
Re: Why do we need those real nonconstructible numbers?
Posted:
Nov 8, 2017 5:45 PM


WM, you should look on the bright side, Roger Penrose can be happy, since the tiling is
aperiodic, there will be no other copy of Roger Penrose standing where he stands,
so he is quite unique. (Doesn't hold for WM, BKK, JG, AP, stupidity, stupidity is
all nonunique, just zero, easily replicable).
j4n bur53 schrieb: > Penrose looks happy: > > Roger Penrose in the foyer of the Mitchell > Institute for Fundamental Physics and Astronomy, > Texas A&M University, standing on a > floor with a Penrose tiling > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_tiling#/media/File:RogerPenroseTileTAMU2010.jpg > > > bursejan@gmail.com schrieb: >> Also there are uncountably many different Penrose tilings. >> >> Penrose's Pentaplexity article on aperiodic tiling: >> Eureka 39(1978) 1632 >> https://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/radin/pentaplexity.html >> >> In plane geometry, the einstein problem asks about the >> existence of a single prototile that by itself forms >> an aperiodic set of prototiles, that is, a shape that >> can tessellate space, but only in a nonperiodic way. >> >> Proposed solutions  >> 2010 by Joshua Socolar and Joan Taylor >> https://arxiv.org/abs/1003.4279 >> >> Am Mittwoch, 8. November 2017 22:55:27 UTC+1 schrieb burs...@gmail.com: >>> Except that the reals are uncountable. >

