News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Prince Rupert's cube by anvandare on Saturday February 17, 2018 @05:43AM (#16400103)
A video is worth a thousand words of theory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2jjgHsxEu4

Re:Prince Rupert's cube by jholman on Saturday February 17, 2018 @07:30AM (#16400399)
That was very good (thank you!), but it led me to this, which was even better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAHcZGjKVvg

Re:Prince Rupert's cube by echelon on Saturday February 17, 2018 @03:43PM (#16402583)
I wish more of mathematics was visual. That's the mode of thinking I employ the most, and I excel at spatial problems.

I wish higher level mathematics and physics paid more attention to the use of visual schematics and diagrams. So much can be communicated with them. Words often pale in comparison.

Re:Prince Rupert's cube by ttsda on Saturday February 17, 2018 @03:59PM (#16402656)
I would like to recommend the 3b1b's[1] YouTube channel.

His procedurally generated videos really make you think of certain math that looked unintuitive or hard to explain in a truly intuitive, visual way.

His series on linear algebra was very eye opening to me, as well as many of his videos about subjects I was initially failing to understand.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYO_jab_esuFRV4b17AJtAw

Re:Prince Rupert's cube by echelon on Monday February 19, 2018 @08:50AM (#16412837)
Thanks so much for sharing! This looks fantastic.
Re:Prince Rupert's cube by arturmakly on Saturday February 17, 2018 @12:54PM (#16401764)
Re:Prince Rupert's cube by taneq on Saturday February 17, 2018 @10:20AM (#16401035)
After watching the video, I feel like this follows intuitively from the fact that sqrt(2) > 1.
Re:Prince Rupert's cube by cousin_it on Saturday February 17, 2018 @10:58AM (#16401204)
The biggest possible difference between Prince Rupert's cubes is 3%, which is much smaller than the difference between sqrt(2) and 1.
Re:Prince Rupert's cube by a1369209993 on Saturday February 17, 2018 @09:01PM (#16404000)
FWIW, `(sqrt(2)-1)^3` is `0.071067831`, which while not equal to `(1.0606601-1)` is fairly close.