Editing 2733: Size Comparisons
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
| + | {{incomplete|Created by a TEXAS-SIZED CRICKET - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}} | ||
Another comic in the [[:Category:My Hobby|My Hobby]] series. | Another comic in the [[:Category:My Hobby|My Hobby]] series. | ||
| − | [[Cueball]] attempts to emphasize to [[Ponytail]] | + | [[Cueball]] attempts to emphasize to [[Ponytail]] what {{w|Texas}}'s size is (as the largest state in the {{w|contiguous US}}, although the second largest state in the whole of the {{w|US}}), by making a size comparison. He states that with Texas expanded to the size of the {{w|Solar System}}, the {{w|ant}}s in Texas will be as large as {{w|Rhode Island}} (the smallest US state). However, Cueball on purpose (according to the caption) just proves how small Texas actually is compared to the Solar System (which is a lot larger){{Citation needed}}. Additionally, the deeper truth of the original statement is inverted; if a much smaller state (Rhode Island, Delaware, etc.) were scaled up to the size of the solar system, its ants would be the size of Texas itself, over 200 times as large as the scaled up Texan ants, so the relative smallness of the Texan ants shows how big Texas is. |
| − | A common analogy for expressing a statistic (such as area/volume/population size/population density) of unfamiliar things is to compare that thing to some other reference that people are likely to already have an understanding of, if only through past comparisons. For instance, it is said that a human-sized {{w|flea}} could jump the equivalent height of the {{w|Eiffel Tower}} (if jumping ability scaled with animal size; which it does not, due to how some of the different numbers involved will scale to the square or cube of the linear factor, so such aspects as power-to-weight ratios and sheer biomechanical strengths cannot be maintained). In this case, Randall is comparing objects that are extremely different in scale (the state of Texas and a small insect), but then blowing Texas up to yet another size many orders of magnitude larger, and then comparing it with something else his addressee has no comprehension of, with the result that the comparison is of no value in understanding how big Texas is (which could be supposed to be Cueball's intended impartation), or what ants have to do with anything in the first place. The only message you get in the end is that "Texas is much bigger than an ant! | + | A common analogy for expressing a statistic (such as area/volume/population size/population density) of unfamiliar things is to compare that thing to some other reference that people are likely to already have an understanding of, if only through past comparisons. For instance, it is said that a human-sized {{w|flea}} could jump the equivalent height of the {{w|Eiffel Tower}} (if jumping ability scaled with animal size; which it does not, due to how some of the different numbers involved will scale to the square or cube of the linear factor, so such aspects as power-to-weight ratios and sheer biomechanical strengths cannot be maintained). In this case, Randall is comparing objects that are extremely different in scale (the state of Texas and a small insect), but then blowing Texas up to yet another size many orders of magnitude larger, and then comparing it with something else his addressee has no comprehension of, with the result that the comparison is of no value in understanding how big Texas is (which could be supposed to be Cueball's intended impartation), or what ants have to do with anything in the first place. The only message you get in the end is that "Texas is much bigger than an ant! |
There are a lot of definitions for how large the Solar System is, but one that is used (and easily agreed upon) is based upon {{w|Neptune}}'s {{w|Apsis#Perihelion and aphelion|aphelion}} (the farthest point from Sun of the outermost planet). Using the {{w|Area of a circle|circle area equation}}, we might say that the 'area' of the solar system is 6.49×10<sup>19</sup> square kilometers (2.506×10<sup>19</sup> square miles), which is a lot, with Texas's area being in turn measured as 696,241 km² (268,820 mi²). The difference in size is the huge factor of 9.32×10<sup>13</sup> (not a [[2707: Astronomy Numbers|simple number]]). Ants, unfortunately for the calculations, vary vastly in size, but Rhode Island's area is known to be 3,144 km² (1,214 mi²). We can therefore back-calculate that Randall's average "ant" would occupy 33.73 square millimeters. Roughly measured, an ant has an "aspect ratio" of 1:2 (width to length), and such an assumption leads to a length of 8.21mm, which falls easily into the range of 2–25mm for various possible species and types of ants. Therefore, Randall's calculated comparison indeed holds up as valid. | There are a lot of definitions for how large the Solar System is, but one that is used (and easily agreed upon) is based upon {{w|Neptune}}'s {{w|Apsis#Perihelion and aphelion|aphelion}} (the farthest point from Sun of the outermost planet). Using the {{w|Area of a circle|circle area equation}}, we might say that the 'area' of the solar system is 6.49×10<sup>19</sup> square kilometers (2.506×10<sup>19</sup> square miles), which is a lot, with Texas's area being in turn measured as 696,241 km² (268,820 mi²). The difference in size is the huge factor of 9.32×10<sup>13</sup> (not a [[2707: Astronomy Numbers|simple number]]). Ants, unfortunately for the calculations, vary vastly in size, but Rhode Island's area is known to be 3,144 km² (1,214 mi²). We can therefore back-calculate that Randall's average "ant" would occupy 33.73 square millimeters. Roughly measured, an ant has an "aspect ratio" of 1:2 (width to length), and such an assumption leads to a length of 8.21mm, which falls easily into the range of 2–25mm for various possible species and types of ants. Therefore, Randall's calculated comparison indeed holds up as valid. | ||
