Ah, the packing problem! Works best in 8 and 24 dimensions. 😎
Curiosity got the better of me last night. I purchased a packet of Scott's Porage Oats.
The Packet is very helpful about the incomprehensible Scottish language.
Translation:
"The weather's terrible out there today.
So you should keep your slippers on,
enjoy a bowl of Scott's and just look out of the wondow,
you'll feel brilliant."
We used to have subtitles on English TV when Scots people were talking. 😀
Curiosity got the better of me last night. I purchased a packet of Scott's Porage Oats.
The Packet is very helpful about the incomprehensible Scottish language.
It's awfy dreich oot the day.
Best keep the baffies on,
grab a bowl of Scott's and
keek out the windae, feeling Gallus.
Translation:
"The weather's terrible out there today.
So you should keep your slippers on,
enjoy a bowl of Scott's and just look out of the wondow,
you'll feel brilliant."
We used to have subtitles on English TV when Scots people were talking. 😀
I believe the dimension to be a certain "square number", but I don't have a simple proof.how to store the whisky?
if you had a square storage wall with dimensions of multiple barrel diameters, would the honeycomb pattern allow more barrels than the rectangular array at a certain dimension? and what would the dimension be?
Pretty nice puzzle.how to store the whisky?
if you had a square storage wall with dimensions of multiple barrel diameters, would the honeycomb pattern allow more barrels than the rectangular array at a certain dimension? and what would the dimension be?
The honey comb storage becomes more efficient with increasing square room size.
I think I found the lowest size for this to happen.
I found a 3 digit number of barrel, their sum is 9.
how to store the whisky?
if you had a square storage wall with dimensions of multiple barrel diameters, would the honeycomb pattern allow more barrels than the rectangular array at a certain dimension? and what would the dimension be?
I've been cheating. There is a calculator for this. You can look at this link without spoiling the problem if you want.
pack circles of radius 0.5 in a square of side 6 - Wolfram|Alpha
I got a number of barrels whose sum is 14...
if you had a square storage wall with dimensions of multiple barrel diameters, would the honeycomb pattern allow more barrels than the rectangular array at a certain dimension? and what would the dimension be?
I've been cheating. There is a calculator for this. You can look at this link without spoiling the problem if you want.
pack circles of radius 0.5 in a square of side 6 - Wolfram|Alpha
I got a number of barrels whose sum is 14...
I found a 14 x 14 square where you can store 216 barrels honey comb way, better than 196 in the rectangular way.how to store the whisky?
if you had a square storage wall with dimensions of multiple barrel diameters, would the honeycomb pattern allow more barrels than the rectangular array at a certain dimension? and what would the dimension be?
BUT....
This is not the lowest size. There is a lower one.
It all boils to look for multiples of sqrt(3) that are a little bit under an even integer.
There is a calculator for this. You can look at this link without spoiling the problem if you want.
now that is interesting!
it breaks out of the square or honeycomb pattern!
I did the (lazy) graphic approach...
Attachments
I got a bit side-tracked by the 7x7 one below. Wondered if you can get from the irregular solution arrangement of 49 to the cubic 49. I don't think you can. There isn't room to move things around beyond a certain point.
And you can't do anything with a cubic arrangement. It's rigid.
And you can't do anything with a cubic arrangement. It's rigid.
Attachments
Quite right.
Circle packing in a square - Wikipedia
At risk of turning this into an expanding Universe thread I am interested in the 3D problem.
Why is Iron 56 the most stable nucleus?
Iron-56 - Wikipedia
Must be packed very optimally. More research needed. 😀
Wiki said:The obvious square packing is optimal for 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, and 36 circles (the smallest six square numbers), but ceases to be optimal for larger squares from 49 onwards
Circle packing in a square - Wikipedia
At risk of turning this into an expanding Universe thread I am interested in the 3D problem.
Why is Iron 56 the most stable nucleus?
Iron-56 - Wikipedia
Must be packed very optimally. More research needed. 😀
With the honeycomb, you will need an outside wall of immense strength, as the barrels will behave like a liquid, and want to flow.
With aligned rows and dividers it takes very little to hold the barrels in place, the weight of each not trying to roll the one below.
About your rabbit joke, Steve- Linda and I were in our local supermarket, in the freezer aisle,
and I saw a packet labelled "cut up rabbi"..........I said "let's get out of here, they got Bob(Alper,a local rabbi who is a comedian, and actually opened for the Pope)"!!
With aligned rows and dividers it takes very little to hold the barrels in place, the weight of each not trying to roll the one below.
About your rabbit joke, Steve- Linda and I were in our local supermarket, in the freezer aisle,
and I saw a packet labelled "cut up rabbi"..........I said "let's get out of here, they got Bob(Alper,a local rabbi who is a comedian, and actually opened for the Pope)"!!
However, the mathematical proofs of these packing problems look extremely complicated to me! 😱Quite right.
Here's good crack at it!
https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-math-of-social-distancing-is-a-lesson-in-geometry-20200713/
https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-math-of-social-distancing-is-a-lesson-in-geometry-20200713/
P.S. I see mchambin's square root of 3 in the hexagonal packing part.
He knows what he is talking about!
He knows what he is talking about!
Lazy, not really, I would say: Foolproof.now that is interesting!
it breaks out of the square or honeycomb pattern!
I did the (lazy) graphic approach...
I was expecting quite a large size, so neglected small sizes...and went over the right answer. :-(
I spend a lot of time at Quanta Magazine. Good site.
Notice I was right about E8 and the Leech Lattice E24! Very interesting dimensions.
I was just playing with my balls:
Only got 7 useful ones really. He-4, C-12 and O-16 are particularly stable nuclei:
Nuclear binding energy - Wikipedia
I totally get Helium 4. Tetrahedron. Carbon 12 must be an empty hexagon and a triangle above and below. 3-6-3. Oxygen 16, I need more balls!
BTW, did we ever answer stv's question. It's 8x8 for unit balls or circles isn't it?
Notice I was right about E8 and the Leech Lattice E24! Very interesting dimensions.
I was just playing with my balls:
Only got 7 useful ones really. He-4, C-12 and O-16 are particularly stable nuclei:
Nuclear binding energy - Wikipedia
I totally get Helium 4. Tetrahedron. Carbon 12 must be an empty hexagon and a triangle above and below. 3-6-3. Oxygen 16, I need more balls!
BTW, did we ever answer stv's question. It's 8x8 for unit balls or circles isn't it?
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- Something to lighten the mood