While this isn’t really the forum to go into treatises on the scientific method, let me just note that proving that something can’t be done is way harder than proving that it can. To prove that it can be done, you just have to do it. But it doesn’t work the opposite way. I can’t run a 4 minute mile, but that doesn’t prove it can’t be done.

Let’s look at the paper problem again. It’s a simple doubling issue, familiar to all of you computer science types out there (you know who you are). The 8th fold will produce a stack that is 2^8 (256) times the thickness of the original piece of paper, assuming (as scientists are wont to do) inhumanly perfect folding. It’s really the paper’s thickness, even more than the size, that’s important here.

My .004” paper (10 times as thick as Cecil’s plastic) theoretically would have been 1.024” thick after the 8th fold, but was actually about 1.5” thick. I sure couldn’t fold it a 9th time. I would guess that Jane’s paper was thicker to start with, so she hit the 1.5” mark at the 7th fold.

We’ve proven that neither Jane nor I can fold a small, 1.5” thick bundle of paper. Maybe one of you big he-men (or she-women, whatever) out there in (ugh) cyberspace can. If so, you’ve got a great future in winning bar bets. Have at it. – steve