Editing 1381: Margin
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
− | + | This is a reference to {{w|Fermat's Last Theorem}}, of which {{w|Pierre de Fermat}} claimed he had a proof that was too large to fit in the margin of a copy of ''{{w|Arithmetica}}''. Despite its simple formulation, the problem remained unsolved for three centuries; it was cracked only with advanced techniques developed in the 20th century, leading many to believe that Fermat didn't actually possess {{w|Fermat's Last Theorem#Did Fermat possess a general proof?|a (correct) proof}} (see [[#trivia|trivia]]). | |
− | This is a reference to {{w|Fermat's Last Theorem}}, of which {{w|Pierre de Fermat}} claimed he had a proof that was too large to fit in the margin of a copy of ''{{w|Arithmetica}}''. Despite its simple formulation, the problem remained unsolved for three centuries; it was cracked only with advanced techniques developed in the 20th century, leading many to believe that Fermat didn't actually possess {{w|Fermat's Last Theorem#Fermat | ||
In the comic, the person writing in the margin attempts to pull a similar trick, without actually having any proof, by claiming that he has found a proof that information is infinitely compressible, but pretending not to be able to show it due to lack of space in the margin. In this particular case, however, this approach backfires, precisely because if information was actually infinitely compressible, the writer ''would'' be able to fit the proof in the margin (due to his own proof). The writer realizes that if he had a proof he should be able to fit it into the margin, and thus he realizes that he cannot pull this trick. Or perhaps the writer really thought he had a proof, but then realized that his statement was a counterexample, and was disappointed that his idea for a proof was wrong. | In the comic, the person writing in the margin attempts to pull a similar trick, without actually having any proof, by claiming that he has found a proof that information is infinitely compressible, but pretending not to be able to show it due to lack of space in the margin. In this particular case, however, this approach backfires, precisely because if information was actually infinitely compressible, the writer ''would'' be able to fit the proof in the margin (due to his own proof). The writer realizes that if he had a proof he should be able to fit it into the margin, and thus he realizes that he cannot pull this trick. Or perhaps the writer really thought he had a proof, but then realized that his statement was a counterexample, and was disappointed that his idea for a proof was wrong. | ||
Line 15: | Line 14: | ||
What it seems he did not realize, is that it would be impossible to read the proof if the writer actually was able to compress his proof to fit in the margin. This is because you would need to know the algorithm described in the proof before you could decompress the proof text so you can read it. So he could actually have used this trick instead, writing that he had compressed it into - say a dot "'''.'''" - and then people would have to find his proof to read it. And since they cannot find such a proof - they could not check his dot. Unfortunately this would also have backfired - because there is already a {{w|Pigeonhole principle#Uses and applications|proof that this is not possible}}! | What it seems he did not realize, is that it would be impossible to read the proof if the writer actually was able to compress his proof to fit in the margin. This is because you would need to know the algorithm described in the proof before you could decompress the proof text so you can read it. So he could actually have used this trick instead, writing that he had compressed it into - say a dot "'''.'''" - and then people would have to find his proof to read it. And since they cannot find such a proof - they could not check his dot. Unfortunately this would also have backfired - because there is already a {{w|Pigeonhole principle#Uses and applications|proof that this is not possible}}! | ||
− | + | The title text, yet another [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Category:Protip protip], makes a reference to the {{w|Shannon–Hartley theorem}}, which limits the maximum rate at which information can be transmitted. Setting the font size of text only changes its ''representation'' on the screen, and not the actual characters themselves. Trying to decrease the amount of space needed to store or transmit it like advised would be nonsensical. | |
− | |||
− | The title text, yet another [ | ||
− | |||
− | |||
==Transcript== | ==Transcript== | ||
− | :[Written on the | + | :[Written on the margin of a page:] |
:I have | :I have | ||
:discovered | :discovered | ||
Line 39: | Line 34: | ||
:never mind :( | :never mind :( | ||
− | == | + | ==Trivia== |
− | + | *Fermat's Last Theorem states that no three positive integers ''a'', ''b'', and ''c'' can satisfy the equation ''a''<sup>''n''</sup> + ''b''<sup>''n''</sup> = ''c''<sup>''n''</sup> for any integer value of ''n'' greater than two. | |
− | *Fermat's Last Theorem states that no three positive integers ''a'', ''b'', and ''c'' can satisfy the equation ''a''<sup>''n''</sup> + ''b''<sup>''n''</sup> = ''c''<sup>''n''</sup> for any integer value of ''n'' greater than two. | + | **In the case with n=2 it is reduced to the {{w|Pythagorean theorem}} which has an infinite number of integer solutions for a, b and c, such as ''3''<sup>''2''</sup> + ''4''<sup>''2''</sup> = ''5''<sup>''2''</sup>. |
− | **In the case with n=2 | + | *Fermat's Last Theorem was {{w|Wiles' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem|solved}} in 1995 by {{w|Andrew Wiles}} with some assistance by {{w|Richard Taylor (mathematician)|Richard Taylor}} who helped him close a gap in his original proof from 1993. |
− | *Fermat's Last Theorem was {{w|Wiles' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem|solved}} in 1995 by {{w|Andrew Wiles}} with some assistance by {{w|Richard Taylor (mathematician)|Richard Taylor}} who helped him close a gap in his original proof from 1993. | ||
**The proof involved some of the most complicated mathematics used today, and it has been speculated that only a handful of people in the world would be able to understand it. | **The proof involved some of the most complicated mathematics used today, and it has been speculated that only a handful of people in the world would be able to understand it. | ||
**For people interested in the subject, {{w|Simon Singh}} has written a [http://simonsingh.net/books/fermats-last-theorem/the-book/ popular science book] about it, called ''{{w|Fermat's Last Theorem (book)|Fermat's Last Theorem}}''. | **For people interested in the subject, {{w|Simon Singh}} has written a [http://simonsingh.net/books/fermats-last-theorem/the-book/ popular science book] about it, called ''{{w|Fermat's Last Theorem (book)|Fermat's Last Theorem}}''. | ||
Line 53: | Line 47: | ||
[[Category:Protip]] | [[Category:Protip]] | ||
[[Category:Math]] | [[Category:Math]] | ||
− |