A rectangle and a rectangle are contained within a square without overlapping at any point, and the sides of the square are parallel to the sides of the two given rectangles. What is the smallest possible area of the square?
- A)
- B)
- C)
- D)
- E)
Answer
B
Key insight
Total area 18 rules out a 4 by 4 square; placing the rectangles side by side (widths 2 + 3, heights 3 and 4) fits in 5 by 5.
Solution
Lower bound: the rectangles have areas and , so the square must have area at least . A square has area , so side is impossible, and any smaller side is too.
Construction for side : stand the rectangle with its -side horizontal and -side vertical, and stand the rectangle next to it with its -side horizontal and -side vertical. Together they span width and height , which fits inside a square.
So the smallest square has area .
The answer is .
Why this works
A minimum-size question has two halves: a bound that shows nothing smaller works, and an explicit arrangement showing the bound is achievable. Area gives the quickest bound; for the construction, orient the rectangles so their long sides run the same direction and their short sides add up.
The trap
Stacking the rectangles end to end (3 + 4 = 7) and answering 49, without trying the side-by-side arrangement.
Common mistakes
- Stacking the rectangles end to end (3 + 4 = 7) and answering 49, without trying the side-by-side arrangement.
- Concluding that area alone proves , without confirming the rectangles actually fit in a square (a and pair, for instance, would not).
Techniques
Bound the quantity above/below or estimate to pin it down