@GeorgeC42811263@neweveryday99 I agree with @Herondale1713. The answer is 14 but because that is the number of discrete squares shown in the third figure. The actual number of discrete squares shown in the second figure is 5 not 4 so that casts some shade on George’s reasoning. Why just count the internals?
@NARCO4204@KenWelch985550@wildklip NARCO if you’re talking to Ken you have what’s known as the Dunning-Kruger effect . . . too stupid to have any idea what you don’t know. Those three stooges most likely lose their QI and their jobs & cost the taxpayers of their dept/town minimum high six figures in a 1983 case