 | | Re: Smallest cube ever!? —Timothy Gould
|
| | | (...) hmmm. I have a suspicion that most non-integer cubes are impossible because of the way the surfaces can be constructed. Each side of a surface must be constructed out of I + 1/5 J plate units (I and J integer) since we can only make them out (...) (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.build.schleim, lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Smallest cube ever!? —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | (...) Of course this should be all non-integer cubes are impossible... Tim (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Smallest cube ever!? —Jean-Marc Nimal
|
| | | | In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Timothy Gould wrote: (snip) (...) I'm not so sure about that... If I understand correctly, the main issue here is to produce a flat square surface with a non-integer number of studs as side, right? Because that is certainly (...) (18 years ago, 19-Mar-07, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Smallest cube ever!? —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | (...) It's still an integer number of plates (which was my condition). Tim (18 years ago, 19-Mar-07, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Smallest cube ever!? —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | (...) Although it would appear my terminology disagreed with my maths ;) So you are right in your reading and I am wrong in my concept but not my principal. So to keep the terminology the same just replace all 5s by 2s and the rest remains the same. (...) (18 years ago, 19-Mar-07, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| | | | |
