Talk:3079: Air Fact - Revision history

172.68.245.112: comment reply

2025-04-24T16:36:34Z

comment reply

172.71.241.72: Cbic tonne?

2025-04-24T13:51:50Z

Cbic tonne?

198.41.227.166 at 03:15, 24 April 2025

2025-04-24T03:15:50Z

172.69.195.172 at 15:43, 23 April 2025

2025-04-23T15:43:35Z

172.71.148.154 at 12:39, 23 April 2025

2025-04-23T12:39:34Z

172.70.162.52 at 10:18, 23 April 2025

2025-04-23T10:18:15Z

141.101.99.126 at 09:59, 23 April 2025

2025-04-23T09:59:17Z

141.101.99.126: Flying ants!

2025-04-23T09:58:40Z

Flying ants!

Barmar at 16:26, 22 April 2025

2025-04-22T16:26:47Z

172.71.172.177: correcting a typo

2025-04-22T16:23:47Z

correcting a typo

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 The use of "cubic meter" here is pretty straightforward, but it did make me think of ways that units can be poorly communicated to make something sound incredible when it's actually true and not all that impressive (e.g., [https://smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2097 SMBC #2097]). If Megan had instead said "cubic tonne", it would still sound intuitively similar to "cubic meter" but would represent over 800 cubic meters (taking STP at sea level) or arguably up to 10,000 cubic meters if you count all the atmosphere up to the Karman line. (The volume of the atmosphere is around 5.2e19 cubic meters.) While the median average cubic meter of air obviously contains zero ants, the estimated total of 20 quadrillion ants on Earth yields a mean average of 0.0004 ants per cubic meter, which works out to up to 4 "ants per cubic tonne" of air. And if we go a little further, it gets even more interesting. Let's stick with "cubic meter" of air rather than cubic tonne. If we assume that the average ant is no "taller" than 1 cm, then virtually all those 20 quadrillion ants are necessarily contained to a volume of air no greater than the land surface area of Earth times 1 cm, which gives you a volume of 1.49e12 cubic meters of air which could possibly contain ants. The added internal volume of ant colonies, while larger than you might think, is negligible compared to the land surface area of the planet, so this actually yields a whopping 13,400 ants per "average" cubic meter, astonishingly close to Megan's claim. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.47.127|172.70.47.127]] 16:21, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
 :Cubic tonne is a bizarre measurement.  A tonne is a measure of mass - 1000kg - about the same an imperial ton - 2240lb. The volume of a tonne depends on the density of the substance. I mean, I know Americans refer to fluid ounces, but cubic tonne? --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.72|172.71.241.72]] 13:51, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
 The explanation needs to mention flying ants. They're certainly not microscopic, they only fly for one or two days a year and there are unlikely to be 10000 in any given cubic metre of air [citation needed], but they're definitely relevant. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.126|141.101.99.126]] 09:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
 :There ''might'' be {{w|Nuptial flight#Flying ant day|one or two days}}, or not. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.172|172.69.195.172]] 15:43, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 The use of "cubic meter" here is pretty straightforward, but it did make me think of ways that units can be poorly communicated to make something sound incredible when it's actually true and not all that impressive (e.g., [https://smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2097 SMBC #2097]). If Megan had instead said "cubic tonne", it would still sound intuitively similar to "cubic meter" but would represent over 800 cubic meters (taking STP at sea level) or arguably up to 10,000 cubic meters if you count all the atmosphere up to the Karman line. (The volume of the atmosphere is around 5.2e19 cubic meters.) While the median average cubic meter of air obviously contains zero ants, the estimated total of 20 quadrillion ants on Earth yields a mean average of 0.0004 ants per cubic meter, which works out to up to 4 "ants per cubic tonne" of air. And if we go a little further, it gets even more interesting. Let's stick with "cubic meter" of air rather than cubic tonne. If we assume that the average ant is no "taller" than 1 cm, then virtually all those 20 quadrillion ants are necessarily contained to a volume of air no greater than the land surface area of Earth times 1 cm, which gives you a volume of 1.49e12 cubic meters of air which could possibly contain ants. The added internal volume of ant colonies, while larger than you might think, is negligible compared to the land surface area of the planet, so this actually yields a whopping 13,400 ants per "average" cubic meter, astonishingly close to Megan's claim. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.47.127|172.70.47.127]] 16:21, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
 The explanation needs to mention flying ants. They're certainly not microscopic, they only fly for one or two days a year and there are unlikely to be 10000 in any given cubic metre of air [citation needed], but they're definitely relevant. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.126|141.101.99.126]] 09:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
 :There ''might'' be {{w|Nuptial flight#Flying ant day|one or two days}}, or not. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.172|172.69.195.172]] 15:43, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ::If the factoid in the comic were true, the fact that the average person has a tidal volume of about half a litre, and takes between 12-20 breaths per minute means that they breathe in and out about 10 cubic metres per day. That’s over 100,000 ants. The fact that you are talking about “per year” implies that the rate is a reasonable number per year, not over 36 million. It’s like comparing the speed of continents to the speed of a car. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.0.190|172.68.0.190]] 20:03, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
 ::Because that's part of the joke. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.123|172.71.241.123]] 08:49, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
 The term "microscopic ants" supposedly refers to viruses and other microorganisms, not actual tiny ants. The actual concentration of airborne germs is pretty much in that ballpark, so it's not about sampling bias, it's about framing. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.103.36|162.158.103.36]] 17:00, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:43, 23 April 2025
Line 34:		Line 34:

	The explanation needs to mention flying ants. They're certainly not microscopic, they only fly for one or two days a year and there are unlikely to be 10000 in any given cubic metre of air [citation needed], but they're definitely relevant. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.126\|141.101.99.126]] 09:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)		The explanation needs to mention flying ants. They're certainly not microscopic, they only fly for one or two days a year and there are unlikely to be 10000 in any given cubic metre of air [citation needed], but they're definitely relevant. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.126\|141.101.99.126]] 09:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
		+	:There ''might'' be {{w\|Nuptial flight#Flying ant day\|one or two days}}, or not. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.172\|172.69.195.172]] 15:43, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 : Tried to address this ... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.146.123|172.71.146.123]] 19:23, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
 : It's difficult to take an exact volume of air and analyze it's content. The less you care about how close to exact volume you took, the easier it is. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 05:07, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
 :There's nothing difficult about taking air samples - I do it myself about every 3-5 seconds. More, when exercising. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.157|172.71.178.157]] 08:53, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
 ::And the nostrils contain very good analysis devices. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:26, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 The term "microscopic ants" supposedly refers to viruses and other microorganisms, not actual tiny ants. The actual concentration of airborne germs is pretty much in that ballpark, so it's not about sampling bias, it's about framing. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.103.36|162.158.103.36]] 17:00, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
 :There isn't even such a thing as a "microscopic ant". The smallest ant species is 0.8mm long. That's tiny, but easily visible without aid. And if there were 10,000 of them in a cubic meter of air, you'd notice. It would be like walking through a thick swarm of gnats. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 17:47, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
 Speaking for myself, I don't understand what would be difficult about taking air samples. Currently the article claims it's sampling bias, but why should that be anymore difficult with air than with e.g. soil?[[Special:Contributions/172.69.67.22|172.69.67.22]] 18:14, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
 : Tried to address this ... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.146.123|172.71.146.123]] 19:23, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:59, 23 April 2025
Line 30:		Line 30:

	The use of "cubic meter" here is pretty straightforward, but it did make me think of ways that units can be poorly communicated to make something sound incredible when it's actually true and not all that impressive (e.g., [https://smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2097 SMBC #2097]). If Megan had instead said "cubic tonne", it would still sound intuitively similar to "cubic meter" but would represent over 800 cubic meters (taking STP at sea level) or arguably up to 10,000 cubic meters if you count all the atmosphere up to the Karman line. (The volume of the atmosphere is around 5.2e19 cubic meters.) While the median average cubic meter of air obviously contains zero ants, the estimated total of 20 quadrillion ants on Earth yields a mean average of 0.0004 ants per cubic meter, which works out to up to 4 "ants per cubic tonne" of air. And if we go a little further, it gets even more interesting. Let's stick with "cubic meter" of air rather than cubic tonne. If we assume that the average ant is no "taller" than 1 cm, then virtually all those 20 quadrillion ants are necessarily contained to a volume of air no greater than the land surface area of Earth times 1 cm, which gives you a volume of 1.49e12 cubic meters of air which could possibly contain ants. The added internal volume of ant colonies, while larger than you might think, is negligible compared to the land surface area of the planet, so this actually yields a whopping 13,400 ants per "average" cubic meter, astonishingly close to Megan's claim. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.47.127\|172.70.47.127]] 16:21, 22 April 2025 (UTC)		The use of "cubic meter" here is pretty straightforward, but it did make me think of ways that units can be poorly communicated to make something sound incredible when it's actually true and not all that impressive (e.g., [https://smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2097 SMBC #2097]). If Megan had instead said "cubic tonne", it would still sound intuitively similar to "cubic meter" but would represent over 800 cubic meters (taking STP at sea level) or arguably up to 10,000 cubic meters if you count all the atmosphere up to the Karman line. (The volume of the atmosphere is around 5.2e19 cubic meters.) While the median average cubic meter of air obviously contains zero ants, the estimated total of 20 quadrillion ants on Earth yields a mean average of 0.0004 ants per cubic meter, which works out to up to 4 "ants per cubic tonne" of air. And if we go a little further, it gets even more interesting. Let's stick with "cubic meter" of air rather than cubic tonne. If we assume that the average ant is no "taller" than 1 cm, then virtually all those 20 quadrillion ants are necessarily contained to a volume of air no greater than the land surface area of Earth times 1 cm, which gives you a volume of 1.49e12 cubic meters of air which could possibly contain ants. The added internal volume of ant colonies, while larger than you might think, is negligible compared to the land surface area of the planet, so this actually yields a whopping 13,400 ants per "average" cubic meter, astonishingly close to Megan's claim. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.47.127\|172.70.47.127]] 16:21, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
		+
	The explanation needs to mention flying ants. They're certainly not microscopic, they only fly for one or two days a year and there are unlikely to be 10000 in any given cubic metre of air [citation needed], but they're definitely relevant. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.126\|141.101.99.126]] 09:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)		The explanation needs to mention flying ants. They're certainly not microscopic, they only fly for one or two days a year and there are unlikely to be 10000 in any given cubic metre of air [citation needed], but they're definitely relevant. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.126\|141.101.99.126]] 09:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:58, 23 April 2025
Line 30:		Line 30:

	The use of "cubic meter" here is pretty straightforward, but it did make me think of ways that units can be poorly communicated to make something sound incredible when it's actually true and not all that impressive (e.g., [https://smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2097 SMBC #2097]). If Megan had instead said "cubic tonne", it would still sound intuitively similar to "cubic meter" but would represent over 800 cubic meters (taking STP at sea level) or arguably up to 10,000 cubic meters if you count all the atmosphere up to the Karman line. (The volume of the atmosphere is around 5.2e19 cubic meters.) While the median average cubic meter of air obviously contains zero ants, the estimated total of 20 quadrillion ants on Earth yields a mean average of 0.0004 ants per cubic meter, which works out to up to 4 "ants per cubic tonne" of air. And if we go a little further, it gets even more interesting. Let's stick with "cubic meter" of air rather than cubic tonne. If we assume that the average ant is no "taller" than 1 cm, then virtually all those 20 quadrillion ants are necessarily contained to a volume of air no greater than the land surface area of Earth times 1 cm, which gives you a volume of 1.49e12 cubic meters of air which could possibly contain ants. The added internal volume of ant colonies, while larger than you might think, is negligible compared to the land surface area of the planet, so this actually yields a whopping 13,400 ants per "average" cubic meter, astonishingly close to Megan's claim. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.47.127\|172.70.47.127]] 16:21, 22 April 2025 (UTC)		The use of "cubic meter" here is pretty straightforward, but it did make me think of ways that units can be poorly communicated to make something sound incredible when it's actually true and not all that impressive (e.g., [https://smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2097 SMBC #2097]). If Megan had instead said "cubic tonne", it would still sound intuitively similar to "cubic meter" but would represent over 800 cubic meters (taking STP at sea level) or arguably up to 10,000 cubic meters if you count all the atmosphere up to the Karman line. (The volume of the atmosphere is around 5.2e19 cubic meters.) While the median average cubic meter of air obviously contains zero ants, the estimated total of 20 quadrillion ants on Earth yields a mean average of 0.0004 ants per cubic meter, which works out to up to 4 "ants per cubic tonne" of air. And if we go a little further, it gets even more interesting. Let's stick with "cubic meter" of air rather than cubic tonne. If we assume that the average ant is no "taller" than 1 cm, then virtually all those 20 quadrillion ants are necessarily contained to a volume of air no greater than the land surface area of Earth times 1 cm, which gives you a volume of 1.49e12 cubic meters of air which could possibly contain ants. The added internal volume of ant colonies, while larger than you might think, is negligible compared to the land surface area of the planet, so this actually yields a whopping 13,400 ants per "average" cubic meter, astonishingly close to Megan's claim. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.47.127\|172.70.47.127]] 16:21, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
		+	The explanation needs to mention flying ants. They're certainly not microscopic, they only fly for one or two days a year and there are unlikely to be 10000 in any given cubic metre of air [citation needed], but they're definitely relevant. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.126\|141.101.99.126]] 09:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:23, 22 April 2025
Line 28:		Line 28:
	::::This is an interesting arguement {{unsigned ip\|162.158.137.163\|22 April 2025 (UTC)}}		::::This is an interesting arguement {{unsigned ip\|162.158.137.163\|22 April 2025 (UTC)}}

−	The use of "cubic meter" here is pretty straightforward, but it did make me think of ways that units can be poorly communicated to make something sound incredible when it's actually true and not all that impressive (e.g., [https://smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2097 SMBC #2097]). If Megan had instead said "cubic tonne", it would still sound intuitively similar to "cubic meter" but would represent over 800 cubic meters (taking STP at sea level) or arguably up to 10,000 cubic meters if you count all the atmosphere up to the Karman line. (The volume of the atmosphere is around 5.2e19 cubic meters.) While the median average cubic meter of air obviously contains zero ants, the estimated total of 20 quadrillion ants on Earth yields a mean average of 0.0004 ants per cubic meter, which works out to up to 4 "ants per cubic tonne" of air. And if we go a little further, it gets even more interesting. Let's stick with "cubic meter" of air rather than cubic tonne. If we assume that the average ant is no "taller" than 1 cm, then virtually all those 20 quadrillion ants are necessarily contained to a volume of air no greater than the land surface area of Earth times 1 cm, which gives you a volume of 1.~~49e11~~ cubic meters of air which could possibly contain ants. The added internal volume of ant colonies, while larger than you might think, is negligible compared to the land surface area of the planet, so this actually yields a whopping ~~134~~,~~000~~ ants per "average" cubic meter. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.47.127\|172.70.47.127]] 16:21, 22 April 2025 (UTC)	+	The use of "cubic meter" here is pretty straightforward, but it did make me think of ways that units can be poorly communicated to make something sound incredible when it's actually true and not all that impressive (e.g., [https://smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2097 SMBC #2097]). If Megan had instead said "cubic tonne", it would still sound intuitively similar to "cubic meter" but would represent over 800 cubic meters (taking STP at sea level) or arguably up to 10,000 cubic meters if you count all the atmosphere up to the Karman line. (The volume of the atmosphere is around 5.2e19 cubic meters.) While the median average cubic meter of air obviously contains zero ants, the estimated total of 20 quadrillion ants on Earth yields a mean average of 0.0004 ants per cubic meter, which works out to up to 4 "ants per cubic tonne" of air. And if we go a little further, it gets even more interesting. Let's stick with "cubic meter" of air rather than cubic tonne. If we assume that the average ant is no "taller" than 1 cm, then virtually all those 20 quadrillion ants are necessarily contained to a volume of air no greater than the land surface area of Earth times 1 cm, which gives you a volume of 1.49e12 cubic meters of air which could possibly contain ants. The added internal volume of ant colonies, while larger than you might think, is negligible compared to the land surface area of the planet, so this actually yields a whopping 13,400 ants per "average" cubic meter, astonishingly close to Megan's claim. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.47.127\|172.70.47.127]] 16:21, 22 April 2025 (UTC)