From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

Products

Services

Android Apps

VPNs

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#9

#12

#13

#14

#1

87 /r/theydidthemath comments

#2

48 /r/theydidthemath comments

#3

47 /r/theydidthemath comments

#4

42 /r/theydidthemath comments

#5

21 /r/theydidthemath comments

#6

11 /r/theydidthemath comments

#7

10 /r/theydidthemath comments

#8

10 /r/theydidthemath comments

#9

10 /r/theydidthemath comments

#10

8 /r/theydidthemath comments

#11

7 /r/theydidthemath comments

#12

7 /r/theydidthemath comments

#13

6 /r/theydidthemath comments

#14

5 /r/theydidthemath comments

#15

5 /r/theydidthemath comments

1 /r/theydidthemath comment

Free

1 /r/theydidthemath comment

Free

1 /r/theydidthemath comment

Free

1 /r/theydidthemath comment

Free

1 /r/theydidthemath comment

Free

1 /r/theydidthemath comment

$0.99

1 /r/theydidthemath comment

Free

1 /r/theydidthemath comment

Free

2141 points

·
3rd Apr 2018

According to this amazon product description a single wafer would weigh about 0.32g.

According to this guy‘s page Jesus height might have been 5' 10" and his weight may be around 142 pounds. —> 64,41 kg

x = amount of wafers

0.32g * x = 64,41kg or 64410g

x=64410/0.32

x= 201281.25

You would have to eat around 200k of them.

If you went to church each week and ate exactly one wafer (52 a year) - you would NEVER eat a whole Jesus in your entire life.

1209 points

·
18th Sep 2018

My reply to a comment below:

A PNY 512GB micro SD is $350. So for 2 kg worth, it would be ~$1,400,000 and 2.048 Petabytes.

57.97 kB a meme.

4000 SD cards x $350 = $1.4 mil.

2000 g / .5 g = 4000 SD cards

2,048,000 GB / 0.000058 GB

**Or ~35,310,344,828 memes.**

962 points

·
25th May 2017

According to this Amazon listing 1000ct plastic spoons fit in a 11.2 x 7.2 x 6.1 inches box. That's 491 cubic inches for 1000 spoons, or 737.8 cubic inches for 1500 spoons.

In the box they will have been more efficiently packed than in the picture, so perhaps 1000 cubic inches is a reasonable guess.

A random bathtub that looks about the right size is 60 inches long x 30 inches wide. That's 1800 square inches.

Assuming the surface area consumed by the person is within the margin of error, 1500 spoons could make a layer a bit over half an inch deep.

I see no reason not to believe the image is of roughly 1500 spoons floating in a tub.

752 points

·
28th Sep 2019

Bumping up the brightness and structure in Instagram to see the cookie stacks better, I got somewhere around these wafer counts per stack (left to right):

- Stack 1: 25,28,32,36,39
- Stack 2: 20,14,10,6,3

So that’s 213 wafers or 106.5 Oreo cookies.

The 10 pack box in the background weighs 52.5 oz. An amazon question/answer says that there are 10 cookies per pack. But this 10 count cookie per 10 count pack weighs 39 oz (much less than the box in the photo). That’s 0.39 oz per cookie.

52.5 oz / 0.39 oz = 134.6 cookies

Nabisco would want an even amount of cookies in each pack, so let’s say 14 cookies per pack. That would be 0.375 oz per cookie which is pretty close to our original math.

Based on the stack count of 106.5 cookies, I think it’s safe to assume that they only used one box to make this mega stuffed cookie. So there is around 140 cookies worth of stuffing in that one cookie.

736 points

·
23rd Jun 2018

At first the volume:

I counted about 68 straws in the video (it's not that clear, since sometimes there are quite a few of the same color put together, which makes it hard to count them). Let's just assume there are 70 straws.

From what I found on the Internet, it seems that 10 inches is quite a common length of a straw and the diameter could be 0.28 inches. In meters that would be 0.254m and 7.1mm or 0.0071m.

Thus the volume is

V = A * h = PI * r^2 * h = PI * (0.0071m / 2)^2 * 0.254m * 70 = 7.04*10^-4 m^3. Or 0.704 liters.

Which is more than twice the volume of a coke can.

For the needed pressure difference we need to solve:

m * g = P * A

<=> density * V * g = P * A

<=> density * A * h * g = P * A |*1/A

<=> density * h * g = P

I found the density of coke to be 1.045 g/ml = 1.045 kg/l = 1045 kg/m^3

Let's assume the height difference from the can to the highest point is about 1 m. Thus we get:

P = 1045 kg/m^3 * 1 m * 9.81 m/s^2 = 10,251.45 Pa = 0.103 bar = 1.487 psi.

That should be it! Please let me know if I messed up ;)

708 points

·
5th May 2019

That would be 642 slices of this stuff, assuming no shipping. That's about $0.31 per slice.

Assuming each slice is ~2mm thick, that's 1.284 meters of cheese - 4.2 feet in freedom units.

265 points

·
14th Nov 2021

I think most responders are missing the point of the question.

To quote:

> if the Earth were flat and it was a dark night, a candle's flame could be seen from 30 miles away

OP is asking how high the flame would have to be to see the candle on the surface of the Earth, given that it's ** not flat**.

OP's correct answer is:

At 30 mi, assuming you are both at sea level, and you stand 2m tall, the candle will need to be at least 481 feet high for you to see it.

I'm basing this on the calculator at:

231 points

·
12th Jul 2017

Amazon actually have a service called AWS Snowball which you can use to import massive amounts (upto *petabyes*) of data into AWS without having to upload it, by shipping it to them physically.

They ship 80TB ruggedised specialized NAS drives to your location, you plug them into your network with 10Gbps connectivity, upload your data, ship them back to Amazon and they put your data into your AWS S3 storage.

210 points

·
22nd Dec 2018

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00NHQF6MG/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

47.99 / 790 = 0.0607....

So would could say that legos are actually about 6 cents each. This it would cost 3 billion for 50 billion pieces.

You would actually be able to buy 83,333,333,333 (or 83 billion pieces) which would make the wall roughly 66% larger.

196 points

·
1st May 2021

As a side note I wonder if this would even be a good captcha. Obviously most people would not be able to quickly solve it so bad start. But I think a computer could probably do pretty well in doing the actual selection. There are programs that use OCR/image recognition to translate math into latex code (see mathpix) pretty well. And I assume that testing if an integral is cognate improper would be fairly trivial to implement with some kind of symbolic solver program. I know captachas take clicking/speed/mouse movement into account to detect human input as well but this is a universal captcha problem. If you changed the problem definition for each captcha instance (change the desired integral property) then it would be harder for a computer as it would have to interpret the text into some kind of code for testing a function. Probably not impossible but by no means easy if there are even a few different kinds of problems.

164 points

·
13th Dec 2014

We will use the current estimate of the number of living humans based on this World Population clock of 7,280,000,000 people. We will also use Google's estimate for the amount of habitable land (since presumably people would like to survive on their land) on Earth of 24,642,575 square miles.

Dividing the amount of people by habitable land area, we get 0.0033849 mi^2 per person. Which is roughly 8766 m^2 (93,365 ft^2) per person of habitable land.

To put this in perspective this is 1.6 times larger than the average U.S. football field.

It's interesting that if you distributed people equally on habitable land on Earth you could easily talk to the nearest person.

137 points

·
30th Jan 2015

$0.00. Because the government basically never uses new tax revenue to offset tax liabilities from individuals. They just collect more money.

But what I think you're asking is how much per person the NFL would pay in tax. The non-profit arm of the NFL, which is separate from NFL Properties and NFL Ventures, " raked in more than $326 million from April 2012 to March 2013, almost of all of which came from "membership dues and assessments". (http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/22/us/nfl-nonprofit-taxes/)

Even getting taxed at the maximum corporate tax rate, 40%, that would be $130,400,000. There are about 240 million adults in the US paying some kind of tax, so that's about $0.54 per taxpayer.

If you're only looking at income tax, about 120 million Americans pay income tax, so that would be $1.08 per person paying income tax. (http://www.ask.com/government-politics/many-u-s-taxpayers-d77a9265390f4bdb)

118 points

·
16th Mar 2018

Buy one now, before you need it.

I have this one, the extra bend in the folding part makes every wine easy to open, and I have yet to break a cork, as it doesn't bend the cork.

https://www.amazon.com/Pulltex-5100-Corkscrew-Black/dp/B008F07S1Q

91 points

·
18th Sep 2018

A PNY 512GB micro SD is $350. So for 2 kg worth, it would be ~$1,400,000 and 2.048 Petabytes.

At 57.97 kB a meme.

4000 SD cards x $350 = $1.4 mil.

2000 g / .5 g = 4000 SD cards

2,048,000 GB / 0.000058 GB

**Or ~35,310,344,828 memes.**

86 points

·
12th Feb 2015

Shelled peanuts go on amazon for About 60 dollars for 25 lbs. based on that math you'd be looking at

25(lbs) / 60(dollars) = .416667 (lbs per dollar)

.416667 (lbs per dollar) * 10(dollars) = 4.16 lbs.

According to yahoo, one peanut weighs about 1 gram.

1 pound is 453 grams.

453 (grams) * 4.16 = 1887.5 (Shelled peanuts).

BUT THAT'S NOT ALL.

You're not going to eat them with the shell on. The shell accounts for just under 60% of the weight.

1887.5 * .4 = **755 nuts.**

That's a lot of nuts.

78 points

·
11th Sep 2016

According to this, "The total land surface area of Earth is about 57,308,738 square miles, of which about 33% is desert and about 24% is mountainous. Subtracting this uninhabitable 57% (32,665,981 mi2) from the total land area leaves 24,642,757 square miles or 15.77 billion acres of habitable land."

The World Population Clock says that, at the time of me writing this, the world population is about 7.45 billion people.

15.77 billion acres divided evenly among 7.45 billion people would leave each person with just over 2.1 acres of land.

78 points

·
19th May 2016

I was reading Doing Good Better (highly recommended by the way!) and in the book it said that if you earn more than k/year in the US you are part of the top 1% globally.

If you make k/year (or maybe 28?), you are part of the top 5%.

EDIT: Please also see /u/tiedyedvortex 's comment: his/her comment actually has sources and stuff.

76 points

·
30th Dec 2015

Total amount of cows in the world is 1.4 billion. On average we eat 0.047 cows per person per year.

So: 7000000000 times 0.047 = 280 million cows

1400000000/280000000= 5

So in about 5 years there would be no more. Also I guess milk would get in demand pretty quickly.

Sources: https://www.quora.com/How-many-chickens-cows-pigs-and-fish-does-an-average-human-consume-in-a-year http://www.statista.com/statistics/263979/global-cattle-population-since-1990/

72 points

·
10th Aug 2015

Considering that the total number of people who have ever lived on Earth is around 107.6 Billion people, we just subtract the current world population of around 7.3 Billion to get a total death number of 100.3 Billion. The current population of the Earth is 6.784% of the total human population ever.

58 points

·
26th May 2018

Well I have no idea how many calories you could get from eating a baby, but here’s the math on the pregnancy.

First trimester you don’t eat more. Second trimester you eat 340 cal a day more. Third is 450.

90* 340 + 90* 450 = 71,000 calories per baby.

But of course, mothers gain weight during pregnancy, so let’s subtract that. Roughly 5-9 pounds of fat gets gained during pregnancy, at 3,500 calc per pound of fat, that’s an average of 24,500 cals 71,000 - 24,500 = 46,500 cals put into the baby.

Now remember, lots of those calories are disappearing to fluids and forming structures that our body can’t metabolize such as bones and cartilage, so it’s likely there’s very little you could eat off a newborn baby, muscle tissue and fat stores, as well as organs are not going to return 46,500 calories, or even close to that. Even if the baby was 8 pounds of pure fat, you’re only getting 28,000 cals back by eating it.

Tl;dr Don’t have a baby if you’re starving, it’s not gonna help

Source 1: https://www.eatright.org/health/pregnancy/prenatal-wellness/healthy-weight-during-pregnancy

Source 2: https://www.webmd.com/baby/guide/healthy-weight-gain

57 points

·
3rd Jul 2017

This is one of Anton Balazh's portfolio.

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Anton+Balazh

he took NASA pictures (and other sources too), and created poligon models so he could render them using artificial lightning and projections. He tweaked quite a bit of variables in the process until they were visually appealing so not sure you could do the math on any of these.

If we look at kodiak island, the larger island at around 3, and knowing it's 150x60km more or less, I can roughly see the mountains there are 4-5 times smaller than the width. Call it 10-15km.

Knowing the largest elevation on that island is 1,362.2 m (wiki) it's safe to say he used something like a 10x magnification on the elevation scale to make it it appealing.

Elevation must be non linear though because Denali (6190m) does not appear to be 5 times taller than Kodiak island elevations although the perspective is very tricky and heavily distorted by the also unnaturally small curvature of the earth.

54 points

·
30th Nov 2018

Here's 12 gallons for $1199.99 (+$249.99 shipping) That's 45.4249 Litres for $1499.98 shipped, or $82.55 per refill, which you can do 18.16996 times.

​

Edit: Ok, here's my best deal: 20 gallons for $539.98, with free shipping. Buy 4 x5 Gallons, get a bulk discount, plus free 2-5 day shipping and the cyber coupon saves you more on top. That's 75.7082L which is 30.28328 refills at $17.83 each. Hell I've wasted that on one weekend before, that's a damn good deal.

49 points

·
31st May 2018

Not necessarily. The kind of metre sticks we commonly have in schools (in the UK, at least) are exactly a metre long. It makes measuring stuff a lot easier because you can just lay them one after another.

37 points

·
12th Dec 2015

The average person produces half a litre of farts per day. That means that from the age of eighteen -- when they're fully grown -- to the day they die (current US life expectancy for men is 78.84 years), the average human male will produce somewhere in the vicinity of 11,100 litres of farts. The Hindenburg, for comparison, contained about 200,000,000 litres of space; if you and eighteen thousand of your buddies band together and eat a lot of beans for the next sixty years, you could just about match it.

Ignoring the issues of thrust, which have been better dealt with elsewhere: what would happen if you just farted into a balloon? After all, you've got to store all of these farts somewhere. Surely that would be less harmful than a rocket-propelled asshole? According to this source, the relative densities are around 1.066 kg/m^3 for farts and 1.204 kg/m^3 for air; that means for every cubic metre of farts you have, you can lift a little less than 0.138 kg. You have 11.1 cubic metres of farts, which gives you a total lift of 1.53 kilograms. Good news! You can fart-lift a human brain, if you're willing to devote your life to intestinal cerebellar aeronautics.

34 points

·
7th May 2019

Assumptions:

Bag dimensions: 3ft diameter x 5 ft height

Volume of bag: 141 cubic feet

# of Bags: 20-30

Cheetoe Calories: 11.54 cal/piece (Source: Cheetoe)

Volume of a cheese puff: .56 oz (Source: Only Source I could find)

Math:

Cheetoes in one bag: ~242,335 pcs (141 CU.FT / .56 OZ/Pcs = 135707.4 oz/.56oz = 242335)

Calories in one bag: 2.79x10^(6) (2,796,541) calories in one bag (242335 x 11.54)

Total Calories: 20 Bag Est: 5.59x10^(7) (55,930,835.6) Calories (2.79x10^(6) x 20)

30 Bag Est: 8.38x10^(7) (83,896,253.4) Calories (2.79x10^(6) x 30)

​

So, I would guess between 55 million and 84 million calories

34 points

·
28th Aug 2019

So, let's start with the building density of South Essex. Maybe there was a better solution to this, but i've decided to just count the houses in a 500 by 500 meter square near Rayleigh, which, as far as i understand geography, is in South Essex. There i've counted 392 houses, which gives me the estimate of an average area of 637.75 m^(2) per house in South Essex. Thus, the total area flooded comes to about 19 132 500 m^(2).

While 60 cm is enough to wash away a car, it is certainly not enough to wash away a full house. I was unable to find a reasonable number for that, but i guess that a volume of water two meters high should carry enough of a punch. Thus, we have our volume estimate at 38 265 000m^(3), which is exactly 15 306 olympic swimming pools.

Assuming this monstrosity has the same proportions as the regular Sports Direct mug of tea, which at 350ml volume is 110mm high, we can estimate it to be 109 328 571 428.5714 larger by volume, being thus 4 781.65 times the height, which means that **it is 525.98 meters high.**

edit: fixed the volume estimates. Never underestimte the Sports Direct Mug.

29 points

·
22nd Sep 2021

I don't think Photoshop would much use for something like this.

Instead something like Algodoo would be better suited. I played around with it years ago and it's pretty good but I don't have the time to try an recreate this problem at the moment.

28 points

·
30th Nov 2018

No no no...

The non-clicky version is under $14 a gross (144ct). Assuming 0.27ml per is correct for those as well you're looking at a hair under $900.

Compare that to $90 for something more sensible

28 points

·
18th Apr 2018

I don't know how to do the math on the strength of the magnet, not sure how we measure that. I can do the math on the price though:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B074BQ2X6G/

For me, it's $12.49, I bought one a month or two back, it's a very strong magnet.

27 points

·
4th Jun 2015

According to advanced human nutrition, a healthy man is 15% bone, 45% muscle, 15% fat.

That means an 80 kg man would have 12 kg of bone, 36kg of muscles and 12 kg of fat.

Bone is made up of minerals which aren't use for energy.

Fat is universally 9 calories per gram.

Muscle is a little bit more complex. It will vary depending on the individual, since different DNA structures synthesize different types of muscle. A gram of protein is 4 calories, but that won't be useful for us by itself since muscle is mostly water. Hydrated lean muscles are about 20% or so protein with a negligible amount of glycogen. 36 kg of muscle would thus contain 7.2 kg of protein. The caloric density of protein is 4 cal/g.

So we have 12000 g* 9cal/g= 108000 calories from fat

+

7200 grams of protein* 4 cal/g= 28400 calories

=**136400 calories**

More if our 80 kg person is a woman, since women store more fat and have less muscle.

24 points

·
7th Mar 2017

Generally, the effect would be minimal if done as a general boycott and only for one day. I would need to know what day you are talking about to give a good estimate. A boycott in December is much different than one in January. Also, we would need a better definition of what anything means. Are you talking about electricity, natural gas, gas, diesel, food, water or just consumer goods? The one area where you can see a larger effect is with individual companies. If the day off happened to be at the last day of the year for say WalMart, you could cause them to miss earnings. Missing earnings can be a big deal and could cause a lot of wealth loss, but at one day, the impact is most likely minimal. For a boycott like this to really have an effect you would have to not buy anything for like a month. This would mess up forecasting, purchasing, supply chain and inventory. It would take a significant amount of time to recover from that because of the whipsaw effect.

All that said, the generic answer is $44B. There are 318.9 million people in the US and the average American spends $140 per day.

Google for US population.

21 points

·
30th Mar 2014

I think I can do this one.

According to this a camel can support about 1,000 pounds (456.6 kg)

Wolfram alpha doesn't have anything about straw, but I found hay has a density of 384 kg/m^3 when it's pressed.

a 1.189 cubic meter block of pressed hay would hypothetically break the camel's back.

But the number of straws is a bit trickier:

Lets say a strand of straw is .57 m x .005 m x .01m when compressed, has a volume of 2.85 x10^-5 m^3. Therefore the mass of a straw is roughly .011 kg.

.011 / 456.6 = **41,511 straws**

20 points

·
9th Jul 2015

https://www.desmos.com/calculator/gc19azxuck

plotted the min points and the max points

the min values are about 5.3 times level and the max values are about 16.4 times level

the exp for a level will be somewhere between 5.3 times the level and 16.4 times the level

19 points

·
8th Dec 2015

It has to be installed manually, since google removed it from the app store. The best non-root way to block adds is to use the AdBlock browser, otherwise it only blocks on wifi and after manually changing a lot of phone settings. You can download both Here.

19 points

·
22nd Apr 2014

Using this statistic that the average foot-to-bottom-of-neck height for a saddle horse is 5 feet to 5'8", it seems that each individual harpy column is something along the lines of a hundred feet or more, as I measured them to be about 20 times higher.

EDIT: Just to clarify, the horse and rider in this picture are riding *past* the statues and are just exiting the tunnel of the gate, **not** just exiting the gate doors behind.

18 points

·
1st Oct 2015

The average person farts 14 times per day and the average commuters travels 50 minutes a day. We will round up to an hour since people are in their cars for reasons other then commuting. Assuming equal distribution of farts that means you fart .58 times per hour. So in 365 days a there will be about 212 farts in the car.

Sources:

http://www.ask.com/vehicles/average-time-people-spend-commuting-work-e3f78de42a7709db

17 points

·
12th Jul 2018

The physics is probably way too complicated, but we can oversimplify immensely and just take the torque and divide by moment of inertia (1.94 x 10^7 kg m^2 according to this). So if we yoink some numbers from the guy who's currently top comment, you get .000505 radians per second per second of rotation, which means in 20 seconds you'd get a certainly perceptible roll of 11 degrees. However, this is if the plane doesn't self correct at all (and pretends gravity is always pointing optimally I guess but that's a much smaller factor). The plane is much stronger than the person^[citation_needed] - if we compare with the torque of the airplane (which, using wing length of 30m and wing area of 260 m^2, and also pretending the wings are rectangles), we get 2691000 n-m compared to the 9810 n-m of the 200 kg person. So apparently you need a 274 times denser, or 55000 kg person to match the torque of a boeing 747 wing. Of course it's impossible to purely generate lift with one wing and not the other... unless you ripped one off, I guess. So theoretically a one winged boeing 747 with a big dude with the density of twice the sun's core is balanced, for some definitions of balanced. Unfortunately further analysis/research has been fruitless as I can't seem to find the actual torque a boeing 747 is capable of producing, but I hope this was at least amusing.

17 points

·
25th May 2015

Hm. I put together a little thing that, for a given range [-N,N], counts the number of times that three integers a, b, c from that range have b² > 4ac, see here. From there, it seems that the percentage of cases with real roots is ~62%, however, the number keeps going down (slowly) as N gets larger, see here: http://i.imgur.com/0UczOiz.png

I guess one can make an argument for symmetry reasons that it should be 0.5 in the limit of N to infinity, though.

edit: the condition should read >=, not >. However, rerunning things doesn’t seem to change much and I’m too lazy to update the graph. Sorry.

In case the link with the code goes missing:

#include <iostream> #include <cstdlib>

void count(long long n) { long long a,b,c; unsigned long real_roots = 0; unsigned long imag_roots = 0; for(a=-n; a <= n; ++a) { for(b=-n; b <= n; ++b) { for(c=-n; c <= n; ++c) { if (b * b > 4 * a * c) { ++real_roots; } else { ++imag_roots; } } } } std::cerr << n << " \t" << real_roots << " \t" << imag_roots << " \t" << (real_roots/((double)imag_roots + real_roots)) << "\n"; }

int main(int argc, char** argv) { int max; if (argc == 1) { max = 20; } else { max = std::atoi(argv[1]); } std::cerr << "N \t#real \t#imag \t%real\n"; for(int i(1); i != max; ++i) { count(i); } return 0; }

15 points

·
29th Jul 2021

People seem weirdly obsessed with believing you can't buy them:

https://smile.amazon.com/Candy-Cigarettes-24-Count-Boxes/dp/B003X3DMLK

And I have seen them for sale in an olde timey candy shoppe.

EDIT: No affiliate link, buy it or don't - doesn't make me money.

15 points

·
9th Aug 2019

Let's see, I found that Escobar made roughly 420 million dollars a week so he would have made approximately 1.8 billion dollars a month.

I can't really imagine how much he paid for rubber bands or how much money he stacked in each rubber band. I'll assume he made stacks of 10'000 dollars each and that a pack of 500 rubber bands costs 4$.

If he made 1.8 billion dollars a month he would have had to use 1'800'000'000/10'000 = 180'000 rubber bands. Therefore he would have spent 180'000/500*4 = 1'440 $ which is less than 2'800 but still quite significant. The final result could vary widely based on how the money was stacked and how much he spent for rubber bands but 2'800 could actually be true.

15 points

·
7th Feb 2019

That's a cheap boost converter. I've toyed with building a tiny steam engine phone charger and bought a couple of these to test out. it didn't take too much effort spinning a motor to get the charging indicator on a phone to turn on (but it obviously didn't charge the phone for shit).

15 points

·
30th May 2018

I feel like 650 batteries for one day is surprisingly high, considering a 100 count pack form Amazon costs about $24, which would be the equivalent of around ~350 calories. Even factoring in the reduction down to 130 batteries a day, you'd still be looking at burning through around $25 dollars a day for just yourself in food.

15 points

·
11th Apr 2018

I'm going to assume this is a 43' freight trailer with interior dimensions of - H: 13' L: 41.5' W: 7.1'.

I'm going to use this package of 5-hr Energy as a basis. Assuming a height of 3.5", width of 6", and length of 7".

This trailer can fit 44 cases high, 13 wide, and 83 long, for a total of 47,476 cases, or 1,139,424 bottles, or 5,697,120 hours of energy.

14 points

·
1st Feb 2017

I don't think it's that high. It's in the top 10 websites by traffic in the US. What do you expect for the odds a random person on the street uses YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter? Reddit's more popular than Twitter, and just less than Wikipedia.

14 points

·
2nd Sep 2018

cool question. i had a hard time working with your variables so call radius r0. call the upper right point of the burrito rectangle E. call the angle E makes with the X axis x.

V = A * h

= (pi * r^2 ) * h

= (pi * (2 r0 sin x / (2 * pi))^2) * 2 r0 cos x

= 2r0^3 / pi * sin^2 x cos x

dV/dx = 2r0^3 / pi * d/dx(sin^2 x cos x)

= 2r0^3 / pi * (2 sin x cos x * cos x + sin^2 x (-sin x))

= 2r0^3 / pi * (sin 2x cos x - sin^3 x)

forgot, but let's put the diameter thing in terms of x

r0 - r0 cos x > 2 r0 sin x / pi

1 > 2 sin x / pi + cos x

so actually the diameter requirement throws out everything below x = 1.134 or about 65 degrees. i think standard burrito technique is more complex and goes to some intermediary point between the opposite side of the cylinder and the center, and the rest is kind of taken up by the sides.

anyways so back to the volume derivative graph, since we're only interested from 1.134 <= x <= pi/2 and the function is monotonically decreasing in that region, we have to pick x = 1.134. substitute back into V, V = 0.221 r0^3

this was surprisingly ugly and i would be very interested to see a more elegant solution

14 points

·
8th Mar 2014

Goomba stomp.. meaning just jump up and jump down, both feet on a head?

Well, the average skull of a healthy person can take ~500lbs of pressure (Source) before it would cave in. That being said, you're not carrying around a 500lbs iron cube, you're jumping up and down on someone, presumably in a fight of some kind.

The average vertical leap of a human male aged 21-25 is 28 inches. (Source)

I'm being called away from my desk so I'll return to this shortly.. If someone wants to punch this into wolfram go nuts :P

14 points

·
8th Jan 2021

Wintergreen toothpicks. Actually no calories, lots of the flavor you like, something to keep your mouth occupied. And the flavored toothpicks keep their flavor for like an hour.

Better to be that weird guy with a toothpick constantly on the side of his mouth than downing 10 boxes of tictacs a day.

14 points

·
31st Mar 2015

Using this packet as a reference, you get 2quarts/packet. That is equal to 1.892L/packet.

According to the USGS, there is approximately 1.376x10^9Km^3 water on the planet. That is equal to 1.386x10^21L.

(1.386x10^21L)/(1.892L/packet)=**7.326x10^20 packets. Assuming that the linked Amazon page is represented at $30.97 for 96 packets, that's $2.363x10^20USD. That's over 2 billion billion dollars in packets alone.

However, I'm no limnologist, but there's no way you could ever reach a homogeneous concentration of Kool Aid. Kool Aid will naturally sink so that helps but it's a tiny factor in a huge system that is pretty much working entirely against you. Every time it rains you'd be set back and have to replenish the Kool Aid. Wherever you got significant evaporation you'd have to add water. It's easy out of the scope of any project in human history.

14 points

·
24th Aug 2019

Im using M to denote Menopoly money

$21.49 for 3 sets on amazon

20,580M per set so 61,740M in total for about 2872.96M per $1 USD

1,000,000,000M is about $348,073 USD

14 points

·
10th Apr 2018

This is going to be a really rough calculation. I'm assuming there's a wide variety of wool yarn - thickness/length - so I'm just going to use this as my template.

This ball of yarn:

200g

320 meters (350yd)

1600 m/kg

Diameter of 14cm (5.5 in, based on package size)

Volume of 1437cm^3

Density of 139kg/m^3

Assuming this Earth-sized ball of yarn is the same density throughout - so ignoring the effects of gravity/compression/whatever.

Earth's volume is 1.083 x 10^21 m^3

Multiplying by the density of the yarn gives us 1.5 x 10^23 kg of yarn.

Multiplying by 1600m/kg = 2.4 x 10^26 meters of this yarn.

Edit: formatting

13 points

·
24th Jul 2014

interesting...

I've been with my so for almost 3 years, we started by having sex twice daily and now it has decreased to 4-5 times/week... we also have had brief patches of no-sex, due to work travels, medical treatments or severe periods.

I could conclude the following.

Using this site: http://www.timeanddate.com/ we've been together for 1028 days.

We haven't had sex at least 30 days because of my work.

We haven't had sex at least 15 days because of her work.

We haven't had sex at least 30 days because of her periods.

We haven't had sex at least 15 days because of medical treatments.

(I should make an excel file too!)

That left us with 938 sex days x 85% chance of sex happening x (90% chance of us doing it once) & (10% chance of doing it twice) = 938x0.85x(0.9x1+0.1x2) = 877 times! whoa!

Our sex sessions have a 50% chance of a 40 mins sex, including foreplay (but only about 20 mins of PIV pumping) and 50% chance of a quickie (3-5min)(morning sex, sex before work, sex before dinner with her parents, sex after the movies and just before bed). We usually put music during sexy times and I've seen we can match a house music beat (~128bpm) by one pump every 2 beats.

So, every sex session could be 0.5x20min x 128/2+0.5x4minx128/2 = 768pumps!!! whoa! I guess there's something wrong there, but math doesn't lie! (or OP's data was skewed)

So, after 2 years and 8 months... We've had sex 877 times with an average of 768 pumps... my dick is below average in lenght, it will not tear her vagina (as some tifu posts i've read) but I'm absolutely happy with my 5 incher.

**And the grand total goes toooooooo (drum rolls)....3,367,680" = 280,640ft = 85,539m! or 85.5km! or 53.16miles!!!!**

MY GOD! Forget the excel thing! I should put an altar to her!!!.

13 points

·
9th Apr 2018

The average radius of the Earth is about 6371Km. The surface area is therefore 4πr^2 = 510,064,472 Km^2 .

The current world population is a bit over 7.614 billion.

( 7.614×10^9 ) ÷ 510,064,472 gives 1 human per 14.9Km^2 . Square rooting this gets the side length of each person's square (3.86Km).

So the distance between any two people is about 3.86 Km (2.298 miles for you freedom people).

The actual distance will be slightly off because the earth isn't a sphere, or flat.

Edit: I mean the reciprocal of that:

1/3.86 = 0.259 Km^2 .

So one human every 259m or 283Yd

13 points

·
5th Aug 2019

I found this easel online that I’m going to use as an approximation to the one shown since it looks as similar as I could find. That easel is 2 feet. The tray is adjustable, so since it looks like it’s half-way up, we’re going to say that the visible part of the easel is 1 foot, which we will use as our scale. That means that the character next to it would be around 4 foot 5 inches tall. In his comics, all of the characters are usually around the same height, so we’re going to assume most of the crowd is also around 4 foot 5. The character next to the easel’s head is around 2 feet, so we will assume the same of the tall character. Since the head and part of the shoulder is visible above the crowd, it is actually very possible that he is actually 6’9.

12 points

·
20th Jan 2016

This is a good one for back-o-envelope estimation:

FB market cap is around 270 billion.

Hershey's *total worldwide revenue* is about 7.5 billion.

Obviously, only a small fraction of that is cups, but let's say it's *all* cups, and double that for retail markup to 15 billion a year.

I don't recall cup package expiration dates, certainly 5 years or less, so even if 5 years of cups at 15 billion a year were on the shelves, 5 x 15 billion = 75 billion.

Considerably less than the market cap of FB (and the latter does not necessarily even get you the "entire" FB company - just the shares available on market which would probably net you controlling interest, but does not preclude shareholders keeping their shares and other share types that are not available to you for purchase, nor take into account the likely spike in FB price (and correspondingly higher purchase price) by your attempt at a takeover).

Cups are *good*, but not *that* good - your friend is wrong.

12 points

·
12th Aug 2018

Ok so with the current population at my time of checking being 7,642,462,325 (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/) let’s do the maths with that.

The world data bank appears to give female population to be around 3.94 billion. So 3,940,000,000. If we only account for a steady sum of births each year, therefore excluding the growth percentages. we would also need the birth per year data. So births this year are standing at 89,396,070. Assuming Best case scenario. Further assumptions also imply 1 months recovery time to fall pregnant again and assuming all pregnancies are viable.

So 2118 is 100 years from now. 100x12=1200. So it’s 1200 months. For each individual to fall pregnant only once we get 3.94x10^11 over the course of 100 years. So we can also work out the number of times an individual is able to get pregnant over the span of 100 years given let’s say that they are only able to get pregnant until 50. So we multiply our original number by let’s go 35 assuming everyone starts getting pregnant at 15. That works out to be 1.379x10^13 if I’m not mistaken. So 35 years of viable pregnancies every single year for the next 100 years would result in 1.379x10^13 becoming the population. Not accounting for the increase over time or deaths.

12 points

·
29th Sep 2014

I'm not a structural engineer but I'm pretty sure the second arrangement would require quite a bit more force to break the pencils.

These are screen captures (with my annotations added) from the Consumer Reports iPhone bending video here: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/09/consumer-reports-tests-iphone-6-bendgate/index.htm

12 points

·
30th Sep 2015

We have a M3 of ca. 75 Trillion dollars and a population of around 7.3 billion, so it'd be ca. 10,2k.

Of that, only a third would be quickly accessible, though. The rest is long term investments, saving accounts, market funds, long term deposits, etc.

If you fear your wallet would overflow, don't fret, though: you'd not even get 680$ worth of cash.

Sources:

11 points

·
5th Dec 2018

Likely not burn in, but temporary image perisitence. There doesn't seem to be any regular time for this to start as it would be different for every panel. It would be first noticeable after about 2 hours, but for it to stay around a bit longer you're looking at closer to 20 hours.

11 points

·
28th Jun 2016

You realize, of course, that your logic is flawed. Saying only 3/196 countries don't use metric is meaningless since it does not account for actual population. It would imply that 1.5% of the world does not use it when, in reality, it's closer to 5.1% of the world's population. Even then, what does that matter, right? 95% still use metric, so lets make everyone use it here!

Wrong. Per Alexa, 52.9% of reddit's visitors are located in America. Obviously I couldn't tell you what percentage of the visitors to this specific sub are located in the U.S. versus the rest of the world, but the fact remains that the majority of hits reddit.com gets are coming from a country that uses feet and inches. The point is not that USCS is superior, I agree that metric is a much nicer, more functional system to use. The point is that here, in this sub, there are a lot of users who don't know metric. The simplest way to solve the problem is, in my view, precisely what I already outlined: reply in whatever system OP used. If OP did not give units from a particular system, try to give both. If you see only one system used and you'd like the conversions, do them yourself and post them!

11 points

·
8th Aug 2014

The tesla model S has a 85 Kwh battery. http://www.teslamotors.com/models/features

The Macbook pro, which I'm not sure if it's the "top macbook" since I don't use Apple products, claims that it has a 63.5 Watt-hour battery (https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs/), so already the Model S has a battery life that is 1,338.6 times longer than the macbook.

The Laptop itself has a 60W Magsafe power adapter, which means that if you were to run that power adapter at full power constantly, you'd be able to run the laptop for **1416 hours, or just about 59 days**. This is opposed to the hour of battery life you would get from running that macbook at full power with its regular battery.

I'm not sure if the graphics load or anything else matters if the power adapter is limiting you to 60w, but 60w doesn't sound like a lot for a computer, especially a MacBook. Someone else should probably correct me on how much power a MacBook can use before it blows.

Also interesting would be how much heat that would give off.

11 points

·
16th Aug 2015

Pulling numbers from the first answer here, Genghis Khan for sure. Even the lowest estimates for the deaths inflicted by his horde exceed the deaths caused by in the Holocaust or in Pol Pot's purges, and the median estimates are equal to Mao's policies and higher than Stalin's numbers.

As for the UK and US, even if you attributed *every* native american death from war or disease in all of the Americas to the US and then added every death caused by the Atlantic slave trade, you would not quite make make Genghis Khan's death toll.

If you add the slave trade together with the deaths the British caused in Africa, you still don't match Genghis Khan's casualty figures, either.

This is all in raw figures, too. If you count by percentage of the world's population, the you need to factor in the difference in population between the Mongol conquests and the other genocides.
In 1300, the population of the world was ~200 million. At the time of the Columbian Exchange, the population was ~450 million, and by 1800 it was ~900 million, so the Brits and the Americans would have to two people for every one person the Mongols killed. By 1930, the population was just over two billion, so Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot would have to kill five people for every one person Genghis Khan killed in order to make the same dent in the population of the world. Since none of them actually manage to decisively beat the Great Khan *even in raw numbers*, I would say Khan is the clear winner.

TL;DR: You did know Genghis Khan was a bad motherfucker, right OP?

10 points

·
5th Mar 2014

The average car has 30,000 parts. Assuming that each part has to be installed in a specific order, you have 30,000! permutations, which is a number larger than any website I could find can calculate. Add in to this the information that each part must go in a specific location, and the probability is essentially 0.

10 points

·
8th Apr 2014

50 inch diagonal measurement of a 16:9 TV is 24.5" inches or 622 millimeters tall.

If you believe my previous calculation (honestly I could have made a mistake anywhere, but I guess 20/7.3 isn't that far off from 20/8), so you want your pixels to be .64mm apart at 20 feet, so you need about 622/.64 or 971 pixels from top to bottom (971P).

So your 1080P television should be more than sufficient already at 20', even if you had ultra super amazing 20/7.3 vision.

That's a little surprising to me actually, but then again 20' is really, really far away for a TV (my 50" 1080P is much closer than 20' from my sofa). If you were sitting more like 10' away, you'd need about 1840 pixels from top to bottom, but again, only if you had super incredible vision.

These seem to sort of agree with me (as in I believe my calculations are within an order of magnitude):

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-4k-tvs-are-stupid/

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

10 points

·
20th Jul 2017

> Even though Spotify won't say it, we've heard several times from industry folks that Spotify ads are extremely cheap and bring in little money, and are mostly there to annoy people into buying a subscription.

Link Spotify makes its real money from subscriptions.

In 2015, they made $3.01 on their average user in ads, but made $67.99 on average from subscriptions. Source

10 points

·
2nd Nov 2018

According to this study, a falling human in perfect position will have a drag coefficient of about 0.2 - 0.3, so lets say 0.25. Average male is around 95kg. surface area of a human foot is 300cm2, so we kan use the formula k=1/2*C*A*rho. Rho is air density, C is the drag coefficient and A is the surface area. We find k=0.0031kg/m. Plugging that and the data above into this calculator for laziness gives us that the velocity of this guy is 34m/s at impact, which is If hits the water he will have to decelarate before he hits the bottom of the pool. Generously saying that this neighbourhood pool is 2.5m deep, he will have to decelerate his 34 m/s in about 0.15s. Which is 25G, about three times as much as fighter pilots will dare to risk.

This guy would not make it to the pool, and if he would, he would break most of the bones in his legs on impact with the water and the rest of them hitting the pool bottom.

10 points

·
28th Mar 2019

You can buy ants on amazon. Not sure the shipping costs, but it would only cost you 14.3 million dollars for 79 million ants. If you can use the ants to rob a bank for more than 14.3 million you're in the money. They probably offer a bulk discount.

9 points

·
30th Nov 2017

okay well the packing density of m&ms is about 68% (this comes up a lot on this sub) meaning 32% of the container will be air. the volume of a single m&m is .636 cubic centimeters. so that works out to 1.6 mil * .636 cc / 0.68 ~= 1500 liters or 53 cubic feet or roughly the cargo area of a honda fit.

9 points

·
29th Apr 2015

Marketwatch did a nice breakdown here, not as extensive as the top comment though http://www.marketwatch.com/story/empty-ballpark-could-cost-orioles-1-million-today-2015-04-29

Average attendance this season: 33,288 Average ticket price in 2015: $24.95 Money spent on concessions per fan, on average: $6 Total: $1,031,928

9 points

·
20th Nov 2017

Likely, what this meme is intended to convey is that 25% of Americans have a negative net worth (total assets minus total liabilities). As someone mentioned in another comment on this post, you can have $250k in mortgage debt, but if your home is worth $400k, you have a positive net worth of $150k.

According to this article from the Motley Fool, 14% of American Households have a negative net worth.

In order for that to equate to 25% of all Americans, it would mean that the average house with negative networth would have to be 1.79 times larger than the average American household.

According to this Census Brief, the average American household is 2.58 people. If the average household with negative net wealth was 4.6 people, then it is possible that these numbers hold up, but, intuitively, it is probably more likely that the negative net wealth households are actually younger and smaller, than positive net wealth households (imagine a single young man with student loan debt, versus a family with income and assets), so chances are that this meme is wrong.

9 points

·
20th Mar 2014

So I started this today at 2:50PM PST.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwFE1YWUmDg1dXFGT0NaYUMzdE0/edit?usp=sharing

Edit: This is how far it was at 35min. But now I actually want to use my computer so I stopped it. Imgur

9 points

·
18th Sep 2015

There have been about 108 billion ever. We currently have about 7.4 billion people, 102 million births/year, and 42 million deaths/year. Assuming a similar percentage is kept up, we will hit 216 billion people ever somewhere around the year 2300 (280 years away), with a living population of 70 billion.

9 points

·
3rd Jan 2015

If you go to 0:18 of this scene, the people in the shot are slightly smaller than Derek's iris. Irises are about 1.2cm in diameter and the average human is about 170cm in diameter so its probably a 1:200 scale model.

The little men in the shot look similar to this product from Amazon.

9 points

·
1st Feb 2018

It's sold in the mens section in two different online stores Amazon and FitnessMagazine.

8 points

·
24th Nov 2017

It's hard to get exact numbers without meticulously counting everything but we can get a good lower bound by looking at what they do with the paper.

Luckily there's a point in the middle where they stack up all the paper. They make 4 paper "staircases" each about half their height. Damian Kulash is 188 cm whereas Andy Ross is 180cm. So approximately 92cm high staircases. Assuming each step height is equal, you can combine all 4 staircases into one tower 9.2m high. The thickness of paper is ≈.1mm so this would be 92000 pages.

The cost of the paper in [bulk]https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Factory-Prices-A4-Copy-Double-A_50032540049.html?spm=a2700.7724857.main07.18.21cfd1c3kPAvGn seems to be at 20 cents per box. Each box has 8 reams, each ream has 500 sheets, so $4.60 for all that paper.

These are full color images but although there are a lot of pages there are also a lot of printers. We know we need a minimum of 574 ink cartridges for each of the printers. At 160 pages per printer it can't be more than 4 cartridges per printer so this factor of 4 doesn't change much considering you can buy cartridges in bulk for a $1 a piece. That would bring the ink costs to $2296.

Cheaper wireless printers are available in bulk at the $10 price point, which brings the price to $5740 for the printer.

The total cost of all of that is $8040.

8 points

·
15th Dec 2018

The current world population as of writing this comment is:

7,640,242,100 Worldometer

The current death rate per year is:

55,300,000 ecology.com

Multiplying the death rate by 18 and subtracting it from the world population;

6,644,842,100

This is just an approximation.

(Edited for spelling)

8 points

·
31st Dec 2017

According to this source all cash and money in bank accounts sums up to $90.4 Trillions. Cryptocurrencies are excluded from this number.

Now we just divide this number by the number of living persons. Currently there about 7.6 Billion people alive according to this site.

That will result in $90.4 Trillion / 7.6 Billion = $11894.74

8 points

·
8th Nov 2017

Using data from here: http://www.ecology.com/birth-death-rates/ we can see that there are 65.7 million births in a 6 month period and there is 27.65 million deaths in the same time frame. Right now there are 7,579,673,839 people alive (at the time I retrieved this from here). So if no babies are born we have a loss of 27.65 million people which gives 7,552,023,839. This is a -0.36% change from our starting position. If babies were born and people died like normal the population would be 7,619,523,839 which is a 0.89% difference from no births. So ultimately it would not create a huge difference. Just for fun, if you wanted a 10% decline in world population starting now, no babies would have to be born for 13.7 years.

8 points

·
5th Oct 2015

I didn't do this, but user Kynan Eng attempted to solve this problem on Quora. His estimate brought it up to a little over 900 billion USD.

8 points

·
30th Apr 2014

the truck is about 4x2 meters,

http://www.inspirationspaint.com.au/paint-calculator

100,000 x 40 = 4,000,000

I'm sure they get paint cheaper, but work force required to paint it brings it up again.

8 points

·
19th Jun 2018

Apparently, a Pringles chip can has a diameter of *3 in.* or *7,62 cm*. Let’s remove *5 mm* to make up for the can and the space so we are left *7,12 cm* or *0,0712 m*.

The diameter of the earth is *12 742 km* or * 12 742 000 m*.

This means the earth has a diameter *167 393 589,069* times bigger than the diameter of a Pringles.

According to this, a pringles weigh *1,75 g*, multiply this by *167 393 589,069* and we get *292 938 780,872 g* of pringles.

Then we take the nutrition value, so *150 calories per 28g*, we get an astonishing *~ 1,5693e+9*, divide that by the average human needs of *2 000 calories* (fuck the babies, I don’t care about them), this means we could feed around *~ 784 657,5 people* for one day with this chip.

8 points

·
3rd Dec 2016

It's called Algodoo, and it's free: http://www.algodoo.com/

I once used it to model several different types of volcanoes for a high school project, it worked pretty well. You can also attach graphs that measure velocity and acceleration over time.

8 points

·
8th Jan 2021

Here's what I'd do: get some bulk toothpicks off of amazon, and some peppermint oil. Soak the toothpicks in the oil for a few days, and then put those in your mouth instead. You get the same minty goodness on demand with none of the sugar. It's cheaper, too.

Taking the first result I get on google, a pack of 12 tic tac boxes is $19.34. At that rate, over those 17 days, you spent about $255. In contrast, 4 oz of food grade peppermint oil (which lasts me about a year) is $20, and a box of 1000 good quality toothpicks on amazon is $6.

That's what I did to help myself quit smoking. It helped to just have a thing to do that didn't hurt me and was socially acceptable and cheap. It's been years and I still do it, but less compulsively, and have saved thousands of dollars.

7 points

·
18th Apr 2015

According to this book the daily cost of breathing is 36-72 kilocalories (C)

According to this government blog on average we breathe 17,280-23,040 times a day. (b/d aka breaths per day)

It takes about 3500 C/1.0 kg of fat ignoring possible metabolic differences and other nuances.

All things considered (72. C)/(23,040 b/d) = 0.003125 C/b

(3500 C/Kg) = x/(0.003125 C/b)

x = (3500 C)/(0.003125 C/b) =1,120,000 breaths/kg or about 48 days of breathing on the upper bound in a healthy individual. With significant figures the math is 1,100,000 breaths.

This math was done in a tim hortons so beware my quantitative analysis could be off and I have a wrong unit/math.

7 points

·
21st Nov 2018

According to the Boston Globe, the average person blinks about every four seconds. Since people do not blink when they sleep, let us assume that everyone is awake, all of the time. Because infinitesimal differences in time could always be observed, a simultaneous blink is technically impossible. So, let us assume that the situation described is fulfilled if everyone blinks in the same second. If everyone blinks at random times, with average frequencies each of 4 seconds, then for any given second, the probability that one person blinks is 25%. Given a world population of 7.5 billion, then the chance that everyone blinks is

P=(1/4)^(7.5^9) ≈ 1/(10^10000000000).

This probability is very low. But, seconds are also short, and as more seconds pass, the chance that the event will occur at least once increases. After 1 hour, the probability that everyone has blinked in the same second is 1-(1-1/(10^10000000000))^3600=0.0000004. After a day, it is 1-(1-1/(10^10000000000))^86400=0.000009. After one year, there is a 1-(1-1/(10^10000000000))^31536000=0.4% chance that everyone has blinked in the same second. After 220 years, the chance is 1-(1-1/(10^10000000000))^(31536000*220)=50%. So, on average, one would have to wait 220 years for everyone to have blinked at the same time.

7 points

·
27th Oct 2021

UH-60 Blackhawk main rotor D spins at 258 rpm

- 4.3 per second
- let’s estimate their head is 0.75 metres from the Center. So one rotation means the head travels 2 * 0.75 * pi = 4.71 metres
- 4.3 * 4.71 metres = 20.25 m/s = ~73km/h

Using this:

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/centrifugal-force

And a 5 kg head:

2,734 newtons

1 G = 9.8 newtons per kg

2734/9.8/5 = 55.8Gs on their head

…which sounds high? I must be making an error somewhere

7 points

·
15th Feb 2014

Hmm. Averaging the weight ranges given on Wikipedia for male and female birds gives us 587g (0.587 kg) for a male and 1205g (1.205kg) for a female.

Their top speed in a stoop is "over 322 km/h." Let's go with 322 km/h. That translates to 89.4444 m/s.

I'm not sure how to define the length of time the impact would take in order to calculate acceleration. Let's go with a tenth of a second to keep the math simple.

0.587kg*89.4444m/s, divided by 0.1 second = 525.03 N

1.205kg*89.4444m/s, divided by 0.1 second = 1077.80 N

According to this link it takes about 3300 N to fracture someone's rib and around 4000 to fracture a femur. Having a hard time finding a number for cracking a skull, but I imagine it's somewhere in that neighbourhood.

I'm not a mathemetician or a biologist, but I'm gonna say no. It would hurt like shit and you would definitely sustain some flesh wounds, but even if it pegs you on the top of the head I'm pretty sure you'd walk away from it. They're just not heavy enough.

7 points

·
22nd Jul 2014

7 points

·
15th Jul 2015

This wikipedia article suggests that there were 5 million people when talking about population growth over the millennium.

>possibly from 5 to 7 million people.

10,000 is 0.2% of 5 million. So if we add 0.2% of today's population.

The World Population Clock shows 7,238,708,661 billion people when I looked. Add 0.2% of that (14,657,417 new people) and you get 7,253,366,078 as the new population.

7 points

·
3rd Jan 2015

The period of an object's rotation is a function of the semimajor axis of its orbit. The equation is 4pi^2 /GM × r^3 = T^2, where G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the sun, r is the semimajor axis, and T is the period.

When I run the numbers I come up with a figure of 1.481×10^11 meters for the semimajor axis of Earth's orbit. Currently Earth's orbet has a SA of about 149.6 million kilometers, which with some fanciful decimal work comes to about 1.496×10^11 meters. That may not look like much (1.5×10^9) but that's a million kilometers that needs to be accounted for.

By the way this figure of 0.9899 AU falls well within all but one estimation of the inner edge of the Goldilocks Zone of our Sun. We'll be fine for a few centuries.

7 points

·
1st Jul 2017

according to this the surface are of the statue of liberty is 1268.64 m^2. Another guy used about 1.5 l / m^2 when power washing his patio. So dividing those gives us 845,76 liners of water. Because of the irregularities in the surface of the statue and the hard to get to areas I’d say you can round this up to 1000 litres.

Edit: of course I should have multiplied 1268.64 * 1.5 = 1902.96 liters. Sorry for this silly mistake.

7 points

·
16th Apr 2021

You can buy a 0.004989516 kg bag of feathers from Amazon. The package has a volume of 0.05899343 liters.

You would need 20042 of these bags to weight 100kg, taking up a volume of 1182.3 liters. That is a cube 1.06m on each side.

7 points

·
2nd Sep 2017

A 1 ft^2 paper towel can absorb anywhere between a half and two and a half ounces of water, according to Consumer Reports. I'll split the difference and say 1 and a half ounces.

Houston got 732 billion gallons of rainfall during the course of the Hurricane The amount of actual flood water is much tougher to calculate.

A 30-pack of Bounty paper towels costs $62.95 on Amazon, and each roll has 56 sheets.

Each roll can soak up 84 ounces (.656 gallons) and each pack can soak up 2,520 ounces (19.688 gallons)

With these numbers, you would need 37,180,008,127 30-packs. At $62.95 a piece, you're looking at $2,340,481,511,594.65 in paper towels to dry down Houston.

6 points

·
16th Feb 2016

Since Bernie cannot undo the Iraq war, how does he plan to pay for free college? He proposes a tax on "Wall Street speculation", i.e. a 0.5% Financial Transaction Tax. This means that the government receives a cut from both the buyer and seller of every stock sold, including those held by individual pensions, 401(k)s, mutual funds, etc.

The EU is currently considering an FTT, and their analysis suggests that a 0.1% FTT would reduce the EU GDP by 1.7% (source). Bernie's tax is 5x larger than this.

But if you want to know whether this will collect the amount predicted, do what Bernie likes to do and look at Northern Europe. Sweden instituted a 0.5% FTT in the 80s and it collected about 3% of what was expected because investors changed the way they traded, reducing capital gains as well (source).

It requires a special kind of cognitive dissonance to simultaneously believe that Wall Street is evil and games the system but that they won't change the way they trade in response to a tax like this one.

6 points

·
21st Jan 2015

I think I understand your question a bit differently than /u/LordBrandon, so here's my shot at it:

As I understand it, your birthday party starts at midnight of your birthday and ends at midnight of the day after, but you can add additional time to it by traveling west. I assume you have no limitations such as staying in a certain country, but mean across the whole globe. So you want to start your party at the earliest time on the planet it is your birthday, and end it at the latest time on the planet it is your birthday.

Well, first we have a base of 24 hours; a day is 24 hours, so you get 24 hours to party if you didn't move. Next, let's look at a time zone map; You'll notice Kiribati likes to add more time zones that are technically in the West, but are continuations of the pattern going East.

For each time zone we move West, we gain an hour of party time. We'll start at GMT+14. That's how many hours we are ahead of Greenwich and the "earliest" time zone there is. It's 14 difference from there to Greenwich at GMT+0. Then we get to go a whole 'nother 12 hours to GMT-12 where we meet the International Date Line. That's 24 base, 14 added in the East, 1 for GMT+0 at Greenwich, and 12 added in the West. Looks like you got 51 hours to party, so get started!

Edit: If you're looking for the same midnight of the same day rather than a day later at the end, then take away the 24 hours difference and just count the time zones: you'll get 27. In that case, you have 27 hours to party!

6 points

·
12th May 2014

Apparently, you have to burn 3500 calories to lose 1 pound of weight.

For a 180-pound person, walking 2 mph burns 204 calories per hour according to http://www.myfitnesspal.com/exercise/lookup. That's the same thing it says for mowing the lawn using a riding mower, mild stretching, fishing from a boat, or playing billiards. It says sitting ice fishing is 163 calories. So presumably 204 calories per hour represents their best guess for a task which is just slightly more than sitting doing virtually nothing. Let's just round that to 40 calories' difference between the two.

3500/40 = 87.5, so at 4 hours a weekday we're looking at about four weeks of your worktime sitting at your desk going from inactive to fidgety just to burn one pound. Ten pounds? See you next February.

6 points

·
20th Oct 2018

I plotted this out in a graphing calculator: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/dvmvyrymfk

A 2m person needs to stand about 2.3km away from the point of contact.

​

This is assuming the Earth and Moon are perfect spheres, of course. And tidal fores aren't current ripping them apart. And it would be possible to stand in this gravity field. And the orbital motion of the Moon through the atmosphere isn't causing wind strong enough to rip the skin off your bones. And...

6 points

·
18th Dec 2020

> I just looked the symbols up, and I can’t seem to find the symbol that he has.

Same here. I honestly still think it's the Rupee. It's not exact, but it's by far the closest of all symbols. Add in the added information from the name and I reckon it's the best bet by far.

6 points

·
19th Jul 2018

Growth rate is about 1.1% per year (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/), to reach a population of 7 billion at this growth rate, starting at 3,5 billion we would need

7 bn = 3,5bn*1.011^n

n years. Solve this for n we get

n=~69 years.

Sooo, surprisingly little

6 points

·
4th Mar 2017

It takes roughly 1s to say "Hello". There are 43,200s in 12 hours. The current world population is 7,488,470,981. 7488470981/43200=173,344.25 days or 474.6 years

6 points

·
21st Nov 2017

Interesting idea! A quick bit of digging and I found that this problem can probably be solved using a hill climbing technique that iteratively finds the parameters that give you the desired shape. In the context of the problem, the catenary that models the rope is

`c(x)=a*cosh((x-3)/a) + k`

and we want `c(3)=1`

, `c(0)=4`

, and `c(6)=4`

Now I'm not patient enough to sit down and write a program right now that iteratively solves this, so I started with some simple math and guessed and checked to get a model that is really close to a true solution. I wrote it up in Desmos and you can find it here.

The conclusion is that `c(x)=(32/25)*cosh(5(x-3)/8)-(7/25)`

is a close enough approximation and the width of the hole pattern would be 1.77 meters which gives us an error of 0.22 meters!