thebestaquaman

joined 3 years ago
[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

The countries in power didn’t change much in size, but the countries they controlled did.

Sorry, but this is just a strange thing to say. The size of any place on a map can only be measured relative to other places on the map. "The countries in power didn't change much in size" just doesn't make any sense.

At the time when the Mercator projection was invented, we already had plenty of maps that gave a more accurate picture of the size of different land masses. The countries in power were actively colonising a lot of the world, so you better bet they would want to amplify their achievements.

The Mercator projection wasn't "just handy". It was literally the first widely used map projection that lat people sail across open seas and get where they wanted. That's a life/death matter. It's literally an integral part of the power of navigating the world seas.

The fact that it compresses the equator is directly a result of where the magnetic poles of the earth are aligned relative to the geography of the continents.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 8 points 23 hours ago

The map is extremely accurate in the sense that a course plotted on the map can be followed by following a compass course. The same does not apply for earlier maps, or by far most modern maps that are designed to match real-world sizes.

The reason the Mercator projection became the standard is that it was, for a long time, the only map you could use to safely navigate long distances, especially across oceans.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (3 children)

It is a coincidence though, in the sense that the Mercator projection by necessity inflates things near the poles relative to the equator.

The major powers at the time were countries like Britain, Spain, France, and Italy. Not Norway, Sweden, Finland, Russia, and Canada, which are inflated far more than the former.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Apple maps (probably one of the most widely used digital maps, whether you like it or not) switches to a spherical projection as you zoom out. I'm actually surprised google maps doesn't do the same.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Exactly, which is why it really grinds my gears when people try to present the map as intentionally amplifying some countries at the expense of others. That's not the point, it's just a side effect of inventing the first map that could actually be used for long-distance navigation.

For the UN it makes complete sense to use a different projection.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

I may have missed something, but I got a substantially longer time, with a lot higher pressure.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

I just did the numbers - looks like you'll need around 120 days to fill the hose with one of the biggest commercially available pumps I could find.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I've been a bit busy at work, but I'll deliver on my promise of numbers :D

I've used the Darcy-Weisbach equation for the pressure drop / flow rate relationship, and assumed

  • We have laminar flow in the hose (which is reasonable)
  • You're delivering water at 1 bar (can't go below that without suction on the receiving side)
  • Viscosity of water: 1.0518 mPa s
  • Viscosity of air: 18.03 micro Pa s
  • Your hose is indestructible, and can therefore tolerate arbitrarily large pressures.
  • You have the pump ready at day 0, and the hose is already stretched out at day 0.

The biggest pumps I could find (1, 2, 3) can deliver water at 400 MPa, with pretty high flow rates (much larger than what we can support with our hose). We're talking about pumps that draw on the order of 1 MW of power.

We start pumping water into the air-filled hose at 4 000 bar on day 0.

After two days, the water front has moved about 1000 km along the hose. Flow rate is at about 1.2 L/s, and pressure at the water front is at a solid 450 bar. This is looking good.

After one week, the water front has moved about 2000 km along the hose. Flow rate is now at about 0.6 L/s, and pressure at the water front has fallen to 200 bar. You begin to worry.

After two weeks, the water front is now at 3100 km. Flow rate has further fallen to 0.4 L/s, and pressure is at 150 bar. The pressure on you to deliver is substantially higher.

After three weeks, water has been pumped 3900 km, and is moving at a speed of 1.15 m/s. Pressure at the water front is around 100 bar. The guys that loaned you money for the massive pump and indestructible hose are lurking around your house.

About 100 days later, the first water starts flowing out of the hose in LA at a flow rate of about 0.5 L/s. It would take you about half an hour to fill the 1000 L tank at this rate. Too bad the tank was impounded by the guys that loaned you the pump and indestructible hose. You have gone into hiding.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Nah, your reading comprehension is just fine, I just worded myself in a pretty verbal way. I totally get how it could be misread, I was thinking along the "salesman making a pitch" line:

"Want something that folds perfectly to A4? A3. Want an extra fold before you get there? We have A2!"

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Yes, I did a typy-type with chubby morning fingers

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

I fat-fingered the A5, otherwise the numbers were right?

I'm aware how the system works, I just wrote about it using A4 as the "base". A3 is what you fold to get A4, A2 folds to give A3, etc.

I didn't know A0 was exactly 1m^2^ though, TIL!

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 78 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (42 children)

Oh, let's also remember that A4 is a member of beautiful variant of an "SI system for paper". Want a paper the size of an A4 folded double? We have A~~8~~5. Want something that folds perfectly to A4? A3. One more fold? A2.

  • Statement: "I want a piece of paper that I can fold twice to get exactly a US letter size."
  • Response: "You must be crazy."

Edit: Did a fat-fingering

 

Normally, I use YouTube very little (watch a couple videos a month). However, I've been in bed with an injury for some time now, which has led me to watch quite a bit of YouTube. The thing is, I subscribe to a small handfull of channels that I enjoy content from, but after a relatively short time I had watched pretty much all the new content from those channels.

Now, I would expect that the YouTube algorithm, which is supposedly designed by competent people to get me to stick around, would be able to suggest some decent content to me based on my subscriptions. However, the past week, I've opened YouTube only to find the same old videos being suggested over and over. Even worse: Whenever there's something interesting-looking from a channel I don't recognise, it always turns out to be some shitty AI voice over some generic animations or footage.

I know for a fact that thousands of hours of content are created on YouTube daily, but it genuinely feels like there are maybe five creators out there that are making anything worth watching. It's either that, or the YouTube algorithm is just complete crap at suggesting creators that are in any way similar to what I'm already subscribing to.

What's going on here? Why does it seem like there's no real content out there?

As a "funny" side note: What's with the "aggressively American" AI narrator-voice? I've heard it before, but thought it was some dude until I realised it's the same voice in a bunch of unrelated videos. It reminds me of the Discovery-channel "action-narrator"-voice from back in the day, but now it's showing up in all kinds of crap videos.

 

Inspired by the linked XKCD. Using 60% instead of 50% because that's an easy filter to apply on rottentomatoes.

I'll go first: I think "Sherlock Holmes: A game of Shadows" was awesome, from the plot to the characters ,and especially how they used screen-play to highlight how Sherlocks head works in these absurd ways.

view more: next ›