Timeline for Can I uncut a piece of paper?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 24, 2019 at 21:48 | vote | accept | RyanfaeScotland | ||
| Sep 7, 2018 at 15:00 | comment | added | James | There is some advice on making the cut less visible on the Lifehacks site. lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/18535 | |
| Sep 7, 2018 at 6:36 | answer | added | niels nielsen | timeline score: 2 | |
| Sep 7, 2018 at 5:18 | comment | added | StephenG - Help Ukraine | Somewhere in the CIA there may be people who do this regularly. You could ask them. :-) | |
| Sep 6, 2018 at 23:16 | comment | added | RyanfaeScotland | Thanks @CortAmmon, I've been continuing to read about this and now that I have a bit of a better idea of what paper actually is I can see how the concept of 'not sticking it back together' could be a, well, sticky one, given that at a base level all paper really is is small bits of pulp stuck together. I was more looking to avoid the addition of a 'foreign body' into the mix (glue, tape) but if the process of 'uncutting' would depend on that then I feel that is quite valid as an answer (so long as it explains why!). | |
| Sep 6, 2018 at 23:10 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | Something worth exploring is what does it mean to be "cut" and what does it mean to "reverse a cut?" I'll point out that book repair is an art and they do have methods of mending which are visually very hard to distinguish from an uncut page. The more you try to exclude such mending techniques from "reversing the cut," the less likely it will be that someone can find something acceptably reversible. | |
| Sep 6, 2018 at 21:45 | comment | added | user190081 | Paper no, but there are some new polymers that heal themselves under pressure: youtube.com/watch?v=VJCX0xgQFBE | |
| Sep 6, 2018 at 21:40 | comment | added | Mithoron | Well, this is quite dupey. | |
| Sep 6, 2018 at 21:06 | comment | added | RyanfaeScotland | Damn you duplicates! I found this in the 'similar question' display physics.stackexchange.com/q/209529/205916 I've posted anyway as I don't believe it to be a duplicate because A) That question claims the process is irreversible, mine asks if it is. B) I discuss cutting, not tearing, which may be a significant difference. C) The answers on that old question aren't quite satisfying enough D) The questions are worded fairly differently (stackoverflow.blog/2010/11/16/…) E) I really don't want it to be one! | |
| Sep 6, 2018 at 20:40 | review | First posts | |||
| Sep 6, 2018 at 22:39 | |||||
| Sep 6, 2018 at 20:36 | history | asked | RyanfaeScotland | CC BY-SA 4.0 |