"Peter Ramm" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 22:04:32 -0000, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"quisquiliae" wrote in message
. uk...
Peter Ramm wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:24:24 GMT, quisquiliae
wrote:

For standing on you don't want a three legged stool, very unstable.
Whereas with four legs it may wobble on an unevensurface but is less
likely to give way when trying to support two feet.


Not sure I'd agree -

Why?

There is nothing intrinsically which makes a three legged stool more
unstable than a four legged one - it depends on the overall design of
the stool.

Both you and "quisquiliae" are assuming that there is more of an
"overhang" of the stool top with respect to a straight line joining
adjacent legs with a three legged than with a four legged - which is
not necessarily the case.

You may also be assuming that a three legged stool has a circular top
compared with a four legged stool with a square/rectangle top - in
which case I would agree about the overhang and hence stability - but
this is not always the case.

However, a four legged stool with a square top and a leg in each
corner is no more stable than a three legged stool with a triangular
top and a leg in each corner.

I rest my case ;-)

You didn't read the op properly in that case.
--
Pete Ramm
LID

Stamp out Spam - See my anti-spam pages:
http://www.spamfreezone.org