So... which of the following is the largest?

[Moonchild]

A bit of silliness.
The question is real though! No-re-voting. Make sure of your answer before choosing!

(No I won't be as mean as to make this a captcha question )

[athenian200]

Hmm... I would have to go with a cube.

The reason is because all the other shapes mentioned are single-sided, flat shapes with no volume. A cube has six square faces worth of surface area to calculate, and also has volume. So, all other things being equal, the cube should be the largest. That will be my answer because it seems the most mathematically sound.

It all really depends on how you define "largest," though. Surface area, volume, word length, etc.

[andyprough]

Rectangle - most letters

[athenian200]

Rectangle - most letters

That's a great answer. Because given the form of the question, the length of the word is the only thing we can measure objectively.

[jobbautista9]

I voted for circle because it has infinite points. While it's true that a point itself doesn't have any size, and that the interior of the circle still has a definite area, since we're just talking about "largest" here, in terms of which basic closed figure has the largest capacity for points, I'd say it's definitely the circle.

[Blacklab]

Has to be the cube... only 3D object... all others only 2D?

But I do like 'Rectangle' answer... properly logical in a suitably left-field way!

[vannilla]

Rectangle is the closest one to the real answer.

[Mæstro]

The circle outranks everyone else. The rectangle should probably be executed. Cubes are a lie.

[00Septimus]

Ich stelle fest, dass bis jetzt noch nicht entschieden ist, wer der Größte ist. Circle und Rectangle liegen momentan, 30.07.2022, 23h17', beide mit 13,7 cm an der Spitze - mal schauen wer gewinnt

Welcher der folgenden ist der groesste.jpg

Doch während ich noch schreibe, hat sich der Würfel mit ca. 16 cm an die Spitze geschoben - wow!

Andererseits haben Sechseck (Hexagon) und Rechteck (Rectangle) auf deutsch beide mit 8 Buchstaben die größte Wortlänge. Die Quizfrage wurde aber in englisch gestellt, also könnte Rectangle der Größte sein. Aber vielleicht hat der Quizersteller die Frage ja in schwedisch gedacht ? Hhm, wie ist dort die Wortgröße der jeweiligen geometrischen Figuren ?

[Moonchild]

Andererseits haben Sechseck (Hexagon) und Rechteck (Rectangle) auf deutsch beide mit 8 Buchstaben die größte Wortlänge. Die Quizfrage wurde aber in englisch gestellt, also könnte Rectangle der Größte sein. Aber vielleicht hat der Quizersteller die Frage ja in schwedisch gedacht ?

The question is English only
For the sake of readers also please keep your posts in English unless you're writing in foreign language boards

[badnick]

Largest in what?

[karlchen]

All items listed, except 1, have got 2 dimensions only. So they are flat, no volume.
The exception is the cube. It has got 3 dimensions: height, width and depth.
I guess that the cube has to be considered the largest therefore.

[00Septimus]

Largest in what?

purposeful question!

All items listed, except 1, have got 2 dimensions only. So they are flat, no volume.
The exception is the cube. It has got 3 dimensions: height, width and depth.
I guess that the cube has to be considered the largest therefore.

I can follow this reasoning.

But: In the quiz question for the largest geometric figure, it is not defined what is meant by "largest"!
That's why I would tend to take the quiz creator seriously when he writes "A Bit of Silliness".

What could be taken for the meaning of "large"? The size of the word, the bar at the end of the vote? ...

The hight of the respective figure with the same content - but then the cube falls from the comparability. Or use the size of the area/surfaces of the respective geometric figure with the same length of the outline?! Since the cube falls out of line as a three-dimensional figure, only the sum of its side surfaces can be taken. But everything depends on how to define "large" here: as high, as voluminous or extensive. I prefer "extensive" (area size), as this is applicable to 2- and 3-dimensional figures when it comes to "large".

With the same length of the outlines, the circle would be the greatest and the cube the smallest.

P.S.: I chose Rectangle for fun because it is the biggest word.

My not automatically translated answer:

Meine nicht automatisch übersetzte Antwort:

Diese Argumentation kann ich nachvollziehen.

Aber: Bei der Quizfrage nach der größten geometrischen Figur ist nicht definiert, was mit Größe gemeint ist!
Deshalb würde ich dazu tendieren, den Quizersteller ernst zu nehmen, wenn er schreibt "A bit of silliness".

Was könnte man für die Bedeutung von "Größe" hernehmen? Die Größe des Wortes, des Balkens am Ende der Abstimmung? ...

Die Höhe der jeweiligen Figur bei gleichem Inhalt - doch dann fällt der Würfel aus der Vergleichbarkeit. Oder sinnvoll die Größe der Fläche/Flächen der jeweiligen geometrischen Figur bei gleicher Länge der Umrisse?! Da der Würfel als dreidimensionale Figur aus der Reihe fällt, kann nur die Summe seiner Seitenflächen hergenommen werden. Doch hängt alles davon ab, wie man hier "large" definiert: als hoch, als voluminös oder als umfangreich. Ich bevorzuge "umfangreich" / (Flächengröße), da dies bei der Frage nach der "Größe" auf 2- und 3-dimensionale Figuren anwendbar ist

Mit gleicher Länge der Umrisse wäre somit der Kreis am größten und der Würfel am kleinsten.

P.S.: Spaßeshalber habe ich Rectangle gewählt, weil es das größte Wort ist.

[badnick]

Largest in what?

purposeful question!

Yeah, I assume the @andyprough's answer.

[Moonchild]

OK getting back to this... the correct answer is Rectangle
Indeed because it's the largest word. No other qualifiers were given with "largest" so it has to be as literal as possible. Sorry for the architect trick question

Cube and determining it based on dimensions (and one obviously having volume while others are "flat") disqualifies because you cannot compare 2D and 3D objects with each other -- 2D is not just "very thin". Although if you picked this you were thinking like an engineer (not a bad thing!).
Similarly, going by number of sides disqualifies because a circle doesn't have a quantifiable number of sides, even if both 2D and 3D objects have "sides" otherwise (if you equate faces to sides).

[athenian200]

That does explain why I was caught between Rectangle and Cube. I was caught between interpreting it literally as referring to the word, and thinking more like an engineer, like you said. I definitely get the reasoning behind that answer.

[karlchen]

OK. I see. The question was not a geometric question, but a linguistic question. Geometry only served to lead almost all of us on the wrong track.

[vannilla]

I still stand by my statement regardless the real intentions behind the poll.