Thinking about it, humans have one less hole than I would’ve guessed, since the tube from our mouth to our anus sort of makes us a complicated straw.
Baldur's Gayte
Submitted 6 days ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/8e3ab16a-7f23-420b-90e5-5213251eefb5.jpeg
Comments
y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 5 days ago
The human body is just a series of tubes.
y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
The internet and I have that in common, I guess.
P00ptart@lemmy.world 5 days ago
One of my friends is a Taurus as well. He’s a car.
madjo@feddit.nl 5 days ago
How many holes does he have?
P00ptart@lemmy.world 5 days ago
At least 5. I’m unwilling to do a more thorough count, tho.
PunnyName@lemmy.world 5 days ago
The average person is a straw.
Kolanaki@pawb.social 5 days ago
This is a strawman argument.
PunnyName@lemmy.world 4 days ago
I love you for this!
trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Not really, they’re some sort of tube, but they don’t classify as straws
einlander@lemmy.world 6 days ago
A circle is a plane folded on itself so the answer is technically 0 holes. But first what is a hole?
affiliate@lemmy.world 5 days ago
a sphere is a plane folded in on itself, and spheres have no (one-dimensional) holes. but spheres do have a two-dimensional hole, which is basically a way of saying they’re hollow.
but a circle is a line folded in on itself, and lines have one (one-dimensional) hole.
Ranta@lemmy.world 5 days ago
The throughput and containment of the object is the criteria for classification here.
Can the object passing through the hole be contained by the medium of the object that is subject to the “hole” classification? If yes, then the object has two holes, one which the passing object passes through to enter the object, and one which is passed through to exit the object.
If the object passing through the object being classified cannot be contained entirely within the classification object medium, then the classification object has one hole.
This kind of classification relies upon the context of the item’s usage, and is in fact a “contextually dependent” classification!
Take the straw for example:
When a straw is being used for drinking bubble tea, the straw has two holes when a boba is passing through. The straw has two holes for each ice crystal or clump of crystals that passes through.
Does the straw have two holes for a liquid? Good question! This is also a contextually dependent classification criteria, though this time it is a matter of reference frame! Do you consider a liqiud to be a macro expression of the fluid dynamics of the molecules comprising the medium? Then it is a whole, though I would suggest that the “whole” of the liquid in the container from which it is being drawn to be one “whole” and the liquid which is drawn into the straw during the vacuum action (from the initiation of the “pull” through to its conclusion) to be a new and unique “part” separated from the source volume and comprises a new “whole”.
Ok, so NOW if the newly separated volume of liquid being drawn into the straw is less than the total volume of the straw, the straw has two holes (one hole being drawn upon, and one hole into which the newly created liquid volume is being drawn into.
Are you very thirsty? Have you drawn more liquid through the straw than the volume of the straw itself? You could then say the straw only had one hole for the duration of that pull!
On the other hand, if you are defining each molecule within the liquid medium to be its own object, then the straw always has two holes.
I don’t personally subscribe to the notion that a straw is a single hole, since, in the abstract, my gut reaction is to define a hole as an absence of something, rather than a property of something else. Tools used to make holes (a shovel, an auger, a 3 hole punch, a gravitational singularity, etc.) all remove a part of the initial object, rather than “adding an absence” (ground media, paper circles, or the physical constants of dimensional spacetime, respectively).
Now that I’m thinking about it though, a straw is constructed by extrusion. The straw media is forced through a mold which defines the initial hole (the initially extruded straw media, which, as side note, is almost certainly trimmed to be cleanly cut to present as clean and uniform tip) and then subsequently, each straw would be severed at standard intervals to make the straw object. While considering this, I feel like it provides even more support for the “two hole argument” as each end of each straw must be independently and intentionally “formed” during the process of manufacturing.
Thoughts?
Minizarbi@jlai.lu 4 days ago
Tl;dr, I was just looking for memes
Robust_Mirror@aussie.zone 5 days ago
How about a pair of jeans?
If anyone wants to see an entertaining mathematician talk about this exact topic for 30 minutes, here you go:
CaptainBlagbird@lemmy.world 5 days ago
And here’s Michael from VSauce talking about the topic:
Karcinogen@discuss.tchncs.de 4 days ago
I knew this was going to be Stand-up Maths before I clicked the linked.
iAvicenna@lemmy.world 5 days ago
a torus is not homotopic to a straw though unless you take the straw and glue it at its ends
Zwiebel@feddit.org 5 days ago
You are talking about a straw of zero wall thickness right? A real straw should be homo-whatever to a torus
iAvicenna@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Even if it has thickness still homotopic to a circle. For instance a band with thickness is homotopic to a circle, you can retract along the radius to arrive at a circle that is inside the band. Similarly a plane, or a slab with thickness are all homotopic to a point.
Note that all of these are transformations are from the space to itself. So if you want to say something like “but you can also shrink a circle to eventually reach a point but it is not homotopic to a point” that won’t work because you are imagining transformation that maps a circle not into itself to a smaller one.
ps: the actual definition of homotopy equivalence between “objects” is slightly more involved but intuitively it boils down to this when you imagine one space as a subset of the other and try to see if they are homotopy equivalent.
lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de 4 days ago
Homotopic: Having the same (homo-) topological properties (-topic)
stevedice@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
I think people don’t know a torus is hollow.
ytg@sopuli.xyz 5 days ago
Wouldn’t a straw be the product of a circle and a line?
iAvicenna@lemmy.world 4 days ago
What you said is stronger than being homotopic. homotopic is weaker, for instance a line is homotopic to a point, By taking the straw (even if it has thickness) and just shrinking it along its longer axis you eventually arrive at a circle. If it has thickness you will arrive at a band and then you can also retract radially to arrive at a circle.
Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com 5 days ago
A CD is clearly homotopic to a torus, though…
And the walls of a straw do have thickness…
A straw goes:Gas - solid - gas - solid - gas
iAvicenna@lemmy.world 4 days ago
If solid torus yes, if just the regular torus (surface of the solid torus) no. CD is homotopic to a circle and so is a solid torus.
gwilikers@lemmy.ml 5 days ago
darfuck is homotopic?
pyre@lemmy.world 4 days ago
topologically same
samus12345@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
piranhaconda@mander.xyz 5 days ago
There’s a math joke I remember hearing ~10 years ago, I can’t remember the whole thing, but it was something about a mathematician not being able to tell the difference between a coffee mug and a donut, they have the same number of holes so they’re the same shape.
MumboJumbo@lemmy.world 5 days ago
It’s what I identify as on Grindr
allywilson@lemmy.ml 5 days ago
Reminds me of the old “Are there more doors or wheels in the world?” question
InFerNo@lemmy.ml 5 days ago
Definitely wheels. All that machinery with wheels for the belts, all transportation, toys, … I can’t fathom there being as many doors.
Unless I’m wooshed :D
markovs_gun@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Depends on how broadly you define door. When you think about it, a transistor could be considered as a sort of door for electrons, for example, and there are 19 billion transistors in the processor of an iPhone
CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 5 days ago
A lot of transportation has an equivalent amount of doors, and there a lot of house, apartment buildings, offices… You use a lot more doors every day than you do wheels.
madjo@feddit.nl 5 days ago
The answer is “yes”.
5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 days ago
🕳
y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 5 days ago
5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 days ago
S¹ × [0, L]
I don’t understand why a circle has one/a hole though. I don’t even know what a hole is.
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
Make sure you’re distinguishing between a circle and a disc.
kogasa@programming.dev 5 days ago
What specifically constitutes a hole is somewhat ambiguous, but if you pull on the thread a bit, you’ll probably agree that it’s a topological quality and that homotopy groups and homology are good candidates. The most grounded way to approach the topic is with simplicial homology.
Dryfire@lemm.ee 3 days ago
The real issue is “Hole” is not desctiptive enough for a clear answer. A straw has one “Through Hole”. If you dig a hole in the ground you have one “Blind Hole”.
Deathray5@lemmynsfw.com 5 days ago
What size does a hole need to be to be a hole
stoy@lemmy.zip 5 days ago
In theory, the smallest hole possible would be a ring of atoms combined into a molecule with an empty center
addie@feddit.uk 5 days ago
Twice as big as half a hole, obviously.
Siegfried@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Think of a box with a hole arrangement that allows us to look through it if we are correctly positioned.
Would anyone dare to say that such a thing is possible to achieve with only one holes? (I’m not allowing holes in corners and edges to make my point)
A straw has 2 holes.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 days ago
The only true answer involves integrals imo (my calc is rusty so I’m not gonna bother trying lol)
__nobodynowhere@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
Zero
Crankenstein@lemmy.world 5 days ago
This is one of those “if you cut a hole in a net, it then has less holes than before” type arguments and I’m all here for it.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world 5 days ago
I think it would still techically be more hole since a larger total area would be hole.
I would be fewer holes, though.
gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
But there’s more hole per hole
m532@lemmygrad.ml 4 days ago
More cheese -> more holes
More holes -> less cheese
Therefore: More cheese -> less cheese