How do you draw a circle?

[ryan]

Right hand, pen, 12:00, counterclockwise, weeee, back to where I started.

Yeah me too, and then I read the article and it said that Americans would do it this way. Japanese do clockwise.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Actually I don't remember drawing a circle (things that look a bit like a circle but not a circle per se), except at school and then I was very focused on the compas graphite tip never getting quite where it had started. So, whatever I drew never were actual circles. I could try again, still have the compass. But I know now it won't ever work.

Nobody ever draws circles.
EB

A near perfect circle is still a circle; it need not be a perfect circle to be a circle.

It's like saying that when I draw a castle it is a castle.

Fast, I'm really surprised even you can't see that.
EB

 

[Canard DuJour]

Draw a random squiggle in Photoshop, blur it 100%, then sharpen it 100%.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Draw a random squiggle in Photoshop, blur it 100%, then sharpen it 100%.

It's a bit naïve to think that when you draw a random squiggle it's really going to be a random squiggle.

No, it won't be random. Whatever we draw is never random.


On the other hand, you can draw a squiggle and see what happens after that.
EB

 

[bleubird]

i get my compass out'

I can draw 360 cords,really!

 

[Kharakov]

I draw a square and argue with whoever is looking at it.

 

[Speakpigeon]

I ask somebody else to draw a circle and then I can mock it.
EB

 

[Kharakov]

Ever worry that the vibrations of your mockery temporarily create perfectly circular disturbances in spacetime around the ink?

 

[fast]

Draw a random squiggle in Photoshop, blur it 100%, then sharpen it 100%.

It's a bit naïve to think that when you draw a random squiggle it's really going to be a random squiggle.

No, it won't be random. Whatever we draw is never random.


On the other hand, you can draw a squiggle and see what happens after that.
EB

When you said, "a bit like a circle," it seemed to suggest that you were drawing a depiction of an imperfect circle and therefore not drawing a depiction of a circle. I wasn't trying to deny the distinction between the depiction of something in drawing form and the thing being depicted; rather, my intent was to deny that an imperfect something isn't still something. A close yet imperfect circle is still a circle, just as a close yet imperfect drawing of a circle is still a drawing of a circle.

 

[bilby]

You don't draw a circle, you draw a gun.

Never bring a circle to a gunfight.

 

[Bomb#20]

I draw a square and argue with whoever is looking at it.

That is a circle, in "Manhattan Geometry".

 

[Kharakov]

I draw a square and argue with whoever is looking at it.

That is a circle, in "Manhattan Geometry".

Had to look that up- I was thinking the drink Manhattan. Ohh, and your comment is pretty hilarious.

 

[Malintent]

Draw a random squiggle in Photoshop, blur it 100%, then sharpen it 100%.

It's a bit naïve to think that when you draw a random squiggle it's really going to be a random squiggle.

No, it won't be random. Whatever we draw is never random.


On the other hand, you can draw a squiggle and see what happens after that.
EB

I don't believe in random... only ignorance of the unknown.

 

[Speakpigeon]

It's a bit naïve to think that when you draw a random squiggle it's really going to be a random squiggle.

No, it won't be random. Whatever we draw is never random.


On the other hand, you can draw a squiggle and see what happens after that.
EB

I don't believe in random... only ignorance of the unknown.

A book in French on QM stated that there's a fundamental difference between ordinary randomness in macroscopic systems, which is essentially an epiphenomenon of our ignorance of the detailed interactions that all together produced the outcome, and QM randomness, which is fundamental randomness.

It didn't say anything about circles done by hand but I suspect it would have said randomness in drawings is not true randomness.
EB

 

[Kharakov]

QM randomness is chaotic, not truly random.

 

[fromderinside]

Quantum randomness is random. If it were chaotic is would produce predictable results without need for some theory. Quantum Mechanical theory may be chaotic.

Getting back on track As Sinatra sang I draw them my way.

 

[Kharakov]

Quantum randomness is random. If it were chaotic is would produce predictable results without need for some theory. Quantum Mechanical theory may be chaotic.

What do you mean? Chaotic systems don't produce predictable results, even though they are deterministic. Think the n-body problem.

 

[fromderinside]

I just wrote garbage. Try my next attempt.

 

[fromderinside]

I'm thinking chaotic processes are bound whilst random processes are not bound. Both are deterministic.

For every season turn turn turn ......

 

[Kharakov]

I'm thinking chaotic processes are bound whilst random processes are not bound. Both are deterministic.

For every season turn turn turn ......

For some reason, I thought random was not deterministic (non-existent as well), and chaotic is deterministic. Maybe because I read the definitions on the little, tiny corner of the internet that I am connected to.

Perhaps your response was random.