3 ms·

It took me longer than it should to get this!

• beardyw 10mo ago
  On reflection, does the squirrel consider itself to have been "gone round"? I don't think so.
  • xlbuttplug2 10mo ago
    Say instead of just walking, the man was laying down a net/barricade around the tree. As soon as the man completes the circumference, the squirrel must admit that it has been gone around.
    • xnorswap 10mo ago
      Now let us suppose the squirrel is at the same distance as the man. Has the man have gone around the squirrel and the squirrel around the man? If it's only radii less than the other, where is the limit? To get it I think I have to re-frame it like this: If you hold out an object toward the centre, you clearly go around it when completing an orbit. If you keep extending that to the origin but then go beyond, so your arm is longer than the radius, then you still go around it, until your arm reaches twice the radius.
      • xlbuttplug2 10mo ago
        The article says the man was trying to see the squirrel's back implying a larger radius. But yeah if your circuit completely fits inside the other person's circuit, then you've been gone around, no matter how slow or fast you both are.
• moconnor 10mo ago
  To get what?
  • xlbuttplug2 10mo ago
    That the man technically went around the squirrel without ever having caught up to it.
    • adastra22 10mo ago
      It is still not clear to me. The periodicity of their orbit around the tree is the same. I think this is an instance of us meaning different things by “go around”