1
$\begingroup$

I have read some articles explaining why rounded corners are more aesthetically pleasing, like this one and it all makes perfect sense but my question is:

Why does nature not have sharp corners? What is the law or set of laws that governs this behavior?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Maybe it is possible to find sharp corners in nature $\endgroup$ – wienein May 13 '16 at 8:15
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ As wienein and Michael said, this question is based on a false premise. Vast numbers of natural mineral and rock formations have sharp edges. So do shells, quills, spines, teeth, beaks, bones, hooves, horns, claws, thorns, scales, gill arches, leaves, icicles, and many other natural structures. $\endgroup$ – Pont May 13 '16 at 9:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This question is an excellent and basic question. The question is not incorrect but it is incomplete. A better alternative could be, "why nature tend to lose the sharp corners?". This question is also associated to probability(statistics), geometry, and physics (basic mechanics , as well as entropy). Each object tend to lose sharp corners. $\endgroup$ – Always Confused Aug 6 '16 at 14:19
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Objects tend to lose "sharp"-corners because the corners are "sharp" :) Sharp edge or corner of an object when collide to any-other object , the total force act through microscopic area-of-contact. So the total pressure on the contact place is immense. (And this is why someone can shave beards with a "sharp" blade, not with a blunt football). However, the more an object pass through random collision, it tend to get shape of a sphere, which have the same contact-area where-ever of it we touch. $\endgroup$ – Always Confused Aug 6 '16 at 14:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ As Always Confused mentioned, sharp corners tend to get weathered more rapidly than smooth surfaces so they are not as frequently represented in the natural world. $\endgroup$ – Friddy May 14 at 17:35
12
$\begingroup$

The premise of your question is entirely wrong. There are many examples of sharp corners in nature, the most obvious being well formed crystals.

Pyrite is a classic example that was mentioned by @wienein in the comments. In a ideal situation it forms cubic crystals with sharp edges.

enter image description here

A classic non-crystalline example would be volcanic glasses such as obsidian, which fracture to produce extremely sharp edges and were historically used by some cultures for making blades and other sharp tools.

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ A perfectly correct answer to a perfectly incorrect question )). Kind of reminds me of "...and the answer is 42". I guess i have to accept it as a correct answer, since my question was indeed based on the wrong premise. Or rather i asked the wrong question. I was thinking of such natural phenomena as rivers being the most obvious example or the outline of a meadow or a forest. But now when i think of it, what is the common attribute here? What that is that does not have a sharp corners in the above-mentioned examples? How should i phrase the correct question? $\endgroup$ – RusI May 13 '16 at 19:28
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @RusI Rivers also have "sharp corners". Think waterfalls. I think is the problem is that "sharp corners" is a loose and subjective term. Things form in certain shape because science dictates them to, not because it is aesthetically pleasing or not. $\endgroup$ – Gimelist May 13 '16 at 20:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @RusI: Erosion causes rounding in rivers (when viewed at a large scale). Cells and multi-cellular organisms are largely bags of liquid, and rounding minimises surface area (structure) to volume ratios. Gravity causes planets to become round. There are lots of processes, and I don't think they are all related. $\endgroup$ – naught101 May 19 '16 at 6:19
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for informing about such perfect cubic crystals in nature. It is wonderful. $\endgroup$ – Always Confused Aug 6 '16 at 14:40
  • $\begingroup$ @Michael How "Sharp" could be subjective term? It is hardly relative and quantitative term. But "Sharper" could not vary person-to-person. A "sharper" blade will cut a paper more easily. a "more-blunt" blade (of same material) will cut that paper more difficultly. $\endgroup$ – Always Confused Aug 6 '16 at 15:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.