **free** account and access **expert** answers to this and **thousands** of other questions

overlapping or no?

overlapping

39?

43 or 45

43-45

44 i think

let's see,
we have 1 huge triangle

the no of smallest triangle is 9+7+5+3+1 = 26

a little bigger triangle .. we have 13, so total is 40 until now

45 is the answer

no .. but quite close

i think 46

Oo... sorry @King 's right i made mistake in above summation

can you explain your approach?

so 45 is rite?

9+7+5+3+1 = 26 .. from this i was able to deduce 46

nos.of small triangles=25 not 26!!@experimentX

9+7=16
5+3+1=9
16+9=25!!

still i cannot come up with general formula ...!

I got 46

no.of triangles=level of @experimentX

hw diya?

Wait letme count again

lol ... quite a matching no.

If overlapping I found 45

yeah!!sry so its 48

there are no inverted ones wid 3 or 4 rows so it has to be 48...i think

so answer is 48!!

@experimentX u der?if u are happy and satisfied wid answer close the question....

i guess 48 is the right answer ...

floor(n(n+2)(2n+1)/8)
where n is the number of triangles on a side
in your specific case, n=5

Oh yeah?
Ok thanks, but now I wanna decipher it
you seem to be familiar with this theorem FFM :P

You think we haven't noticed?
Where do you get this encyclopedic knowledge?!

Lol, I was kidding. I am just an ordinary guy with some practice :)

:)

thanks to all for reply!! and finally it's complete!

48 i guess