Because Banach-Tarski doesn't work in 2d and that's not the sort of mistake Randall could get away with without drowning under messages um-actually-ing him.

You must be looking for the article how to cut a pizza into multiple slices. This article was called 9 ways to cut a pizza.

Obviously a more USEFUL article would be 9 ways to cut a pizza into equal slices.

You can eat the whole thing like fruit-by-the-foot

I definitely saw a comic strip about this exact thing being the right way to cut a pizza for one.

Followed by a demonstration of someone eating the whole thing in one long continuous grind without their hands.

You mean it's... One PIEEECCEEE?

/channeling Emily the Engineer cast energy

Maybe that was the original size for that one

You share your pizza ?

It's pretty simple, really. There's a mathematical way of creating a complete cover of all points within a sphere in a finite number of subsets in such a way that those finite subsets can be rearranged into two complete spheres of the same size.

It's kind of like how there are exactly as many points between 0 and 1 on a number line as there are between 0 and 2, so if you take a 0 to 1 segment, and then multiply all distances by 2, you can cut it into two pieces with exactly as many points as the original 0 to 1.

This is the sort of thing that only works with mathematical abstractions, which is why it's paradoxical. You sure as heck can't do this with a pizza, even if it's technically isomorphic to a sphere.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=s86-Z-CbaHA

Get ready for 24 minutes of not understanding anything

My brain just noped out

That doesn't seem right. If you imagine moving the "off-centre" point towards the edge, then two of the slices will cover most of the pizza, so the remaining slices can't add up to enough.

It would make a fun geogebra animation.

The loading icon on Mac