Just one more square bro

Comments

• SlurpingPus@lemmy.world ⁨47⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

  Image

  source
• Berengaria_of_Navarre@lemmy.world ⁨32⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

  Thanks, I hate it!

  source
• wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  For the uninitiated: this is the current most - efficient method found of packing 17 unit squares inside another square. You may not like it, but this is what peak efficiency looks like.

  (Of course, 16 squares has a packing coefficient of 4, compared to this arrangement’s 4.675, so this is just what peak efficiency looks like for 17 squares)

  source

  • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    But you can fit 25 squares into the same space. This isn’t efficiency, it’s just wasted space and bad planning.

    You raised the packing coefficient by ⅝ to squeeze one extra square in with all that wasted space, so don’t argue that 25 squares has a packing coefficient of 5. Another ⅜ will get you an extra 8 squares, and no wasted space.

    source

    • SlurpingPus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      For 25 squares of size 1x1 you’d need a square of size 5x5. The square into 17 squares of size 1x1 fit is smaller than 5x5, so you can’t fit 25 squares into it.

      source
    • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      You can’t fit 25 squares into a square 4.675x bigger unless you make them smaller. Yes, that will increase the volume available for syrup.

      source
    • wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Precisely. That’s why I wrote the parenthetical about the greater efficiency of 16 as a perfect square. As the other commenter pointed out, this is a meme.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • forestbeasts@pawb.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Yeah, it’s not at all an optimal waffle. It’s more a cool math meme waffle. ;3

      – Frost

      source
  • Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Thank you I was very lost lmao

    source
  • chris@links.openriver.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Does coefficient in this context mean the length of the side of the big square?

    source

    • wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Exactly. It is the length of the side of the bigger square, relative to the sides of the smaller identical squares.

      source
• panda_abyss@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  This makes me so angry for reasons I can’t articulate

  source

  • Deconceptualist@leminal.space ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    This actually makes me unreasonably happy, kinda like knowing the secrets of the number 37.

    source

    • morto@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Now it’s 42

      mind blow

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

  TIHI

  source
• VoteNixon2016@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨57⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

  The solution is to take a bite of waffle and then take a drink of syrup like it’s a chaser

  source
• Deceptichum@quokk.au ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  How inefficient, I could fit 100 squares in there easily.

  source

  • Deconceptualist@leminal.space ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Right? Wake me up when we reach a 7 nm waffle lithographic process.

    source

    • j4k3@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      Gate all around. I expect my waffle and syrup to hug each other. No one likes a lethargic partner.

      source
• merc@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Related:

  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_packing

  Nature is a lot more elegant with spheres:

  en.wikipedia.org/…/Close-packing_of_equal_spheres

  source
• ik5pvx@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

  Who tf uses a 56 years old collectible for breakfast?

  source
• Carl@hexbear.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I forget what this shape is actually a solution for but it is very funny

  source

  • Kumikommunism@hexbear.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    It’s the square packing in a square for n = 17.

    source

    • Carl@hexbear.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      yeah that’s a wild rabbit hole to go down, the shaprs are either extremely satisfying or extremely distressing, there is no in-between.

      source
• StellarExtract@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Is this the new loss?

  source

  • y0kai@anarchist.nexus ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    no this is a gain

    source
• mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Mathematicians: makes something with zero practical applications

  Waffles:

  source
• bulwark@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Pfft, let me know when “Big Waffle” develops its own proprietary 6-nanometer syrup squares. Until then I will defer to the Belgians and their superior waffle technology.

  source

  • Cort@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Those fat Belgian waffles have nothing on the Dutch stroopwafel technology coming out of asml

    source
• butter_tart@piefed.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  THERE IS CLEARLY ROOM FOR 25 SQUARES…. sorry just so unreasonably angry right now

  source

  • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    There isn’t. The sides are 4.675 long (as far as i understand)

    To fit more squares, youd need to use smaller squares but by that logic you could fit any number of squares.

    source
• Deconceptualist@leminal.space ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  About damn time. #WaffleOptimizationCrew

  source
• PapaStevesy@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Decrease the size of the squares and you could get waaaay more surface area.

  source

  • Zwiebel@feddit.org ⁨51⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

    This comes from a math problem where the squares size is fixed and you try to minimize the area they fit in

    source

    • PapaStevesy@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

      Yeah I know, but it’s terrible waffle design, there’s big flat chunks without syrup squares. It’s a huge amount of wasted area unable to hold syrup in any meaningful volume. It’s sad, really.

      source
  • blackbrook@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    It’s really volume you care about, for filling with syrup.

    source

    • PapaStevesy@lemmy.world ⁨46⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

      Good point. Pesky square-cube law gets me again. Having done three minutes of research on Wikipedia pages I didn’t fully understand, I think changing the square divots to spherical ones will give us the smallest surface area-to-volume ratio.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• tanisnikana@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  slice-of-pie-from-just-off-center-and-carved-out-comma-but-worse.bmp

  source