Difference between revisions of "Talk:866: Compass and Straightedge"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
(agree)
(Suggested reference)
Line 15: Line 15:
 
[[User:Spagovir|Spagovir]] ([[User talk:Spagovir|talk]]) 18:33, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 
[[User:Spagovir|Spagovir]] ([[User talk:Spagovir|talk]]) 18:33, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 
: I'm pretty sure you're right, it sounds like a Hawking party reference to me too. - [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] ([[User talk:CRGreathouse|talk]]) 06:17, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 
: I'm pretty sure you're right, it sounds like a Hawking party reference to me too. - [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] ([[User talk:CRGreathouse|talk]]) 06:17, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 +
 +
Anyone think of adding a reference to 710 Collatz Conjecture?  Where in a similar vein, he begins by explaining the steps for applying the conjecture, then finishes up by losing all his friends.  [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.17|108.162.246.17]] 16:26, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:26, 8 August 2018

No, the comic is funny because many geometrical theorems prove something along the lines of "With a compass and straightedge you cannot construct..." (e.g. a square and a circle with the same area) If you have knowledge of this type of proof, the humor is that you think he's about to talk about something that is impossible in geometry, but really he's talking about the inapplicability of geometry to real life. This is often a difficulty with nerds and brainy people, they try to apply their theoretical knowledge to human relationships and fail. 75.103.23.206 19:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

And then there's the converse: people who are able to apply theoretical knowledge and succeed. 76.106.251.87 04:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

The explanation mentions that there are "three such constructions", but doesn't go any further. What they are should at least be addressed (or linked to), even if we're not going to elaborate on the "why" of their impossibility. For the uninitiated, they are squaring the circle, trisecting any angle, and doubling the cube. 76.106.251.87 04:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

If such constructions are "impossible with the use of modern algebraic techniques," then why don't we just use older algebraic techniques?  ;) 213.203.138.251 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Those "modern algebraic techniques" just did prove that you can't solve this constructions by using only "classical geometry".--Dgbrt (talk) 18:14, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I tried forming a club for compasses and straight edges but no one signed up :( ~JFreund

Could the “most awsome birthday party“ bear another deeper meaning, for example be analogue to the rational polynom with rational coefficients? 162.158.202.100 04:30, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Could this "most awesome birthday party" be a reference to Stephen Hawking's party for time travelers? Spagovir (talk) 18:33, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you're right, it sounds like a Hawking party reference to me too. - CRGreathouse (talk) 06:17, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Anyone think of adding a reference to 710 Collatz Conjecture? Where in a similar vein, he begins by explaining the steps for applying the conjecture, then finishes up by losing all his friends. 108.162.246.17 16:26, 8 August 2018 (UTC)