B.

A REACTION TO A POINT IS A REGULAR POLYGON

When anyone tells a statement, there are only two possible realities whether it is true or
not. This paper is all about my reaction to the statement saying that a point is a regular polygon.

The author of the article has somewhat proven his statement in many ways. However, I
think that there are some points he failed to consider. Let us define first what is a point and a
polygon. A polygon is a closed figure bounded by segments intersecting at a point called the
vertex. A point is an undefined term and has no shape. Based from the meaning given, how is it
possible for a point to be a polygon when it has no shape?
The author used several regular polygons to prove his statement. He proposed that the
intersection at which the lines from vertex to midpoint creates another regular polygon which is
of course a small one. Well, I can say this just depends on the kind of material someone is using.
All objects has their own perspective that when it is far from our eyes, it could look like a point.
The truth is, maybe it just looks like a point and when you go near, you can see its actual form.
With this, we can say it is just an illusion that our eyes made based from the lights it reflects. If a
point is a regular polygon, how many sides that it possess? There is no definite answer for this
question I guess.

There are lines from Heinrich Hertz that goes, “One cannot escape the feeling that these
mathematical formulas have an independent existence and intelligence of their own, that they are
wiser than we are, wiser even than their discoverers”. Maybe there are just other points that the
author missed. As of now, I would not agree with the author’s statement. I need more proof.