One can't, but two can.

Dec 8, 2005

A thousand, though, is evidently right out.  It is seemingly impossible to find a picture of a regular chiliagon on the web.  I suspect it would be more or less indistinguishable from a picture of a circle (interior angle of 179.64 degrees, after all).

Christophe Peacocke seems to think it's plausible to suppose that the reason one's imaginations of a chiliagon and of a 999-gon are indistinguishable is that the experiences of seeing a chiliagon and of seeing a 999-gon are indistinguishable.  The latter statement might be the case but my mental image of a chiliagon (such as it is) has discernible sides, which is not the case with circles.  (NTM I've never actually seen a chiliagon, knowingly anyway, despite efforts, though I'm not sure if that's supposed to matter.)

Comments

on 2005-12-08 22:47:24.0, michael commented:

i heart icosikaihenagons

[permalink]


and, further, on 2005-12-08 22:59:02.0, tammy commented:

my mental image of a chiliagon is delicious

[permalink]


and, further, on 2005-12-09 23:44:33.0, dave zacuto commented:

I imagined a Japanese man in an ill-fitting monster suit shaped like a pepper

[permalink]


and, further, on 2005-12-17 19:18:11.0, Jeremy Osner commented:

It occurs to me on rereading that your title is a little misleading. I do not suppose you could find a one- or two-sided regular polygon online.

[permalink]


and, further, on 2005-12-18 1:06:43.0, ben wolfson commented:

The title is misleading in that its being the title suggests that it has something to do with the post.

[permalink]