Talk:3179: Fishing
The tug on a fishing line would be measured in newtons, not kilograms. 76.187.17.7 04:30, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- It's at least a C+ 65.35.15.18 05:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, but he is not measuring the force, he is measuring the "weight" (mass) of the thing he thinks he hooked. (e.g. a 5 lb fish)2603:8000:5E00:2913:EE02:2D56:E960:2CDE 05:21, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
YAY BERET GUY!Mathmaster (talk)
Beret Guy's estimate is, of course, absurd (or it would be for anyone else). His lifting capacity, the breaking points of his line and rod, the buoyancy of his boat and the force to break loose an individual piece of rock (the lowest of which would mark the upper bounds for his estimate) are (many) orders of magnitude lower than the force required to haul a 10^24 kg catch into the boat [citation needed, I guess] 627235 (talk) 11:42, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- He's not saying that he can reel it in, just estimating the size of the "fish" he's hooked. Barmar (talk) 14:57, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- When he pulls, there is a little bit of give (infinitesimal) as the planet moves - he might be sensing that and estimating based on it. Assuming you know the properties of the fishing line, like its stretch, and of the boat's surface area, buoyancy. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to estimate given perfect knowledge of the water, boat, line, forces, etc, even if the Earth is much more massive than the boat being pulled downwards R128 (talk) 15:22, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- At that massive scale, wouldn’t the upper bound of weight he could detect the buoyancy of the boat - beyond that he is no longer pulling anything up, but pulling himself down - so that the resistance he feels is the buoyancy keeping the boat up? 71.17.36.59 16:18, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
Planets don't have a catch size limit. By definition, a planet has cleared its neighborhood, meaning there's no need to maintain a breeding population. Now, dwarf planets and small solar system bodies are a different story, and the rules are rather strict. 209.188.63.98 19:08, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
Beret Guy is surprisingly inaccurate on this one. You'd need to divide the actual weight of Earth by 6 to his estimated weight. --DollarStoreBa'alConverse 19:23, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
Any reason to believe this is an ocean instead of a lake? I changed the transcript to make it more generic, but like "seafloor" better than "bottom," so would change it back if there is some reason to know it is an ocean. Bobthegoat123 (talk) 19:48, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
