The four-ellipse version is rather more elegant.
Is there something like that for 5?
thats quite the loose defenition of a circle you're using there
Topologically, you're a circle.
Topologically, you're a torus.
It depends how you count various holes.
True, but if we're assuming a baseline (non-modified) human, then you're a torus.
We have more than one hole through our bodies...
Other than our digestive tract, what hole goes all the way through our body? The rest of them are all dead ends.
EDIT: I forgot the tubes that go from our ears to our throats. I guess with the multiple passages going down to the trachea you might end up with more than one topological hole.
On a gross anatomical level, though, I only see the digestive tract as being worth counting.
I was thinking digestive tract as one hole, and then nostrils as a second.
You have more than one hole through your body.
True... but that's quite the loose usage of grammar and spelling you're using there...
why stop at 4?
Holy crap there's a seven.
In what sort of crazy ass fucked world would this be the most efficient way of displaying any conceivable set of information?
Dunno, but I'm sure they've got better drugs than we do...
Ow. That one actually hurt to look at...
Dunno why I found this pretty amusing.
Why can't you just add another normal circle? I mean, I see this weird thing, and then there's the four ellipses, but I never understood why you can't just use 4 circles. Arrange them so they are equally far apart, and have their middles overlap, just like the 3 circle version.
Where do opposing circles overlap each other, but not the orthogonal two circles?
Oh, that's correct. That means two possibilities are missed with just normal circles. My bad.
You get bonus points for accurately describing geometric relationships over a textual conversation.
Because circles have strong magnetic fields. When you put too many of them in one place, they fly apart and break into arcs.
Offbeat: funny, weird, sad, strange or quirky news that's just....just offbeat :)