Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
It looks like a valid pedagogical question to me. Do we have a policy on pedagogical questions?
I do not understand the question at all. In particular, how is this tic-tac-toe iso (though nice) related to this; neither of the things involved is particullarly part of the 'physical world'. And, what is the example in the original question. Right, there are twelve. And? In particular since then it is dicussed this is not just about cardinality. Like, two arms, two feet, two eyes, two ears, two kidneys,...with some canonical iso given by left to left and right to right.
I could imagine there being something if some 'structure' or 'relation' is preserved. But to be direct I doubt this question itself is salvageable as it will always be a bit hard to communicate what is asked for and then if there is some sort of false start the thing is lost. So if anything I could imagine that after some discussion OP reasks something along these lines but clearer.
Sidenote: the fact that there is a tag implies that somebody with nonminimal rep once typed this in the tag field and it was not yet deleted. That being said I have nothing against pedagogy or education questions, but this one is unclear to me.
I voted to reopen. Michael raises an interesting, almost philosophical question. In fact, John Searle, a well-known philosopher, has written on precisely this point. In so far as MO is appropriate for mathematical philosophy, I feel this question is appropriate. As quid say, "it will always be a bit hard": Yes, it will be difficult to articulate these issues. Which does not imply they should not be explored.
1 to 7 of 7