Does a triskadecahedron have to be regular? Can’t you have a pentahedron, decahedron, etc?
What would you call a pyramid with an isosceles triangular base? Wouldn’t it still be a tetrahedron? Or is there a whole other set of suffixes to be used with irregular solids?
Pardons for all the above spelling errors.
Oh crud. I just reread this thread and saw that you were specifying “regular” when talking about the (necessarily fictitious) triskadecahedron. I just fumbled that little detail. Please disregard everything I say on this and all other threads.
Sorry, TheDude, geometry was never my strong point, but thanks for not utterly ripping the fact that I’m an ignorant fool in maths right out of me!
Anyway, back to the original question, and as I said above somewhere, the ‘shape’ would be too obscure for the human mind to conceive, let alone the sort of scale involved.
Also, the shape of all the physical matter in the Universe (as supposedly ‘calculated’ on all those massive supercomputers) should be long ‘strings’ of superclusters of galaxies and stars etc. joined together in a big ‘web’.
NOTE: this is NOT what I have said, but merely reported information; please do not bombard me with ‘naive fool’ comments.
What would the shape of the space that the Universe is comprised of be? I am not referring to the space filled with matter, but with empty space (of which there must be quite a lot as light from quasars etc. going in all directions has to ‘go’ somewhere further out than they are. Would it be a giant sphere, or would it be some weird, non-regular-non-defineable shape? Any ideas?
“Now be quiet before I rather clumsily knight you with this meat cleaver” - Edmund Blackadder
Please?