Remember this equation? x^2 + y^2 = r^2 , in case you don't or you still haven't encountered it, this is your basic equation of a circle. If you go back to your geometry history, you would find there that the only reason why the perfect circle can never exist is because one would need to draw a circle (or any shape for that matter) down to its smallest size (your quarks or subatomic particles), nobody has gone that far I think, and even if someone did, as technology advances, man will find smaller units over and over so in effect there will never be an end to the search for that perfect circle. If I'm not mistaken, don't quote me, the most perfect circle was made out of particle waves but that is not even considered the "perfect" because there are smaller units that particles (subatomic particles), but it's as perfect as it gets today, maybe next few years, someone can measure a perfect circle on subatomic level, but maybe when that day comes, a smaller unit has been discovered (mega super subatomic quark or something). The point is, the theory on shapes doesn't suggest that the perfect circle doesn't exist because the "roundest looking object has miniscule straight lines...", nope, in fact, it's suggesting that there is, it's just that the technology cannot comprehend it yet. For the record, just for technicality's sake, the word "perfect" cannot be applied on a geometrical shape, that will never exist because of the same theory as the perfect circle. In summary, existence is not being questioned, the ruler is just not efficient yet, think about it.Originally Posted by Lowlyspy
PS: Agree on topic, disagree on real life comparison.
Bookmarks