Circles or squares.

What's the best?

Circles are round but they don't have flat sides. Squares are nice and stackable but they have pointy corners.

Circles are also stackable.

Squares are a diet shape.
Too much pie around circles.

Strictly speaking as two dimensional shapes neither are stackable. If you want stacking it’s cubes and spheres you want.

Martin's very correct here.

I don't like trying to put 3d shapes onto 2d screens. Feels wrong to deny them that additional dimension.

Circles are definitely better for pies because with a square pie somebody gets the bulk of the crust which just isn't on. It's different for Shepherd's Pie and Cottagers Pie though because no pastry with those.

ClaretAndJew wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:31 am

Circles are also stackable.

Why would you though?

I mean, who stacks their circles these days?

Rowls wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:49 am

Why would you though?

I mean, who stacks their circles these days?

Only squares

martin_p wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:34 am

Strictly speaking as two dimensional shapes neither are stackable. If you want stacking it’s cubes and spheres you want.

Actually it’s cubes and cylinders

CoolClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:03 am

Actually it’s cubes and cylinders

A 3D circle is a sphere.

Why'd you have to and bring angles of rotation into this?

It's like hanging out with Mrs Pacman again.

Not to mention rotation points.

Arrrggghhhh too late

I'll throw you a curve ball and give you triangles.
Superior in every way.

martin_p wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:06 am

A 3D circle is a sphere.

It is yes I meant if you wanted what was best for stacking…

ElectroClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:09 am

I'll throw you a curve ball and give you triangles.
Superior in every way.

Triangles are clearly superior. I feel sorry for the quadrilaterals and the ovoids. They can't compete.

Not with the Triangles. Or their cousins, the Hexagons.

I'm not sure we should allow Triangles into the circle/square standoff. Seems a bit obtuse to me.

Guess you could argue that circles are pointless so the square wins.

There are a couple of ways in which spheres can be stacked. Cubic close packing and hexagonal close packing being 2 of the most common.

martin_p wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:34 am

Strictly speaking as two dimensional shapes neither are stackable. If you want stacking it’s cubes and spheres you want.

Is Rowls talking about stacking two dimensional shapes though? Maybe he's stacking 3-D shapes of zero height?

Sproggy wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:20 am

Is Rowls talking about stacking two dimensional shapes though? Maybe he's stacking 3-D shapes of zero height?

I've been stacking 2D shapes all morning and don't seem to be getting anywhere

martin_p wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:06 am

A 3D circle is a sphere.

Balls.

A square is two (or more) triangles adjacent to each other, so the triangle is superior as it is
an integral part of the whole.

ClaretAndJew wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:31 am

Circles are also stackable.

I had 4 pancakes for my breakfast, each one stacked on top of the other.
To be fair though, you don't see many square pancakes these days.

Funkydrummer only went and dropped the B-word

B O O M

Juan Tanamera wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:31 am

I had 4 pancakes for my breakfast, each one stacked on top of the other.
To be fair though, you don't see many square pancakes these days.

Square pancakes would roll up more uniformly.

It's impossible to eat a pancake with one end getting cold before you've finished.

Having said that, the circle is a great contender is it's an all-rounder.

Juan Tanamera wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:31 am

I had 4 pancakes for my breakfast, each one stacked on top of the other.
To be fair though, you don't see many square pancakes these days.

Those pancakes were cylinders.

Rowls wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:34 am

Square pancakes would roll up more uniformly.

It's impossible to eat a pancake with one end getting cold before you've finished.

Not at the speed I eat them, I was a Gannet in another life.

Sproggy wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:34 am

Those pancakes were cylinders.

Try making them squaricles next time. They'll roll up much better.

Sproggy wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:34 am

Those pancakes were cylinders.

They were as flat as the proverbial......

Juan Tanamera wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:35 am

Not at the speed I eat them, I was a Gannet in another life.

It's not the eating, it the filling prep that does it. If only there was a pre-sugared, square pancake available on the mass market...

Juan Tanamera wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:36 am

They were as flat as the proverbial......

What's a proverbial cylinder?

Rowls wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 11:37 am

What's a proverbial cylinder?

I don't know, please tell.

Talking of squares, get yersen down to Trent Bridge. It's free admission today for a whole day of test match cricket. The bars are open all day and the sun is shining.
NB for non-cricket types the area where the wickets are is known as 'the square' and the length of the pitch is exactly one chain.

This has become a bit of a circular argument.

Rowls wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:49 am

Why would you though?

I mean, who stacks their circles these days?

Crowning at dominoes!

Hexagons for me. They tesselate so nicely.

Falcon wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 12:18 pm

Hexagons for me. They tesselate so nicely.

Hexagons are banned from this thread for the same reasons triangles aren't allowed.

Superior shapes need their own space so the wronguns can fight it out between themselves.

We, the undersigned, are determined to get triangles (or for that matter, any geometric shapes) included in shape discussion, feeling that exclusion is unfair.

TLF
#Triangles Liberation Front

ElectroClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 12:32 pm

We, the undersigned, are determined to get triangles (or for that matter, any geometric shapes) included in shape discussion, feeling that exclusion is unfair.

TLF
#Triangles Liberation Front

Please don’t listen to the TLF, they have some very outdated views on shape reassignment surgery (e.g. a triangle having a point cut off to become a quadrilateral). If you really care about triangles and triangle rights then the ERT (Equilateral Rights for Triangles) is the organisation to support.

Circles only have one side. There's nothing in 2D with two sides, then you get the triangle, rectangle/square etc., and as you increase the number of sides you get nearer to a circle again. There's no way of identifying where you are on a circle.

Spherical objects are useful for drainage as they always have open spaces between them. In sports turf, sand is sieved to get similar sized round sand particles for this reason. Angular sand doesn't drain so well as the smaller pieces will fill in the gaps between the bigger particles (I always thought this was an unsatisfactory explanation as we add sand to an already existing substrate - we don't play on pure sand but a sandy soil. However I assume the boffins have done their research well).

Of course, as the number of sides of a regular shape increase, it gets closer and closer
to a circle until, at finity, it becomes a circle.

I actually went to Finity on a hiking trip and saw an octogon so I know you're not telling the truth, Funky.

Hipper wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 12:46 pm

Circles only have one side. There's nothing in 2D with two sides, then you get the triangle, rectangle/square etc., and as you increase the number of sides you get nearer to a circle again. There's no way of identifying where you are on a circle.

Controversy comes to the Circles or Squares thread.

If you can't tell where you are on a circle, you've probably drawn a circle that's too big. Try tracing round a saucer instead.

Rowls wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 1:44 pm

I actually went to Finity on a hiking trip and saw an octogon so I know you're not telling the truth, Funky.

I can only assume that your sat nav is faulty and the octagon was on it's return journey OR never
actually arrived at the abstract location.

Anyway, I know that you're making it up because infinity is unattainable and is an unlimited extent
of time, space or quantity and as such is a theoretical principle.

Circles are merely squares with the corners cut off.

Or are they all corner?

Rowls wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 1:46 pm

Controversy comes to the Circles or Squares thread.

If you can't tell where you are on a circle, you've probably drawn a circle that's too big. Try tracing round a saucer instead.

If you can tell where you are on a circle you are probably looking at a clock.

On a slight tangent, but what colour are shapes in your mind.

For me a circle is blue and a square is red. Triangles are green but that might just be because I've eaten too many Quality Street.

Anyway, this is my favourite shape.

Falcon wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 1:58 pm

On a slight tangent, but what colour are shapes in your mind.

For me a circle is blue and a square is red. Triangles are green but that might just be because I've eaten too many Quality Street.

Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?

Triangle ARE green though.

Funkydrummer wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 1:58 pm

If you can tell where you are on a circle you are probably looking at a clock.

I pushed a mathematician onto a circle during a sumo wrestling fight (long story) seven years ago and he's still there. Says it's impossible to know where he is.