User talk:Sicherman

Polydrafters

Hello there. I was searching for the difference between polydrafters and polydudes, and the first result was your question on the Polydrafter talk page. As best as I could make it, it looks like polydrafters with angles of 30 degrees or 150 degrees are excluded from the definition of polydudes, but it's not sufficient to get the exact set. Do you know of any criteria or counts? Also, on the Eternity puzzle page, do you know whether the set of 209 pieces are universal in any sense, or were they chosen arbitrarily? -- 99.203.14.176 (talk) 22:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I discussed this question with Abaroth, who has concluded that polydudes are not defined consistently. Ed Pegg Jr., who coined the term polydrafter, has a web page about the Eternity Puzzle: [1]. He writes that Monckton called his pieces polydudes. Joe DeVincentis noticed that they all lacked 30° interior angles. Ed accordingly defined the term polydudes to denote polydrafters that satisfy this condition, which is imposed to make the pieces less likely to break. For this purpose there is no reason to exclude 150° interior angles. By the way, many writers define extended polydrafters by allowing the same kinds of junction but not requiring the cells to conform to the triangle grid. Polydrafters and extended polydrafters have entries in the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences. Sicherman (talk) 11:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia , I hope you will like it here and decide to stay.

You may want to take a look at the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some links I've found useful:

Also: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your username and the time after your comments. Signing with three tildes ~~~ will just sign your username.

I hope to see you around Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

Johann Wolfgang [ T ...C ]

04:15, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Katakana-origin.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Katakana-origin.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Al Stillman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alley Cat. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

My mistake! Thanks for fixing it. Sicherman (talk) 21:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Diaphote Hoax

I am delighted to find a distinguished contributor like yourself here! In the process of adding sources for Sheffield Scientific School, I've just edited Mansfield Merriman and added his Yale Obituary Record as a source. In discussing the Diaphote Hoax, the article made it sound as if there were some question as to Merriman's authorship of Recreations in Mathematics, a mystery that had been solved by various French academics, and ascribed to, rather than acknowledged by, Merriman. Yet Merriman's Yale obituary, published in 1925, clearly lists the book as his, including the pseudonym he used. So this was clearly known in his lifetime. I'm obviously missing something. Was it that the authorship of the letter published in 1880 was not known until Merriman republished it in 1917? - Nunh-huh 20:18, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I first read Licks's _Recreations in Mathematics_ in the 1960's. At that time I had no idea who "H. E. Licks" was, and no reason to identify him as Merriman. The Library of Congress card listed the author as "H E Licks," with spaces to be filled in ink by the nation's librarians.

During the 2000's I corresponded with André Lange, author of a large website on the history of television ([2]). I told Professor Lange of my suspicions regarding Merriman. Lange was excited about the possibility of identifying the author of the Diaphote Hoax. He got in touch with Lehigh University, and eventually with J. A. MacLennan, who had written a history of the Lehigh University Physics Department. MacLennan found the obituary notice that you mention. That clinched it for Lange, who prominently added Merriman's name and biographical information to his page on the Diaphote Hoax, with kind acknowledgment of the help that he got from MacLennan and me ([3]). This page also explains my reasoning, so I will not relate it here. Sicherman (talk) 21:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above link to Lange's site is dead. Here is a working link: ([4]). Sicherman (talk) 11:04, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]