 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Archpawn wrote:
> People keep making razors with more and more blades. I present a razor with too
> many blades to count. This set of blades is not only perfect, but closed and
> totally disconnected as well.
too complicated. I'm keeping my trusted Dirichlet razor ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian Froeschlin wrote:
> too complicated. I'm keeping my trusted Dirichlet razor ;)
(trying to get a hair between the blades is a form of meditation for me)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 09/10/2012 20:31, Archpawn nous fit lire :
> And now a version with a fat cantor set. What's the point of having uncountably
> many blades if it still has zero measure?
>
Shipping cost: weight of blades is 0, number of blades is so huge...
And the biggest point for the seller: you have one razor, you cut it in
three (or two ?) parts and now can sell one while keeping the other one
and repeat. The more you sell, the smaller the razor, but still the same
number of blades.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfr de> wrote:
> too complicated. I'm keeping my trusted Dirichlet razor ;)
I don't know what that is. Is it related to Dirichlet series?
If you want things simple, may I suggest Occam's razor?
Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
> Shipping cost: weight of blades is 0, number of blades is so huge...
No. The edges have zero measure. The solid still has volume.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 10/10/2012 02:58, Archpawn nous fit lire :
>> Shipping cost: weight of blades is 0, number of blades is so huge...
>
> No. The edges have zero measure. The solid still has volume.
>
I wonder. Finite x Finite x 0 = ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Archpawn wrote:
> Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfrde> wrote:
>> too complicated. I'm keeping my trusted Dirichlet razor ;)
>
> I don't know what that is. Is it related to Dirichlet series?
I thought about Dirichlet function f:R->R
f(x) = {1 if x is rational number | 0 otherwise}
Put in one blade for each rational number ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 10/10/12 1:40 AM, Le_Forgeron a écrit :
> Le 10/10/2012 02:58, Archpawn nous fit lire :
>>> Shipping cost: weight of blades is 0, number of blades is so huge...
>>
>> No. The edges have zero measure. The solid still has volume.
>>
>
> I wonder. Finite x Finite x 0 = ?
>
Not always, as is the case with fractals. A fractal line (width = 0) can
have an area, a fractal surface can have a volume (thickness = 0).
That blade is fractal, and even if it effectively have a volume of zero,
it still occupy a mesurable volume.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi(gh)!
On 09.10.2012 05:24, Archpawn wrote:
> People keep making razors with more and more blades.
...and other people simply grow their beards, which also can be very
fractal!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_=27Yadgar=27_Bleimann?= <yaz### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> Hi(gh)!
>
> On 09.10.2012 05:24, Archpawn wrote:
> > People keep making razors with more and more blades.
>
> ...and other people simply grow their beards, which also can be very
> fractal!
>
> See you in Khyberspace!
>
> Yadgar
LOL, so we end up with the question, if Dirichlet's beard follows his function?
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gustav_Lejeune_Dirichlet
Best regards,
michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi(gh)!
> LOL, so we end up with the question, if Dirichlet's beard follows his function?
>
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gustav_Lejeune_Dirichlet
As far as it is recognizable from the image, I would say "not really"...
but I've seen many Afghans growing amazingly fractal (= involving
self-similarity) beards!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
