4 ms·
> The truth is far simpler. Mathematicians are solving puzzles, and some of those puzzles don't come from the real world at all, and can't be motivated in that
by conceit 11y ago
> The truth is far simpler. Mathematicians are solving puzzles, and some of those puzzles don't come from the real world at all, and can't be motivated in that way.
Why is it that mathematicians are unable to see the recursion: Pure maths is maths applied to maths, so it is applied maths, nevermind how often this operation had to be repeated until the result would be substantiv?
- ColinWright 11y agoThere are two approaches to answering your question. Firstly, what makes you think that mathematicians are unaware of the trail back to "the real world"? Secondly, I'd be interested in knowing what you think this real world issue this problem might be descended from: Dissect a circle into congruent pieces, such that the centre point is contained in the interior of one of the pieces.
- gech 11y agoCutting up a pineapple evenly without including the core because no one wants to eat that part?
- srtjstjsj 11y agoThat is not an application of the problem posed above -- the core would still be in one of the pieces, and an easier solution would be to core the fruit first and then divvy up the annulus that remains.
- conceit 11y ago1. Because at least one claimed that there wasn't any such trail back. 2. The problem of not everyone having noticed yet how elated one is. \s I think there is no positive solution to this geometric puzzle.
- ColinWright 11y agoCan you find a dissection where some pieces don't touch the center point? Can you prove that it's impossible to have the center in the interior of a piece?