Editing 2740: Square Packing

Jump to: navigation, search

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 20: Line 20:
 
The title text mentions the same approach "improved" the solution for 1 unit square, whose optimum solution is obviously that unit square itself with s=1. Munroe remarks that if he had "some upgrades", presumably a more powerful hydraulic press, he could get the resulting square to be even smaller.
 
The title text mentions the same approach "improved" the solution for 1 unit square, whose optimum solution is obviously that unit square itself with s=1. Munroe remarks that if he had "some upgrades", presumably a more powerful hydraulic press, he could get the resulting square to be even smaller.
  
βˆ’
The humorous implication behind the comic and the title text is that rather than the shapes being mathematical, abstract shapes, they are actually physical squares, constructed of some extremely strong, but not completely incompressible material. It is not obvious what material that might be: even using a hydraulic press, its cross-sectional area can only be reduced to 92-94% of its original size. (The fact that the theoretical squares exist in a 2D universe in the problem statement, but here are seemingly 3D objects showing distortions in the sides facing the viewer after being presumably crushed from the top and sides in turn by the hydraulic press, is not more fully addressed.)
+
The humorous implication behind the comic and the title text is that rather than the shapes being mathematical, abstract shapes, they are actually physical squares, constructed of some extremely strong, but not completely incompressible material. It is not obvious what material that might be: even using a hydraulic press, its cross-sectional area can only be reduced to 0.97 or 0.96 times that it starts with. (The fact that the theoretical squares exist in a 2D universe in the problem statement, but here are seemingly 3D objects showing distortions in the sides facing the viewer after being presumably crushed from the top and sides in turn by the hydraulic press, is not more fully addressed.)
  
 
This is perhaps a related joke to [[2706: Bendy]], but now with squares and compressed areas instead of triangles and extended lengths.  Unsolved packing problems also appear to be a long-standing interest of Randall, who shows himself pondering "the most efficient packing of round-cut diamonds of uniform size" in the What If? [https://what-if.xkcd.com/108/ Expensive Shoebox], with the title text "A Google search for unsolved+packing+problems very nearly got me just now."
 
This is perhaps a related joke to [[2706: Bendy]], but now with squares and compressed areas instead of triangles and extended lengths.  Unsolved packing problems also appear to be a long-standing interest of Randall, who shows himself pondering "the most efficient packing of round-cut diamonds of uniform size" in the What If? [https://what-if.xkcd.com/108/ Expensive Shoebox], with the title text "A Google search for unsolved+packing+problems very nearly got me just now."

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)