It's not a very elegant proof, but I wrote a computer program to search for all possible geometric constructions involving six or less circles, and unless there's a bug in the program, six circles is indeed the best one can do.
What's more, my program found a nicer construction than I did:
It has the merit of being more symmetrical than mine was, and producing three squares instead of just two. ;)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2022-11-16 01:22 am (UTC)It's not a very elegant proof, but I wrote a computer program to search for all possible geometric constructions involving six or less circles, and unless there's a bug in the program, six circles is indeed the best one can do.
What's more, my program found a nicer construction than I did:
It has the merit of being more symmetrical than mine was, and producing three squares instead of just two. ;)