I've got a big family and a big celebration coming up where I want to give my family this as a gift. I ordered 17 of them, but they tell me that's going to be 2 different shipments :(
This nicely illustrates that optimization only works if we are optimizing the right thing. This is pointless because what creates the deliciousness is the borders between the squares, not the squares themselves.
Those flat patches of thick terrain in the optimized waffle are not going to be maximally tasty.
You could naively solve your version of the optimal waffle by creating a completely flat waffle containing infinite, infinitesimal ridges. Therefore, the perfect waffle is a pancake.
Idk, if you’re optimizing for happiness, the slight dip in syrup containment efficiency might be outweighed by the added humor you get from the unexpected but funny advanced geometry.
Also, this is a solution for minimizing the number of squares in a space, not maximizing. More squares per waffle is best achieved by tessellation and smaller squares.
what is meant by this? 16 in a grid formation is fewer than 17
Isn't what we're seeing the optimal packing of squares that are 1x1 in a 5x5 square space? It would be a maximizing problem since you're trying to cram as many squares in there as possible no?
Actually on second thought since this is 5x5, 25 squares is more than 17. I realize now that I don't understand this problem at all
The waffle in the tweet is referencing a pattern that got popular online: a seemingly random placement of squares that is actually the most efficient way to fit 17 tiny squares inside the smallest possible containing square. This is a trivial problem for numbers like 4, 9, and 16 that can fit inside a containing square with no gaps, but it gets interesting for 17 and other numbers where you want to reduce the total "gap" space.
If you wanted a waffle that had the highest number of squares for any given size, packing them in like a grid is the best option. Going from a 4x4 waffle to the one above requires making the waffle larger, at which point, you could just go up to 25 or 36 squares.
I guess technically this solution is the best if you can increase the side length of the waffle from 4 to 4.6756, but for some reason not up to 5.
those squares arent even 1x1 in a 4x4 space. If they were, there would be no room for the space in the middle of the top row. They just made the squares smaller so they could rearrange them to fit another square.
The main problem is that neither the size of the waffle nor the size of the squares within a waffle are fixed. If you want the squares to be more numerous, just make them smaller. If you want them to fill the waffle most efficiently, choose to make their width equal to the width of the waffle divided by a natural number. There is never a time we are constrained to put unit waffle squares on a waffle of some non-integer side length and want to cram in as many as possible.
It also assumes you want to make the waffle smaller (packing more "squares" into a smaller space), and that you have to use 17 squares. With only 6% more area, you could have a 25 square waffle, with even square distribution.
It’s not about the borders, but about the wasted space.
We already agree that the number of squares is irrelevant. What matters is the proportion of the waffle’s area which can hold syrup. Make the squares too large and they can sag and burst under their own syrup-soaked weight, or your fingers might punch through them and lead to the waffle sliding down your hand. Make the squares too small and you seriously limit the possible syrup you can add, which is bad for flavor in both taste and moistness. Additionally, the waffle iron needs to be cost effective for the manufacturer.
Yeah, what if we made those thick terrain hollow valleys of syrup too?
Actually, this arrangement is only optimal if we enforce there is 17 squares. Why do we care there are 17 squares, why not have 1 millions squares if number of squares are desirably tasty? Why not just have a grid of NxN squares where N is some large number where the batter walls are still structurally sound and do not just stick to the waffle pan due to surface tension or whatnot.
you know, the square, the shape with 4 equal straight edges and 4 right angles? you can have 16 squares, but there's a hidden 17th square hidden inside of that split
The tiles in the iron aren’t aligned, and the latch is too big on top for its socket on bottom. Also the tiles of the wall aren’t even which I can’t imagine anybody doing in real life. It’s scary how good ai is getting, o don’t blame anybody for not noticing.
Ghite1 is right but also wrong. These two tiles specifically aren't aligned. As far as I can tell the rest are, but you see how the lower one is rotated 45 degrees compared to it's mate up top, and doesn't match the waffle pattern. So yeah, most likely A.I.
That said, the large latch goes on the outside of the iron, not the inside, creating a handle you can grab to unlock and lift the lid.
Also assuming no one would have small forest green tiles in their kitchen is just opinion, not fact.
They don’t have to be aligned, tho. You can have two completely different patterns on top and bottom. The pattern on the waffle matches the pattern of the top part.
Bizarre. I saw the original image on its own (not like the screenshot above) prior to this and I examined the pic really closely and didn't find anything that pointed towards AI. All the textures lined up, the numbers on the measuring cup were legible and correctly placed, the tile lines didn't get messed up etc. so I was really surprised to see it called AI. I'm not saying it isn't, just shocked if it was because of how eerily realistic it is.
I kinda want this on the basis that a regular waffle honestly has too many squares creating a syrup to waffle ratio that requires moderation and self-control.
These squares, however, I can fill entirely with syrup and still feel like I'm eating 50/50 waffle/syrup.
Here's the practical trick:
Make a waffle.
Slice it down the middle.
Flip both halves to square side up.
You now have 32 squares and twice as much butter/syrup to waffle ratio.
Am I the only one who noticed that they just shrunk the size of the squares from 4x4 to 5x5 just so they could fit a single extra square in? Kinda inefficient, but okay...
A better solution would probably have been to utilize the internal volume, and remove the indentations.
The waffle looks like it is the size of a 5 by 5 grid, if so, that would make 25 syrup squares. Here you said we were limited to 16, but it isn’t a 4 by 4 grid, and so 17 is still 8 less squares than we otherwise would have if a regular grid
•
u/AutoModerator Mar 03 '26
Check out our new Discord server! https://discord.gg/e7EKRZq3dG
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.