Talk:Britney Gallivan

Fold "Anything"

I don't do a lot of edits here, but the following phrase/sentence seems to have issues: These equations show that, in order to fold anything in half, it must be \pi times longer than its thickness, and that, depending on how something is folded, the amount its length decreases with each fold differs. This seems like it could be original research- the equations and the link refer to folding paper, not any other kind of material. Expanding the applicability of these equations to beyond that could be wrong, synthesis, or original research. 169.233.37.162 (talk) 01:05, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Proof

Does someone have a link to the proof ? may be some outline of the proof would be good for the mathematically inclined. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.126.136.220 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 2 December 2005

I found an "independent derivation of her equation" via a BoingBoing.org post found here Jason Coleman 00:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Mythbusters

I saw on Mythbusters that she had used toilet paper and had folded in half lengthwise, but not alternating like they preformed in Mythbusters. Does that make project still viable or is it "bending the rules"?Da Kenster 23:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Traditional paper rules for folding said a single piece of paper can not be folded in half more than 7 times now matter how thick, how large or how folded. Even folding in triangles, etc. And no one one could do it, so why not say it? Most references to the traditional rules of the problem have been removed from the net, because they know it has now been done.

I was told Mythbusters wanted to set a new world record and could not, so they changed the rules to say their alternate folding way was the correct way. Such is the ethics of TV. Using the alternating approach like Mythbusters, Britney had folded paper in half 9 times and gold in half 12 times, but they did not mention that, as they wanted the 7 fold value to seem to be the record.

In terms of "bending the rules" Mythbusters did not use a "piece of paper" but taped 17 pieces together. In any case the most significant thing Briney did was mathematically solve the problem. Prof Gall 08:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Unsolved mysteries

What I want to know is how she managed to lay the 4,000 foot long piece of paper out straight so she could fold it in half the first time. Where did she do that? I mean, 4,000 feet is like six city blocks, or 13 football fields. And toilet paper is pretty fragile. I bet it would break under its own weight just trying to drag it along the ground to get it laid out straight in the first place. Anyway, it would be good to understand the technique used to make the first few folds. Once the thing was only 8 or 10 feet long I guess it wouldn't be too hard to fold it two or three more times, but the first eight or nine folds must have involved some very fancy footwork. DavidCBryant 00:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

She used a large indoor mall and crawled around on her hands and knees for hours. That's dedicaton. I believe this is all discussed in her book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.12.63 (talk) 04:29, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Did not use paper

She used toilet paper and gold leaf, she did not use actual paper. Just to be clear JayKeaton 09:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

She did use "toilette paper" however this is still paper and it was an unperforated commercial roll. Furthermore she broke the limit of 8 folds with other papers but used the toilette paper for the 12 fold record. On another note the problem was that it was thought that nothing could be folded more than 7 or 8 times and she came up with a formula for folding any material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.2.185 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 23 December 2007

Notability

When a book on significant mathematical events not only includes her work as an entry, but also describes her accomplishment as having "shocked the world". I'd say that's empirical proof that she's notable. Hence I have removed that 'notability questionable' template from the article. Noel (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Wrong Equation

For more see http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=332&t=216185&hilit=Britney+Gallivan

Her proof is wrong, since she used as a length the distance from the center to the begining of the paper. A More physical significant result would've be using the middle of the paper or use the conservation of the paper as I used (this is the same as the last one) I'm astonishing of How NOBODY saw that until today (Actually 3 years ago as I did) Everytime I see this (mythbusters recently) I'm anoyed, why people don't see this simple fact?

EulerIntegral —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.59.190.172 (talk) 16:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Her equation has been proven to be correct both theoretically and empirically. It has been reviewed by experts in the field of mathematics and found to be valid. Your derivation, as shown here, is neither peer reviewed, nor clearly explained. Your reasoning is difficult to understand, but seems to arise from questions of material science. In fact, you are yourself unsure of this, "I don't know too much about physics of bending materials, so I can't say that those approximations are good or no." Ms. Gallivan's equation, as described here, is based upon the fact that as paper is folded repeatedly it creates a fold that is semicircular while the paper is deformed. It is rude to simply state something is wrong without proper proof. While your approach has merit it does not seem to take into account the material properties of paper. Please refine and better explain your approach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.168.72.164 (talk) 12:30, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Additional TV mention

She is mentioned, and where I heard of her, on the British TV show "QI" season F episode 3 @ 37:20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSOV6R9kahQ I don't know how to properly cite it in the article.

Regards, -- Steve -- (talk) 01:25, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Her record has been beaten

Quickly skimming it over I didn't notice it being written down anywhere in the encyclopedia article, and I'm not comfortable with changing anything in Wikipedia articles

"Dr. James Tanton and students at St. Mark's School folded a 13000 ft long piece of toilet paper 13 times, beating the Britney Gallivan's record" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:C88:4000:A004:D142:3994:2384:382A (talk) 09:42, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Britney Gallivan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051102085038/http://pomonahistorical.org/12times.htm to http://pomonahistorical.org/12times.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:01, 26 July 2017 (UTC)