A simple puzzle to play












3












$begingroup$


How many possible ways can you completely draw this figure?



enter image description here



Conditions:




1 - Once you start to draw you can’t take your pencil off of the paper.
2 - You can’t trace along a line already drawn.











share|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    3












    $begingroup$


    How many possible ways can you completely draw this figure?



    enter image description here



    Conditions:




    1 - Once you start to draw you can’t take your pencil off of the paper.
    2 - You can’t trace along a line already drawn.











    share|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      3












      3








      3





      $begingroup$


      How many possible ways can you completely draw this figure?



      enter image description here



      Conditions:




      1 - Once you start to draw you can’t take your pencil off of the paper.
      2 - You can’t trace along a line already drawn.











      share|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      How many possible ways can you completely draw this figure?



      enter image description here



      Conditions:




      1 - Once you start to draw you can’t take your pencil off of the paper.
      2 - You can’t trace along a line already drawn.








      pattern






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 8 hours ago









      AHKieran

      5,0261040




      5,0261040










      asked 8 hours ago









      Dicul SmerdDicul Smerd

      866




      866






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5












          $begingroup$

          This is really a job for a computer rather than a human being, but never mind. (I will check my answer with a computer after posting it...)



          [EDITED to add:] Looks like I missed exactly 48 routes. Corrections are below. I confess that I used a computer to check the total and help find what I'd missed.



          You have to start at one of the bottom corners and end at the other. (Because any vertex of odd degree has to be the start or the end of the path, and there are exactly two of those.) Without loss of generality let's start at bottom left and end at bottom right; this will give us exactly half of the paths.



          Call the vertices of the square, reading clockwise from bottom left, ABCD; and call the middle of the square X. We always start at A. We must visit X twice, with each of A,B,C,D coming before or after it just once. Call two of A,B,C,D "partners" if we visit one of them, then X, then the other. We may have A,B and C,D partners; or A,C and B,D; or A,D and B,C.



          If A,B and C,D are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AB,CD edges. We will go between each of the pairs {A,B}, {B,C}, {C,D} exactly twice, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/8 of the paths. Now we must start ABA (which must continue DCBCD) or ABC (which may continue BADCD or DCBAD) or AD (which must continue CBABCD). That's 4 paths, or 32 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



          [EDITED to add:] I missed ABCDABCD. So 40 rather than 32 paths.



          If A,D and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AD,BC edges. We will go between {A,D} exactly twice and between {B,C} exactly three times, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/12 of the paths. Now we must start ABC (in which case we can't proceed to D because then we can't get back to B,C, so we must continue BCDAD) or ADA (in which case we must continue BCBCD) or ADCB (in which case again we can't proceed to A so must continue CBAD). That's 3 paths, or 36 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



          If A,C and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to the graph we already had with the reinterpretation that the diagonals are two separate edges and don't meet in the middle. We will travel exactly twice between B,C, so if we don't distinguish between the "parallel" edges between those vertices we will count exactly 1/2 of the paths. Now there's a symmetry between B,C so if we also assume we visit B before C then we will count exactly 1/4 of the paths instead. Now our possible beginnings are ABC, ABD, ADB, and by mere brute force I think our options are ABCBDCAD, ABCBDACD; ABDACBCD, ABDCBCAD; ADBACBCD, ADBCABCD, ADBCBACD. That's 7 paths, or 28 after un-ignoring those symmetries.



          [EDITED to add:] I missed rather a lot here. After ABC we can go straight to D and then we can traverse the remaining four vertices in either direction (two more paths with symmetries ignored -> 8 more in total). Or we can go to A, then D, and traverse the remaining three in either directions (another 2/8 more). After ABD or ADB there are just the options I listed above. So I'm 16 short: not 28 but 44.



          In summary,




          we have a total of 40+36+44=120 routes. And that was all starting at A rather than at D, so the total number is twice that or 240.




          Here, in case anyone cares, is the computer code, in Python. It's not very efficient, but it doesn't need to be: it was much faster than I was, and got the right answer straight away :-).



          def e(prefix, target, edges):
          last = prefix[-1]
          if not edges:
          if last == target: yield prefix
          return
          for edge in edges:
          if last in edge:
          if last==edge[0]: other=edge[1]
          else: other=edge[0]
          yield from e(prefix+other, target, edges-{edge})

          print(list(e('A','D',{'AB','BP','PC','BQ','QC','CD','AD','AX','BX','CX','DX'})))





          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            I can confirm this is the correct answer...
            $endgroup$
            – Dr Xorile
            3 hours ago



















          4












          $begingroup$

          I've (very quickly) found 36:




          enter image description here
          Each can be reversed and flipped over the y-axis




          Edit: I've exhausted my ideas and effort for this, someone feel free to add more!






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            I've never thought about using the cross in the centre as a turning point and doing >< instead of x....
            $endgroup$
            – AHKieran
            8 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AHKieran yeah! I wasn't sure if it would be possible but wanted to see!
            $endgroup$
            – Greg
            8 hours ago



















          2












          $begingroup$

          I went ahead and did this with a computer. Of course, @Gareth had already done it by then. I can confirm his answer of:




          240 (Two times the 120 graphed below which all start at the bottom left)




          Here's a computer-generated version of the graphs:




          All Euler Paths






          Old answer and salient warning about trying to go through things systematically before coffee:



          I make it




          72 (these and their reverse and one that I missed which should be in the third row between 3 and 4)




          They are




          paths







          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "559"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f79445%2fa-simple-puzzle-to-play%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            3 Answers
            3






            active

            oldest

            votes








            3 Answers
            3






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            5












            $begingroup$

            This is really a job for a computer rather than a human being, but never mind. (I will check my answer with a computer after posting it...)



            [EDITED to add:] Looks like I missed exactly 48 routes. Corrections are below. I confess that I used a computer to check the total and help find what I'd missed.



            You have to start at one of the bottom corners and end at the other. (Because any vertex of odd degree has to be the start or the end of the path, and there are exactly two of those.) Without loss of generality let's start at bottom left and end at bottom right; this will give us exactly half of the paths.



            Call the vertices of the square, reading clockwise from bottom left, ABCD; and call the middle of the square X. We always start at A. We must visit X twice, with each of A,B,C,D coming before or after it just once. Call two of A,B,C,D "partners" if we visit one of them, then X, then the other. We may have A,B and C,D partners; or A,C and B,D; or A,D and B,C.



            If A,B and C,D are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AB,CD edges. We will go between each of the pairs {A,B}, {B,C}, {C,D} exactly twice, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/8 of the paths. Now we must start ABA (which must continue DCBCD) or ABC (which may continue BADCD or DCBAD) or AD (which must continue CBABCD). That's 4 paths, or 32 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



            [EDITED to add:] I missed ABCDABCD. So 40 rather than 32 paths.



            If A,D and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AD,BC edges. We will go between {A,D} exactly twice and between {B,C} exactly three times, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/12 of the paths. Now we must start ABC (in which case we can't proceed to D because then we can't get back to B,C, so we must continue BCDAD) or ADA (in which case we must continue BCBCD) or ADCB (in which case again we can't proceed to A so must continue CBAD). That's 3 paths, or 36 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



            If A,C and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to the graph we already had with the reinterpretation that the diagonals are two separate edges and don't meet in the middle. We will travel exactly twice between B,C, so if we don't distinguish between the "parallel" edges between those vertices we will count exactly 1/2 of the paths. Now there's a symmetry between B,C so if we also assume we visit B before C then we will count exactly 1/4 of the paths instead. Now our possible beginnings are ABC, ABD, ADB, and by mere brute force I think our options are ABCBDCAD, ABCBDACD; ABDACBCD, ABDCBCAD; ADBACBCD, ADBCABCD, ADBCBACD. That's 7 paths, or 28 after un-ignoring those symmetries.



            [EDITED to add:] I missed rather a lot here. After ABC we can go straight to D and then we can traverse the remaining four vertices in either direction (two more paths with symmetries ignored -> 8 more in total). Or we can go to A, then D, and traverse the remaining three in either directions (another 2/8 more). After ABD or ADB there are just the options I listed above. So I'm 16 short: not 28 but 44.



            In summary,




            we have a total of 40+36+44=120 routes. And that was all starting at A rather than at D, so the total number is twice that or 240.




            Here, in case anyone cares, is the computer code, in Python. It's not very efficient, but it doesn't need to be: it was much faster than I was, and got the right answer straight away :-).



            def e(prefix, target, edges):
            last = prefix[-1]
            if not edges:
            if last == target: yield prefix
            return
            for edge in edges:
            if last in edge:
            if last==edge[0]: other=edge[1]
            else: other=edge[0]
            yield from e(prefix+other, target, edges-{edge})

            print(list(e('A','D',{'AB','BP','PC','BQ','QC','CD','AD','AX','BX','CX','DX'})))





            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I can confirm this is the correct answer...
              $endgroup$
              – Dr Xorile
              3 hours ago
















            5












            $begingroup$

            This is really a job for a computer rather than a human being, but never mind. (I will check my answer with a computer after posting it...)



            [EDITED to add:] Looks like I missed exactly 48 routes. Corrections are below. I confess that I used a computer to check the total and help find what I'd missed.



            You have to start at one of the bottom corners and end at the other. (Because any vertex of odd degree has to be the start or the end of the path, and there are exactly two of those.) Without loss of generality let's start at bottom left and end at bottom right; this will give us exactly half of the paths.



            Call the vertices of the square, reading clockwise from bottom left, ABCD; and call the middle of the square X. We always start at A. We must visit X twice, with each of A,B,C,D coming before or after it just once. Call two of A,B,C,D "partners" if we visit one of them, then X, then the other. We may have A,B and C,D partners; or A,C and B,D; or A,D and B,C.



            If A,B and C,D are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AB,CD edges. We will go between each of the pairs {A,B}, {B,C}, {C,D} exactly twice, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/8 of the paths. Now we must start ABA (which must continue DCBCD) or ABC (which may continue BADCD or DCBAD) or AD (which must continue CBABCD). That's 4 paths, or 32 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



            [EDITED to add:] I missed ABCDABCD. So 40 rather than 32 paths.



            If A,D and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AD,BC edges. We will go between {A,D} exactly twice and between {B,C} exactly three times, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/12 of the paths. Now we must start ABC (in which case we can't proceed to D because then we can't get back to B,C, so we must continue BCDAD) or ADA (in which case we must continue BCBCD) or ADCB (in which case again we can't proceed to A so must continue CBAD). That's 3 paths, or 36 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



            If A,C and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to the graph we already had with the reinterpretation that the diagonals are two separate edges and don't meet in the middle. We will travel exactly twice between B,C, so if we don't distinguish between the "parallel" edges between those vertices we will count exactly 1/2 of the paths. Now there's a symmetry between B,C so if we also assume we visit B before C then we will count exactly 1/4 of the paths instead. Now our possible beginnings are ABC, ABD, ADB, and by mere brute force I think our options are ABCBDCAD, ABCBDACD; ABDACBCD, ABDCBCAD; ADBACBCD, ADBCABCD, ADBCBACD. That's 7 paths, or 28 after un-ignoring those symmetries.



            [EDITED to add:] I missed rather a lot here. After ABC we can go straight to D and then we can traverse the remaining four vertices in either direction (two more paths with symmetries ignored -> 8 more in total). Or we can go to A, then D, and traverse the remaining three in either directions (another 2/8 more). After ABD or ADB there are just the options I listed above. So I'm 16 short: not 28 but 44.



            In summary,




            we have a total of 40+36+44=120 routes. And that was all starting at A rather than at D, so the total number is twice that or 240.




            Here, in case anyone cares, is the computer code, in Python. It's not very efficient, but it doesn't need to be: it was much faster than I was, and got the right answer straight away :-).



            def e(prefix, target, edges):
            last = prefix[-1]
            if not edges:
            if last == target: yield prefix
            return
            for edge in edges:
            if last in edge:
            if last==edge[0]: other=edge[1]
            else: other=edge[0]
            yield from e(prefix+other, target, edges-{edge})

            print(list(e('A','D',{'AB','BP','PC','BQ','QC','CD','AD','AX','BX','CX','DX'})))





            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I can confirm this is the correct answer...
              $endgroup$
              – Dr Xorile
              3 hours ago














            5












            5








            5





            $begingroup$

            This is really a job for a computer rather than a human being, but never mind. (I will check my answer with a computer after posting it...)



            [EDITED to add:] Looks like I missed exactly 48 routes. Corrections are below. I confess that I used a computer to check the total and help find what I'd missed.



            You have to start at one of the bottom corners and end at the other. (Because any vertex of odd degree has to be the start or the end of the path, and there are exactly two of those.) Without loss of generality let's start at bottom left and end at bottom right; this will give us exactly half of the paths.



            Call the vertices of the square, reading clockwise from bottom left, ABCD; and call the middle of the square X. We always start at A. We must visit X twice, with each of A,B,C,D coming before or after it just once. Call two of A,B,C,D "partners" if we visit one of them, then X, then the other. We may have A,B and C,D partners; or A,C and B,D; or A,D and B,C.



            If A,B and C,D are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AB,CD edges. We will go between each of the pairs {A,B}, {B,C}, {C,D} exactly twice, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/8 of the paths. Now we must start ABA (which must continue DCBCD) or ABC (which may continue BADCD or DCBAD) or AD (which must continue CBABCD). That's 4 paths, or 32 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



            [EDITED to add:] I missed ABCDABCD. So 40 rather than 32 paths.



            If A,D and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AD,BC edges. We will go between {A,D} exactly twice and between {B,C} exactly three times, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/12 of the paths. Now we must start ABC (in which case we can't proceed to D because then we can't get back to B,C, so we must continue BCDAD) or ADA (in which case we must continue BCBCD) or ADCB (in which case again we can't proceed to A so must continue CBAD). That's 3 paths, or 36 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



            If A,C and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to the graph we already had with the reinterpretation that the diagonals are two separate edges and don't meet in the middle. We will travel exactly twice between B,C, so if we don't distinguish between the "parallel" edges between those vertices we will count exactly 1/2 of the paths. Now there's a symmetry between B,C so if we also assume we visit B before C then we will count exactly 1/4 of the paths instead. Now our possible beginnings are ABC, ABD, ADB, and by mere brute force I think our options are ABCBDCAD, ABCBDACD; ABDACBCD, ABDCBCAD; ADBACBCD, ADBCABCD, ADBCBACD. That's 7 paths, or 28 after un-ignoring those symmetries.



            [EDITED to add:] I missed rather a lot here. After ABC we can go straight to D and then we can traverse the remaining four vertices in either direction (two more paths with symmetries ignored -> 8 more in total). Or we can go to A, then D, and traverse the remaining three in either directions (another 2/8 more). After ABD or ADB there are just the options I listed above. So I'm 16 short: not 28 but 44.



            In summary,




            we have a total of 40+36+44=120 routes. And that was all starting at A rather than at D, so the total number is twice that or 240.




            Here, in case anyone cares, is the computer code, in Python. It's not very efficient, but it doesn't need to be: it was much faster than I was, and got the right answer straight away :-).



            def e(prefix, target, edges):
            last = prefix[-1]
            if not edges:
            if last == target: yield prefix
            return
            for edge in edges:
            if last in edge:
            if last==edge[0]: other=edge[1]
            else: other=edge[0]
            yield from e(prefix+other, target, edges-{edge})

            print(list(e('A','D',{'AB','BP','PC','BQ','QC','CD','AD','AX','BX','CX','DX'})))





            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            This is really a job for a computer rather than a human being, but never mind. (I will check my answer with a computer after posting it...)



            [EDITED to add:] Looks like I missed exactly 48 routes. Corrections are below. I confess that I used a computer to check the total and help find what I'd missed.



            You have to start at one of the bottom corners and end at the other. (Because any vertex of odd degree has to be the start or the end of the path, and there are exactly two of those.) Without loss of generality let's start at bottom left and end at bottom right; this will give us exactly half of the paths.



            Call the vertices of the square, reading clockwise from bottom left, ABCD; and call the middle of the square X. We always start at A. We must visit X twice, with each of A,B,C,D coming before or after it just once. Call two of A,B,C,D "partners" if we visit one of them, then X, then the other. We may have A,B and C,D partners; or A,C and B,D; or A,D and B,C.



            If A,B and C,D are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AB,CD edges. We will go between each of the pairs {A,B}, {B,C}, {C,D} exactly twice, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/8 of the paths. Now we must start ABA (which must continue DCBCD) or ABC (which may continue BADCD or DCBAD) or AD (which must continue CBABCD). That's 4 paths, or 32 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



            [EDITED to add:] I missed ABCDABCD. So 40 rather than 32 paths.



            If A,D and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to a graph without X but with extra AD,BC edges. We will go between {A,D} exactly twice and between {B,C} exactly three times, so if we don't bother to record which edge we choose each time then we will count exactly 1/12 of the paths. Now we must start ABC (in which case we can't proceed to D because then we can't get back to B,C, so we must continue BCDAD) or ADA (in which case we must continue BCBCD) or ADCB (in which case again we can't proceed to A so must continue CBAD). That's 3 paths, or 36 when we bother to distinguish "parallel" edges.



            If A,C and B,C are partners, this is equivalent to the graph we already had with the reinterpretation that the diagonals are two separate edges and don't meet in the middle. We will travel exactly twice between B,C, so if we don't distinguish between the "parallel" edges between those vertices we will count exactly 1/2 of the paths. Now there's a symmetry between B,C so if we also assume we visit B before C then we will count exactly 1/4 of the paths instead. Now our possible beginnings are ABC, ABD, ADB, and by mere brute force I think our options are ABCBDCAD, ABCBDACD; ABDACBCD, ABDCBCAD; ADBACBCD, ADBCABCD, ADBCBACD. That's 7 paths, or 28 after un-ignoring those symmetries.



            [EDITED to add:] I missed rather a lot here. After ABC we can go straight to D and then we can traverse the remaining four vertices in either direction (two more paths with symmetries ignored -> 8 more in total). Or we can go to A, then D, and traverse the remaining three in either directions (another 2/8 more). After ABD or ADB there are just the options I listed above. So I'm 16 short: not 28 but 44.



            In summary,




            we have a total of 40+36+44=120 routes. And that was all starting at A rather than at D, so the total number is twice that or 240.




            Here, in case anyone cares, is the computer code, in Python. It's not very efficient, but it doesn't need to be: it was much faster than I was, and got the right answer straight away :-).



            def e(prefix, target, edges):
            last = prefix[-1]
            if not edges:
            if last == target: yield prefix
            return
            for edge in edges:
            if last in edge:
            if last==edge[0]: other=edge[1]
            else: other=edge[0]
            yield from e(prefix+other, target, edges-{edge})

            print(list(e('A','D',{'AB','BP','PC','BQ','QC','CD','AD','AX','BX','CX','DX'})))






            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 5 hours ago

























            answered 6 hours ago









            Gareth McCaughanGareth McCaughan

            61.6k3152237




            61.6k3152237












            • $begingroup$
              I can confirm this is the correct answer...
              $endgroup$
              – Dr Xorile
              3 hours ago


















            • $begingroup$
              I can confirm this is the correct answer...
              $endgroup$
              – Dr Xorile
              3 hours ago
















            $begingroup$
            I can confirm this is the correct answer...
            $endgroup$
            – Dr Xorile
            3 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            I can confirm this is the correct answer...
            $endgroup$
            – Dr Xorile
            3 hours ago











            4












            $begingroup$

            I've (very quickly) found 36:




            enter image description here
            Each can be reversed and flipped over the y-axis




            Edit: I've exhausted my ideas and effort for this, someone feel free to add more!






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I've never thought about using the cross in the centre as a turning point and doing >< instead of x....
              $endgroup$
              – AHKieran
              8 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @AHKieran yeah! I wasn't sure if it would be possible but wanted to see!
              $endgroup$
              – Greg
              8 hours ago
















            4












            $begingroup$

            I've (very quickly) found 36:




            enter image description here
            Each can be reversed and flipped over the y-axis




            Edit: I've exhausted my ideas and effort for this, someone feel free to add more!






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I've never thought about using the cross in the centre as a turning point and doing >< instead of x....
              $endgroup$
              – AHKieran
              8 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @AHKieran yeah! I wasn't sure if it would be possible but wanted to see!
              $endgroup$
              – Greg
              8 hours ago














            4












            4








            4





            $begingroup$

            I've (very quickly) found 36:




            enter image description here
            Each can be reversed and flipped over the y-axis




            Edit: I've exhausted my ideas and effort for this, someone feel free to add more!






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            I've (very quickly) found 36:




            enter image description here
            Each can be reversed and flipped over the y-axis




            Edit: I've exhausted my ideas and effort for this, someone feel free to add more!







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 7 hours ago

























            answered 8 hours ago









            GregGreg

            2,191319




            2,191319












            • $begingroup$
              I've never thought about using the cross in the centre as a turning point and doing >< instead of x....
              $endgroup$
              – AHKieran
              8 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @AHKieran yeah! I wasn't sure if it would be possible but wanted to see!
              $endgroup$
              – Greg
              8 hours ago


















            • $begingroup$
              I've never thought about using the cross in the centre as a turning point and doing >< instead of x....
              $endgroup$
              – AHKieran
              8 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              @AHKieran yeah! I wasn't sure if it would be possible but wanted to see!
              $endgroup$
              – Greg
              8 hours ago
















            $begingroup$
            I've never thought about using the cross in the centre as a turning point and doing >< instead of x....
            $endgroup$
            – AHKieran
            8 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            I've never thought about using the cross in the centre as a turning point and doing >< instead of x....
            $endgroup$
            – AHKieran
            8 hours ago












            $begingroup$
            @AHKieran yeah! I wasn't sure if it would be possible but wanted to see!
            $endgroup$
            – Greg
            8 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            @AHKieran yeah! I wasn't sure if it would be possible but wanted to see!
            $endgroup$
            – Greg
            8 hours ago











            2












            $begingroup$

            I went ahead and did this with a computer. Of course, @Gareth had already done it by then. I can confirm his answer of:




            240 (Two times the 120 graphed below which all start at the bottom left)




            Here's a computer-generated version of the graphs:




            All Euler Paths






            Old answer and salient warning about trying to go through things systematically before coffee:



            I make it




            72 (these and their reverse and one that I missed which should be in the third row between 3 and 4)




            They are




            paths







            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$


















              2












              $begingroup$

              I went ahead and did this with a computer. Of course, @Gareth had already done it by then. I can confirm his answer of:




              240 (Two times the 120 graphed below which all start at the bottom left)




              Here's a computer-generated version of the graphs:




              All Euler Paths






              Old answer and salient warning about trying to go through things systematically before coffee:



              I make it




              72 (these and their reverse and one that I missed which should be in the third row between 3 and 4)




              They are




              paths







              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$
















                2












                2








                2





                $begingroup$

                I went ahead and did this with a computer. Of course, @Gareth had already done it by then. I can confirm his answer of:




                240 (Two times the 120 graphed below which all start at the bottom left)




                Here's a computer-generated version of the graphs:




                All Euler Paths






                Old answer and salient warning about trying to go through things systematically before coffee:



                I make it




                72 (these and their reverse and one that I missed which should be in the third row between 3 and 4)




                They are




                paths







                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                I went ahead and did this with a computer. Of course, @Gareth had already done it by then. I can confirm his answer of:




                240 (Two times the 120 graphed below which all start at the bottom left)




                Here's a computer-generated version of the graphs:




                All Euler Paths






                Old answer and salient warning about trying to go through things systematically before coffee:



                I make it




                72 (these and their reverse and one that I missed which should be in the third row between 3 and 4)




                They are




                paths








                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 3 hours ago

























                answered 7 hours ago









                Dr XorileDr Xorile

                12k22566




                12k22566






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Puzzling Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpuzzling.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f79445%2fa-simple-puzzle-to-play%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Magento 2 controller redirect on button click in phtml file

                    Polycentropodidae