|
Very nice. Los Angeles to Washington, DC in 64 minutes! Normal flights take around 5 hours at the shortest.
Scott Dorman Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD
President - Tampa Bay IASA
[ Blog][ Articles][ Forum Guidelines]
Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
|
|
|
|
|
I'm fairly certain I have met both those guys. Many years back, when I was a young lad in the Navy, my in-laws lived outside Beale, in the Lake Wildwood area. At that time, it was a smaller community, but lots of Air Force people, especially pilots lived up there because it was so very nice, and had some very expensive homes as well.
My father-in-law built custom homes and knew several pilots from doing thier homes for them. On weekends, my wife and I would head up that way (from NAS Moffetf Field) and these guys would come over for a beer and we'd talk military stuff back and forth.
Memories.
|
|
|
|
|
Very, very, very cool. Extremely fascinating. Thanks for sharing.
I have to say, the following is my favorite part of the excerpt:
"I could see the eerie shine of my gold spacesuit incandescently illuminated in a celestial glow. I stole one last glance out the window. Despite our speed, we seemed still before the heavens, humbled in the radiance of a much greater power. For those few moments, I felt a part of something far more significant than anything we were doing in the plane."
Indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
Q: Describe a 2 or 3 dimensional shape with an infinite edge and zero area, which takes up a finite amount of space.
|
|
|
|
|
Zero area yet still requires space?
A ray perhaps?
|
|
|
|
|
That is a 1-dimensional shape that can be placed in a 2 or 3 dimensional space. Perhaps a loop would qualify as an answer (depending on your definition of "infinite").
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory.Gadow wrote: Describe a 2 or 3 dimensional shape with an infinite edge and zero area, which takes up a finite amount of space.
No.
|
|
|
|
|
A: A shape which is 2 or 3 dimensional and has an infinite edge and zero area, and takes up a finite amount of space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peano curve?
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book,
only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
|
|
|
|
|
I'm guessing you're not going to allow t as a dimension, right? 
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
How about a singularity?
Zach
|
|
|
|
|
a point. infinite edge, zero area (zero volume in 3d). Don't get the last qualifier, since it contradicts the second...perhaps you meant 'occupies a specific location'.
|
|
|
|
|
not np compliant, so wont answer
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
That would be a fractal, such as this Sierpinski triangle[^].
ADDED
Although not many would agree they have 2 or 3 (or any integer) number of dimensions...
|
|
|
|
|
Good friggin call. Though I wouldn't say it has an infinite edge. Perhaps an infinite number of edges, but each of them of a finite length. And what happens when the cumulative edge length approaches infinity? Doesn't it approach having a surface? Who knew there was so much philosophy in such a simple question? 
|
|
|
|
|
well, either edge is used for perimeter, not the line connecting two vertices; or we could agree the vertices are all melting together and all edges become one...
the surface issue is the problematic one, they are fractals after all.
|
|
|
|
|
Very good! I missed your response when I posted my answer below.
You are also correct, I should have said that the shape could be rendered geometrically in a plane or a space. But that might have given away too much.
|
|
|
|
|
you also silently switched from edge to perimeter in your solution message; the edges get smaller and smaller after each iteration, it is the perimeter that grows to infinity. But that didn't stop me 
|
|
|
|
|
The solution is correct whether you use "edge" or "perimeter" as both approach infinity as the number of iterations increases. As I corrected myself below, not all edges diminish in size 
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm. When you start with a finite triangle, and all you do is cut some edges in half, none of the edges will ever grow, let alone grow to infinity; the perimeter yes, the edges no.
|
|
|
|
|
As the number of edges approaches infinity, the sizes of those edges decreases toward 0, so they approach being a single edge. Or so, that's how I interpreted it.
|
|
|
|
|
That is what I suggested here[^] but I didn't expect you to buy it.
|
|
|
|
|
Not so. You always have the outside edges of the starting triangle; those remain the same size. What you are adding are the edges created by cutting out the middle triangle, which are half the size of the triangle's outer edges.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
