Can you fold a piece of paper more than seven times?

[Michael Kilderry]

You may have noticed my signature is:
"No matter how hard you try, you can not fold a piece of paper in half more than seven times."

Has anybody actually tried that? Remember, it has to be in neat folds, if it looks like a scrunched up ball by the time of the eighth fold, then you haven't successfully proved the theory wrong.

Michael Kilderry

And here's that famous signature right now:

[David]

Yes You Can!!!!

With a large enough piece of paper A2 or A3 and is very thin then you can

your little saying does not mention size or weight

Ha Ha

David

[t00fri]

Yes You Can!!!!

With a large enough piece of paper A2 or A3 and is very thin then you can

your little saying does not mention size or weight

Ha Ha

David

A more fruitful thought would rather be to contemplate what Michael's little sentence is supposed to tell you (and every one else) "between the lines":

By folding the paper n times, its thickness increases /exponentially/, i.e like 2^n = exp(n*log2), which --due to the enormous increase-- becomes
thick very fast, despite the paper itself being very thin...

Bye Fridger

[t00fri]

Yes You Can!!!!

With a large enough piece of paper A2 or A3 and is very thin then you can

your little saying does not mention size or weight

Ha Ha

David

A more illuminating thought would rather be to contemplate what Michael's little sentence is supposed to tell you (and every one else) "between the lines":

By folding the paper n times, its thickness increases /exponentially/, i.e like 2^n = exp(n*log2), which --due to the enormous increase-- becomes
thick very fast, despite the paper itself being very thin...

Bye Fridger

[Cham]

Hmm, I gess what t00fri is trying to tell, between the words, is that if you auto-reference your own post n-times, it will grow exponentially with n.

[Cham]

Hmm, I gess what t00fri is trying to tell, between the words, is that if you auto-reference your own post n-times, it will grow exponentially with n.

[Cham]

Hmm, I gess what t00fri is trying to tell, between the words, is that if you auto-reference your own post n-times, it will grow exponentially with n.

[Cham]

Hmm, I gess what t00fri is trying to tell, between the words, is that if you auto-reference your own post n-times, it will grow exponentially with n.

[David]

tf00i

i don't understand the equation because I'm not to good at Math's but i know that at every fold the thickness doubles so at the 8th fold it is 128 times thicker than when you started then 256, 512 etc

I do know what the saying is trying to say, I was being silly. I think it's saying that it is fruitless in trying to do something when you know it's impossible

david

[Cham]

Oups ! My post is growing linearly with n !!

[wcomer]

If so, then it would be rare mistake on his part. If you autoreference yourself only one time per post, then the post grows linearly. What you really need to do is autoreference yourself twice per post.

[Cham]

Yep ! See my previous post !

[wcomer]

If so, then it would be rare mistake on his part. If you autoreference yourself only one time per post, then the post grows linearly. What you really need to do is autoreference yourself twice per post.

If so, then it would be rare mistake on his part. If you autoreference yourself only one time per post, then the post grows linearly. What you really need to do is autoreference yourself twice per post.

[Cham]

I predict a new kind of virus will spread here !

[wcomer]

If so, then it would be rare mistake on his part. If you autoreference yourself only one time per post, then the post grows linearly. What you really need to do is autoreference yourself twice per post.

If so, then it would be rare mistake on his part. If you autoreference yourself only one time per post, then the post grows linearly. What you really need to do is autoreference yourself twice per post.

If so, then it would be rare mistake on his part. If you autoreference yourself only one time per post, then the post grows linearly. What you really need to do is autoreference yourself twice per post.

If so, then it would be rare mistake on his part. If you autoreference yourself only one time per post, then the post grows linearly. What you really need to do is autoreference yourself twice per post.

[Cham]

Do you think we could draw some "ascii" like figures with posts as letters ?

[t00fri]

right Walton...

Cheers
Fridger

[Michael Kilderry]

I didn't think you could fold a piece of paper more than seven times because I couldn't do it myself and I tried with several large pieces of paper. I got the idea when I read it on a piece of paper with all other odd bits of information on it. Oh well, guess I'll have to change my signature.

Maybe they meant average A4 printer paper couldn't be folded so many times. Unless, David's eighth fold was a scrunched up ball.

I would like someone to try if they can fold an A4 piece of paper in half eight times, I think that would be impossible.

Michael Kilderry

[selden]

I must admit that I was a little surprised that you were using 7 as your value. I vaguely recall hearing long ago that 8 was the maximum number of folds.

It doesn't matter what the size of paper you use or its thickness. Past a certain point, the layer of paper on the exterior layer just can't stretch enough to be folded over the bend, and the innermost one can't compress any more.

[Michael Kilderry]

You're probably right Selden, as I managed to fold it eight times, but by that time it was a scrunched up ball, not neatly folded. Let's see if anyone can fold a piece of paper in half nine times!

Michael Kilderry