(Close Window) 
Topic: Im confused....... 


Im trying to learn the 5x5 magic square as it is taught in 13 steps. what I don't understand is this.. ( I understand where to put each number I should say ) Corindas example is 65 and he says you take 60 away, leaving 5 , then you divide by 5. I decided to try it,,,, I got 157. Minus 60 is 97. 97 divided by 5 is 19.4.... So what do I do? I tried it starting with 20 and it ended up being 160 all the way round. Man am I confused. 


Simon, you need the REMAINDER after dividing by 5 (you can't work in decimals). I.e. 97/5 = 19 remainder 2 (i.e. 19*5=95; 9795=2). You need to add the remainder to the key squares. Mike 


Best if the target number is divisible by 5 (the last digit ends in 5 or 0). You can work with decimals though. In your example you would begin with 19.4, then the next box put 20.4, then 21.4 and so on. Not pretty but such is life. Best to stick with targets that are divisible by 5. 


Ok, but adding just made some higher, and the top row and a few others stayed the same? If I add the renainder to say 26 ,making it 28 is the next square I do 29 or 27, I don't understand how adding the remainders will make it all lower? Sorry If I'm being dumb. 


There are serious errors in Corinda's book (well, there are in my 1984 Supreme Magic edition). The top left square in (B) is a key square and should be asterisked. The example given in (C) is not worked out using Corinda's rules. The correct square for sum 248 using Corinda's procedure (key squares in brackets) is: (56) 60 37 44 51 59 41 (46) 50 52 40 42 49 56 (61) 46 (51) 55 57 39 47 54 61 (41) 45 No wonder you were confused Simon! Mike 


Oh dear... I see, I can begin to understand it now, is there another book which has the magic square well explained and described? Im awful at maths really so for some reason the magic square appeals to me a lot. 


Do you really want a 5x5 square? 4x4 is much easier. Harry Lorayne describes a very simple method in The Magic Book. However, Harry's method does have drawbacks with large totals. I have a method that gets round these drawbacks but at the cost of more mental calculation http://www.mindmagician.org/msquare.aspx Mike 


Thanks I think I understand, I'lll just have to keep trying, and getting better at maths might help to. 


Michael, That is one pretty Magic Square! I've usually made the necessary jump at a specific position, making the magic square quite homogenous with all numbers in sequence, except for one place where the step can be 2, 3 or 4 also. In your square you instead move the position of the step to never have to step more than 2 in a single position. Is that your idea? *** clever and the square looks great. /Tomas 


Thanks Tomas  I'm glad you like it. Yes, I devised the method myself and, as far as I know, it's original. Mike 