Can you put a ship inside a Klein bottle?

Comments

• sploosh@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Klein bottles have no inside, so no. Either that or everything is in every Klein bottle.

  source

  • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Either that or everything is in every Klein bottle.

    That would still be a no because no ship can be put in a Klein bottle if every ship is already in the Klein bottle.

    source

    • Quill7513@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      the ship would be put in the kline bottle upon the kline bottle’s creation

      source
• Toes@ani.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Image

  source

  • wetbeardhairs@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Well no, but actually yes.

    source
• Treczoks@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  All ships actually are already in all Klein bottles.

  source

  • sga@lemmings.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    by a very specific definition of “inside”

    source

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      The specifics were already covered by the term “Klein bottle”. Everything is inside all Klein bottles. You, me, and the universe.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• untakenusername@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  yes’nt

  source
• dmention7@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  I’d ask the inverse. What definition of “inside” can you apply to a traditional bottle–so as to say that a ship is inside the bottle–that could not also be applied to a Klein bottle. Both of them have a single opening that leads to an enclosed volume.

  A Klein bottle may only have one surface, and therefore you can argue it has no topological inside. But a traditional bottle is topologically equivalent to a flat disc, so the same logic would say you can’t put a ship inside one of those either.

  source

  • SparroHawc@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Once you put a cork in the neck of the bottle, it is no longer a disc and can contain other objects.

    source

    • dmention7@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      True, but can’t you cork a Klein bottle just as easily?

      source
• Krudler@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  This actually is a stupid question

  source

  • technopagan@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Well, that’s the whole idea of this community, isn’t it?

    source

    • theOneTrueSpoon@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      No. It says it right in the name. No Stupid Questions /s

      source
    • Krudler@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      If a question is structured such that it’s unanswerable you’ve got a stupid question on your hands.

      Everybody knows that “no stupid questions” means you’re not supposed to be embarrassed by asking something you don’t know.

      But when you show up asking a specifically unanswerable question, you’re just a troll. Yes a harmless troll but it’s just trolling; it’s just time wasting.

      source
• BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Well, there’s also this: Can You Fill a Shape That Has No Inside? - The Action Lab www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdHd8yWyysE&ab_channel=Th…

  source
• captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Ask Randall Monroe.

  source
• TheButtonJustSpins@infosec.pub ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Yes

  source
• Fleur_@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  No but you could project one onto its surface

  source