At 08:22 AM 01/25/2002 -0800, Tim May wrote: >On Thursday, January 24, 2002, at 09:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>I've concluded that you can't answer Tim's riddle >>without knowing the radius of the drill --but I may >>put myself open to ridicule for suggesting this. > >But if you were devious enough, you would realize that >"can't answer Tim's riddle without knowing the radius of the drill" >allows for offering the infinitesimal drill bit "trick" >as a valid solution to the problem.
It's quickly obvious that *if* there is a solution, it's either dependent on "d", the radius of the drill bit, or it's not. If it is, the infinitesimal drill bit is the obvious calculation method. But it's a counter-intuitive answer, and real-world problems don't usually have answers that neat, and the mind that is not merely devious but also curious says "that's interesting, let's explore this, have I got some paper to draw pictures on, wonder how someone noticed a surprising result like this...". Alternatively, the mind that is not curious but merely plodding says "OK, if there's an answer, that's it, but let's check to be sure before sending Tim the answer", which leads to almost as much work as doing it from scratch :-)
