This is a cracking question. [I'm assuming that 'integral side lengths' is intended also to mean integral positions. That is to say, the position vectors of the cubes' vertices should consist only of integer components...such that we are effectively drawing our cube in a 3D grid. If this was not a condition, the answer would be infinity.] So then: first, there are 53 = 125 1x1x1 cubes. Then 43 = 64 2x2x2cubes. 33 = 27 3x3x3 cubes. 23 = 8 4x4x4 cubes. And, stunningly, 13 = 1 5x5x5 cube. So far we have 225 cubes. That would not be interesting. But we have only counted the cubes with edges parallel to the edges of the main cube. Suppose there are some more cubes formed by diagonal lines? Since edge lengths and vertex positions both have to be integral, and we are working in 3 dimensions, we are actually looking for Pythagorean quadruples - integer solutions to a2 + b2 + c2 = d2 Up to now we have only used trivial solutions like this: 52 + 02 + 02 = 52 Our edges have only moved in one dimension. We might consider edges that move in two dimensions, using the smallest Pythagorean triple: 32 + 42 + 02 = 52 But diagonal edges of length five are clearly not going to fit. So introduce the third component, and we find this: 12 + 22 + 22 = 32 By using diagonal edges it is possible to constuct a few more valid 3x3x3 cubes. It turns out, I think, that four of these can be formed. So we have 229 cubes in total.
They are not generally called seven cubes.
The answer probably is 3*2*4 = 24 unit cubes but you could also do it with 10 cubes: 2 cubes of size 2*2*2 and 8 unit cubes. The question does not require the cubes to be unit cubes.
16 1-inch cubes
The ratios of areas are the squares of the ratio of lengths (and the ratio of volumes are cubes of the ratio of lengths). As the perimeter of the second is twice the perimeter of the first, each length of the second is twice the length of the first, and so the ratio of the lengths is 1:2 Thus the ratio of the areas is 1²:2² = 1:4. Therefore the surface area of the larger prism is four times that of the smaller prism.
There are 27 1x1cm cubes
5x5x5 gives us 125 7x7x7 gives us 343 343/125 is 2.744
No because cubes do not have opposite sides that are different lengths. Cubes have all equal sides and all equal coners. A cube is not a rectangle.
When c = the number that is the dimension of the cube (ex. this time, 7), you can find the number of cubes for any size of cube. c3 - (c - 2)3 So for 7, that is 7x7x7 - (5x5x5) 49x7 - 25x5 343 - 125 218 There are 218 cubies in a 7x7x7 Rubik's cube!
With 10 cm side lengths, this cube has a volume of 1000 cm3
They are not generally called seven cubes.
Sure cubes can tessellate. It's actually very easy to do so with cubes, as they would all have straight sides of even lengths from any angle.
The total volume of two cubes that each have edge lengths of 5 feet is: 250 cubic feet.
If the number cubes are standard dice cubes, the odds of rolling 3 ones is 1 in 216.
5x5x5=125 and 3x3x3=27 add them to get the combined volume of 152 in^3
There are 12 squares on 2 cubes
If the surface area is 49 cm2 then the edge lengths are 2.858 cm
650 °C