Difference between revisions of "Talk:1902: State Borders"
(Explaining MN Northwest Angle) |
|||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
There are some great videos on YouTube about weird State boundaries. There are some REALLY weird oddities out there. Take for instance the "Give to Canada" piece - that's the Northwest Angle in Minnesota. It's really an accident that it ever ended up in the USA at all, and doesn't make any sense! [[User:Martini|Martini]] ([[User talk:Martini|talk]]) 13:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)Martini | There are some great videos on YouTube about weird State boundaries. There are some REALLY weird oddities out there. Take for instance the "Give to Canada" piece - that's the Northwest Angle in Minnesota. It's really an accident that it ever ended up in the USA at all, and doesn't make any sense! [[User:Martini|Martini]] ([[User talk:Martini|talk]]) 13:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)Martini | ||
| + | :I wouldn't call the NW Angle an accident as much as a slightly illogical solution in order to maintain the terms of the original border agreement in the face of the Mississippi River's inconveniently located headwaters. My recollection is that it said roughly: the border goes west of <this> point until reaching the Mississippi river [which all parties assumed continued that far north]. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.40|108.162.216.40]] 14:13, 13 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 14:13, 13 October 2017
Let's be honest- it should all be Canada. 162.158.74.123 12:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Could Arizona, New Mexico be a reference to Trump? Like, make the border straighter so it's easier to build a wall? Herobrine (talk) 12:35, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
- More likely the joke is that conceding territory to Mexico is about the last thing Trump would do AnotherAnonymous (talk) 13:04, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
My first thought is to wonder if it would be possible to arrange the map such that all internal borders are "straight lines" that span the entire country, to satisfy as many criteria as possible:
- The number of states remains unchanged
- …and they all get to keep their capitals (probably quite difficult)
- …or (and?) each state manages to keep either its current population, land area, or coastline length
- …and they all get to keep their capitals (probably quite difficult)
- Or all internal borders are parallels or meridians
- Or all states have the same land area
- …or population; or population density
- Or if you're allowing more (or fewer) states than the present layout, what's the greatest number of states possible such that they all contain at least one complete city?
Which of those criteria would be the most interesting challenge? And which could you construct an algorithm to solve? I really should refrain from trying to build those algorithms, because I'm supposed to be working --Angel (talk) 13:28, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
There are some great videos on YouTube about weird State boundaries. There are some REALLY weird oddities out there. Take for instance the "Give to Canada" piece - that's the Northwest Angle in Minnesota. It's really an accident that it ever ended up in the USA at all, and doesn't make any sense! Martini (talk) 13:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)Martini
- I wouldn't call the NW Angle an accident as much as a slightly illogical solution in order to maintain the terms of the original border agreement in the face of the Mississippi River's inconveniently located headwaters. My recollection is that it said roughly: the border goes west of <this> point until reaching the Mississippi river [which all parties assumed continued that far north]. 108.162.216.40 14:13, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
