« Smithers | Main | Perspective, Please »

July 11, 2006

Comments

R.

Uh oh! What a teaser blog entry! I can't wait to hear the dirt--purely to be supportive of you and your career, you understand. XO!

Most Reverend Dame Jipip

Sympathies on the conference tedium and on being infected with a co-worker's perspective. I've endured both and envy you neither. Have a good return trip, Ms. P.!

BTW, why do you say there are no such things as concentric squares?

Pronoia

Isn't the definition of concentric circles that the circumference of every circle is equidistant from every other circle's circumference? That's just not possible with squares.

I can see one way to define concentric circles such that it applies to squares--having the same center-point. But I've never heard of anyone using concentric to describe squares. Perhaps I'm running in the wrong circles....

:-)

udge

Concentric means only that several objects share a common centre point, therefore it is quite correct (if unusual) to speak of concentric squares or circles or any other identically shaped but differently sized things whose centres lie on a particular common point.

Squares (rectangles, triangles, and other figures with points) are different from circles in that the corners are further apart (on the diagonal) than the sides of the figures are (on the perpendicular), but that doesn't invalidate their possible concentricity.

Most Reverend Dame Jipip

Yes, what Udge said. And your "running in the wrong circles" line is a riot!

Pronoia

I stand corrected! The speaker in question still wasn't talking about concentric anything (rather a 2x2 grid), but I will cease declaring concentric squares impossible. :-)

Most Reverend Dame Jipip

Ugh, no. Not possible with a 2x2 grid. Perhaps the speaker meant to say "adjacent squares." I hear and read so many gross verbal errors these days that I'm becoming inured to them. I hope.

However, contrary to one thing Udge stated (which I just noticed), concentricity doesn't require identically shaped forms. For example, you could have a triangle within a circle within a square, the center point for all three being the same in these concentric objects.

Well, I guess we've done this subject to death.... :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.