Post Made Community Wiki by Scott Morrison
show/hide this revision's text 2 Changed wording to improve readability. Indented image.

There's a famous problem posed by Erdos that has an easy 3-D solution, but a very difficult 2-D solution. The problem is to prove the following: Given a decomposition of an n-cube into finitely many n-cubes $Q_1, ... Q_k,$ $k > 1$, Q_k$ ($k>1$), prove that there exist two distinct cubes $Q_i, Q_{i'}, i \neq i'$Q_{i'}$, of equal size.

The above statement is certainly true for $n=3$ (this is a simple exercise), but it is in fact untrue for $n=2$. I think this is known as the "Squared square" problem, and you can read more about it here. Below is the first counter-example, due to Sprague, to the problem.

               A squared square with no equal sub-squares

show/hide this revision's text 1

There's a famous problem posed by Erdos that has an easy 3-D solution, but a very difficult 2-D solution. The problem is to prove the following: Given a decomposition of an n-cube into finitely many n-cubes $Q_1, ... Q_k,$ $k > 1$, prove that there exist two cubes $Q_i, Q_{i'}, i \neq i'$, of equal size.

The above statement is certainly true for $n=3$ (this is a simple exercise), but it is in fact untrue for $n=2$. I think this is known as the "Squared square" problem, and you can read more about it here.

A squared square with no equal sub-squares