Talk:String girdling Earth
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Not a logic puzzle
[edit]User Androstachys (talk · contribs) seems to insist that this is a logic puzzle. As the essence of the puzzle is the circumference of the circle, this clearly is a mathematical puzzle, so I have undone the edit. DVdm (talk) 09:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- User DVdm seems to think that there are puzzles that may be solved without using logic. I would love to see some of these puzzles. Androstachys (talk) 11:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- With the same reasoning you should say that (almost?) every puzzle is a "language puzzle", since there are (almost?) no puzzles that may be solved without using language. DVdm (talk) 11:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Mmmmm - red herring? Androstachys (talk) 11:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- "A logic puzzle is a puzzle deriving from the mathematics field of deduction" - see Logic puzzle. As I said somewhere else, mathematics and logic are inseparable. Androstachys (talk) 11:48, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I had seen that, but the circumference of the circle belongs in mathematics, not in logic and not in language.
And no, no red herring, just an attempt to explain (by an i.m.o. valid analogy) the error in your reasoning. If you like you can remove the two instances of "(almost)" in my previous message - that's why I had added the question marks. DVdm (talk) 11:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I had seen that, but the circumference of the circle belongs in mathematics, not in logic and not in language.
- "A logic puzzle is a puzzle deriving from the mathematics field of deduction" - see Logic puzzle. As I said somewhere else, mathematics and logic are inseparable. Androstachys (talk) 11:48, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Mmmmm - red herring? Androstachys (talk) 11:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- With the same reasoning you should say that (almost?) every puzzle is a "language puzzle", since there are (almost?) no puzzles that may be solved without using language. DVdm (talk) 11:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
It seems that you are not amenable to reason - language is simply the medium used to pose a puzzle; it doesn't affect the intrinsic logic of the puzzle and only needs considering if it's a word or language puzzle; just as irrelevant is the fact that all problems appearing in WP are couched in English and use the Roman alphabet. Do try to see the essence of the matter rather than gleefully pointing out trivia. Androstachys (talk) 13:07, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- I.m.o. logic doesn't affect the intrinsic mathematics of the puzzle, which is the fact that the circumference of a circle is 2 Pi times the radius. That is the essence of the puzzle. Ask any mathematician or logician whether this is a logic puzzle or a mathematics puzzle. The essence of the matter is a geometric property, not a logical one. DVdm (talk) 13:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- The fallacious reasoning(?) here is that a proposition fits neatly and exclusively into one category. This particular puzzle contains elements of logic, English, mathematics, spherical geometry, topology, grammar and a whole lot more. Deciding which categories are pertinent sometimes calls for a delicate sense of judgement. Paul venter (talk) 14:37, 26 August 2012 (UTC)