Talk:Antimagic square

Order Three
A magick Square of order three goes like thus: 9,8,7 2,1,6 3,4,5 Jaynus _Izanagi 17:25, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


 * It is not an anti-magic square by definition. The sums are all different, but do not form a sequence of consecutive numbers. An antimagic square of order three is impossible, it just hasn't been mathematically proven yet. Pure Pandemonium 23:38, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * By which you mean it has been mathematically proven, but not elegantly. See proof by exhaustion. 23:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You have exhibited a heterosquare, not an antimagic square 23:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Sparse antimagic squares
Hi. I've added some discussion of the sparse generalization. But perhaps this should have a page of its own. Comments anyone? Robinh (talk) 21:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

open problem
If there have to be numbers from 1 to 9 in 3x3 square, we can test all 362880 squares. It can be done using computer. Can it be proof of non-existense of 3x3 magic square? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.20.141.208 (talk) 14:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC)