Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #590167

Re: Small enough- to be zero?

Show all headers | View raw

On 7/20/2016 7:03 PM, john wrote:
> Sergio said "d. none of the above " Bzzt!! Wrong! From whereverpedia
>  " Buckminsterfullerene is a spherical fullerene molecule with the
> formula C₆₀. It has a cage-like fused-ring structure which resembles
> a football, made of twenty hexagons and twelve pentagons, with ...
> Wikipedia" In this case, "football" is a soccer ball for you
> Americans that waited behind
>

you are right !

you win, I am so humaniliated...

I didnt know... the shame, ugh,,,

    but so easy to visulize

from a socker site;

Twelve pentagons and 20 hexagons form a figure known to mathematicians
as a truncated icosahedron, to chemists as the buckminsterfullerene
molecule—and to nearly everybody else as the standard soccer ball. As
this summer's World Cup competition approached, a soccer
bail-shaped information pavilion toured the German cities preparing to
host World Cup matches. Here the "football globe" makes a stop
in Leipzig. The iconic black and white soccer ball is also an intriguing
puzzle amenable to mathematical analysis. Other soccer balls that may
never be seen on the playing field also offer interesting solutions to
the mathematical questions posed by the standard design


So Carbon stole that shape from Soccker ball !

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 11:11 -0700
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 13:18 -0500
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-20 12:57 -0700
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 16:30 -0500
    Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 14:45 -0700
      Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:06 -0700
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:16 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:42 -0700
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:59 -0700
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:58 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 16:32 -0700
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 18:39 -0500
              Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 17:03 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 20:06 -0500
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-21 14:20 +0000
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 07:51 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 08:25 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:36 -0400
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-07-22 14:05 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-07-22 14:52 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-21 15:25 +0000
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 11:25 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-22 00:48 +0000
                haxacontaDELTAhedronic noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 13:47 -0700
                stab a guess (or an i.s.i.s): hexacontaDELTAhedron a.k.a C_sixty noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:52 -0700
                stab a guess (or those flamethrowers): hexacontaDELTAhedron a.k.a C_sixty noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 19:27 -0700
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-20 20:55 -0400
              Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 18:04 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-20 20:37 -0400
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 07:44 -0700
              Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:33 -0400
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 18:39 -0500
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 02:08 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? "Eduardo J. Berringer" <invalid@example.com> - 2016-07-24 11:21 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-07-24 12:48 -0700
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 09:39 -0700
    Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 15:21 -0700
      Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:49 -0400
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-22 12:04 +1000
    Re: Small enough- to be zero? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-21 23:54 -0700
      Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-23 11:57 +1000
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 17:01 -0400
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-24 10:52 +1000
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 21:25 -0400
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 18:09 -0700
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-23 13:31 -0700
    Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 17:20 -0400

csiph-web