Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: beet1e on February 07, 2005, 05:26:41 AM

Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: beet1e on February 07, 2005, 05:26:41 AM
Imagine that the Earth was a round ball with no mountains, trees or obstacles, no ocean waves etc., but otherwise was the same size. Now imagine a length of string were to be passed from the equator all along one of the meridians at surface level - all the way up over the north pole, down the other side past the south pole, and back up to the equator where it begins. That would be a very long piece of string....

But now imagine that another length of string were to be passed around the earth in the same way, along the same meridian, but this second length of string had to pass 3 centimetres above the earth's surface.

How much longer than the first length of string would the second length of string have to be?

HTC employees/Mathman et al - please keep Mum for 24 hours to give the others a chance to answer. ;)
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Tilt on February 07, 2005, 05:37:25 AM
X= (2Pi(R+3))-(2PiR)

X= 6 x Pi


(presume I am an "other")
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Swoop on February 07, 2005, 07:19:22 AM
Are we also taking into account the earths 'squatting' due to the directional spin effect on a globe?

(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/209_1081438631_swoop.gif)
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: megadud on February 07, 2005, 07:28:50 AM
the earth cannot be perfectly round or it would be a water world and everyone wuld drown....so your math problem is not worth my time...i got one for you though...

1+3=_


good luck :aok

megadud
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: mechanic on February 07, 2005, 07:30:48 AM
if it takes a man 2 hours to dig a hole, how long would it take the same man to dig half a hole?
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: megadud on February 07, 2005, 07:50:15 AM
Quote
Originally posted by mechanic
if it takes a man 2 hours to dig a hole, how long would it take the same man to dig half a hole?


does he get to rest up before digging...a glass of water?

need more info

megadud
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: JCLerch on February 07, 2005, 09:15:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Tilt
X= (2Pi(R+3))-(2PiR)

X= 6 x Pi


(presume I am an "other")


Well lets see if this works out.

Were solving for the circumfrance of a string around one diameter of a 'spherical' Earth.

Assume Radius of Earth is 637,815,000 cm

First string = 2piR = 2 * 3.14159 * 637,815,000 = 4007509836.6987 cm

Second String = 2pi(r+3) = 2 * 3.14159 * 637,815,003 = 4007509855.5483

The difference in length of the two strings is 18.84955592153875943077586029 9677

6 * Pi = 18.84955592153875943077586029 9677

Yup, same number as Tilt :)

The lesson to be learned here is, when solving for the difference in circumfrances, we don't need to know the actual  radius of the circle, on the difference between the two radii...

(BTW, I had to do the math as I didn't believe the answer, an 18.85 cm difference didn't pass the Common Sense test, even though it was the correct answer!)
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Max on February 07, 2005, 09:19:15 AM
Quote
Originally posted by mechanic
if it takes a man 2 hours to dig a hole, how long would it take the same man to dig half a hole?


Is he using a shovel or a pick-axe?

DmdMax
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: FiLtH on February 07, 2005, 09:43:55 AM
With an Earth such as that..there would be no string nor life to lay it.
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Max on February 07, 2005, 10:20:12 AM
Filth where in NH ya live?

DmdMax
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: storch on February 07, 2005, 10:24:15 AM
If my grandmother had wheels, would she have been a bicycle?  Would anyone have "ridden" her?  If someone other grandpa had "ridden" her would I still be me?
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: VWE on February 07, 2005, 10:31:11 AM
Your from cube'r right? So yes you would still be you... bunchofinbreadislanders!  :p
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: storch on February 07, 2005, 10:52:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by VWE
Your from cube'r right? So yes you would still be you... bunchofinbreadislanders!  :p


Not so rococo!!!!  There is considerable cultural diversity amongst all Caribbean Islanders.  Just like in the USA  "Out of many, one people"  E pluribus unum.

Besides the question was for Beet1e from the original "Island of Inbred types"  Though thanks to former colonials returning they have infused the gene pool with fresh DNA.  :D
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Swoop on February 07, 2005, 11:00:46 AM
Quote
Originally posted by JCLerch
Were solving for the circumfrance of a string around one diameter of a 'spherical' Earth.



Yeah see here's the thing:  The Earth is not a perfect sphere.  When you put a spin force on a globe that isnt a solid structure (ie one with some water in it's make-up) there is a certain amount of bunching around the equator.  IE, the circumference of the planet is bigger if you measure it around the equator rather than pole to pole.

If the Earth was hanging stationary in space with no spin force upon it then it would be a perfect sphere......if you ignore the mountains / valleys, etc.

(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/209_1081438631_swoop.gif)
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: HavocTM on February 07, 2005, 11:26:44 AM
I read once that if the Earth were the size of a billiard ball, it would be smoother even with the mountains and canyons.
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: beet1e on February 07, 2005, 11:30:06 AM
Excellent work, Tilt and JCLerch. :aok

2 pi multiplied by the difference in radii, in this case 3cm, = 6 x pi centimetres.

Swoop said
Quote
Yeah see here's the thing: The Earth is not a perfect sphere. When you put a spin force on a globe that isnt a solid structure (ie one with some water in it's make-up) there is a certain amount of bunching around the equator. IE, the circumference of the planet is bigger if you measure it around the equator rather than pole to pole.
Quite correct, but the difference is not as much as you might think. According to the Google Calculator, 1km is equivalent to 0.539956803 nautical miles. As you know, at the equator a change of 1 minute of longitude equates to 1 nautical mile. Each degree along the equator is 60 nautical miles, therefore the circumference of the earth, along the equator is 60 x 360 = 21,600 nautical miles. Converting that to kilometres gives a result of 40,003.2km. The distance from the equator to either north or south pole is 10,000km, so the circumferance via the poles is 40,000km. As you can see, the earth is fatter/squat because of the rotation, but the difference is only about 3km. The difference in radius at the equator versus either of the poles is therefore only about ˝km. (3km. divided by 2pi)
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: mechanic on February 07, 2005, 11:33:08 AM
if the sun was on the scale of a grain of sand in size, then the next closest star would be over 4 miles away!

hehe

its true
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Jackal1 on February 07, 2005, 12:22:52 PM
Consider that there are two trains. One is leaving from point A. The other is leaving from point C. Both are headed to point B.
  The train leaving from point A will be traveling at 55mph. The train leaving from point C will be traveling at 60mph. The train leaving from point A will depart at 10:30 AM. The train leaving from point C will depart at 10:35 AM. The train leaving from point A will have a 10mph head wind. The train leaving from point C will have a 10mph tail wind. The train leaving from point A will have a 15 degree incline.
The train leaving from point C will be traveling on flat land. The train leaving from point A will carry 55 passengers ranging in weight from 130 to 210 pounds. The train leaving from point C will  carry 60 passengers ranging in weight from 135 to 195 pounds. Both the train leaving from point A and the train leaving from point C will carry equal loads of luggage and fuel.
Why is point B such a happening place?
What is going on there and why in the hell haven`t we heard about it before these railheads?
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: hitech on February 07, 2005, 12:39:46 PM
Billard ball: Might be more smoth but very close for all purpose.

Earth: Evererst 37000 ft I.E. aprox 7 miles ocean depth about same.
I.E. +- 7 Miles over 8000mile dia. I.E. +- .001 %

Billard ball: 2.5" would equate to .0025 tollarance, not sure what the tollerance is but wouldn't suprise me if it is under .001.

HiTech
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: megadud on February 07, 2005, 01:07:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by beet1e
Excellent work, Tilt and JCLerch. :aok

2 pi multiplied by the difference in radii, in this case 3cm, = 6 x pi centimetres.

Swoop said  Quite correct, but the difference is not as much as you might think. According to the Google Calculator, 1km is equivalent to 0.539956803 nautical miles. As you know, at the equator a change of 1 minute of longitude equates to 1 nautical mile. Each degree along the equator is 60 nautical miles, therefore the circumference of the earth, along the equator is 60 x 360 = 21,600 nautical miles. Converting that to kilometres gives a result of 40,003.2km. The distance from the equator to either north or south pole is 10,000km, so the circumferance via the poles is 40,000km. As you can see, the earth is fatter/squat because of the rotation, but the difference is only about 3km. The difference in radius at the equator versus either of the poles is therefore only about ˝km. (3km. divided by 2pi)


if your not a teacher, go see a shrink

megadud
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: megadud on February 07, 2005, 01:07:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by beet1e
Excellent work, Tilt and JCLerch. :aok

2 pi multiplied by the difference in radii, in this case 3cm, = 6 x pi centimetres.

Swoop said  Quite correct, but the difference is not as much as you might think. According to the Google Calculator, 1km is equivalent to 0.539956803 nautical miles. As you know, at the equator a change of 1 minute of longitude equates to 1 nautical mile. Each degree along the equator is 60 nautical miles, therefore the circumference of the earth, along the equator is 60 x 360 = 21,600 nautical miles. Converting that to kilometres gives a result of 40,003.2km. The distance from the equator to either north or south pole is 10,000km, so the circumferance via the poles is 40,000km. As you can see, the earth is fatter/squat because of the rotation, but the difference is only about 3km. The difference in radius at the equator versus either of the poles is therefore only about ˝km. (3km. divided by 2pi)


if your not a teacher, go see a shrink

megadud
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Nwbie on February 07, 2005, 01:44:34 PM
Let me know, I'll be getting sloshed in the club car

NwBie


Quote
Originally posted by Jackal1
Consider that there are two trains. One is leaving from point A. The other is leaving from point C. Both are headed to point B.
  The train leaving from point A will be traveling at 55mph. The train leaving from point C will be traveling at 60mph. The train leaving from point A will depart at 10:30 AM. The train leaving from point C will depart at 10:35 AM. The train leaving from point A will have a 10mph head wind. The train leaving from point C will have a 10mph tail wind. The train leaving from point A will have a 15 degree incline.
The train leaving from point C will be traveling on flat land. The train leaving from point A will carry 55 passengers ranging in weight from 130 to 210 pounds. The train leaving from point C will  carry 60 passengers ranging in weight from 135 to 195 pounds. Both the train leaving from point A and the train leaving from point C will carry equal loads of luggage and fuel.
Why is point B such a happening place?
What is going on there and why in the hell haven`t we heard about it before these railheads?
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: HavocTM on February 07, 2005, 01:55:41 PM
I took train C to point B once and we hit Train A because they forgot to stop at point B.
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Octavius on February 07, 2005, 02:07:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by megadud
if your not a teacher, go see a shrink

megadud


if you can't dig numbers, get a book ... or flip burgers :)

octavius
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: 2stony on February 07, 2005, 03:15:13 PM
Does a bear ****e in the woods? Not most polar bears.

Or, what state in the continental U.S. lies the furthest North?
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: HavocTM on February 07, 2005, 03:35:24 PM
I believe it is Minnesota.. There is a small chunk that goes up into Canada.  Maybe International Falls or something...

Of course it is probably the obvious Maine...
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: 2stony on February 07, 2005, 03:51:45 PM
HavocTM is the winner! Yes, a lot of people think it's Maine, but Minnesota lays above the line further.

:aok
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Jackal1 on February 07, 2005, 06:43:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Nwbie
Let me know, I'll be getting sloshed in the club car

NwBie


You buying? :D
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: BBQ_Bob on February 07, 2005, 08:37:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by 2stony
Does a bear ****e in the woods? Not most polar bears.

Or, what state in the continental U.S. lies the furthest North?


That would be Angle, Minnesota
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: RightF00T on February 07, 2005, 09:32:31 PM
There is no such thing as half a hole.
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: megadud on February 07, 2005, 10:02:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Octavius
if you can't dig numbers, get a book ... or flip burgers :)

octavius


will do :aok

megadud
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: WilldCrd on February 08, 2005, 12:52:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by RightF00T
There is no such thing as half a hole.


Its obvious you never met a marine D.I.
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Lovemonk on February 08, 2005, 05:35:38 AM
Damn, Everest must have been eating its greens of late.  Think it's closer to the 29,000 feet mark.  Makes me chuckle at the size of some of the AH mountains.  

Doesn't change the example much but i'm a mountain dweeb.
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Holden McGroin on February 08, 2005, 07:56:24 AM
Quote
Originally posted by RightF00T
There is no such thing as half a hole.


Quote
If you opt to use a needle to pass the bridle line through the sail, go to step 2. If you choose to use the hole-punch instead, fold the sail along the diagonal again (to fold the tape) and make half a hole in the center of each masking tape square so that when you open up the fold, each square will have one full hole (instead of two holes).


 How to make a kite (http://www.kitelife.com/archives/issue29/kids-kitemake2003/tissue_fighter.htm)
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: FiLtH on February 08, 2005, 09:17:33 AM
Conway area Dmax..Mt Washington Valley.  

    If the oceans suddenly dried up, would the air be too thin to breathe?
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: JB88 on February 08, 2005, 06:58:56 PM
if a chicken and a half in a day and a half can lay an egg and a half, then how many wooden legged monkees does it take to kick the seeds out of a dill pickle?
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Nwbie on February 09, 2005, 12:11:20 PM
The Horror !!
They are wasting good seeds there...
But actually, which Monkee are we referring to?
Davy? Or the curly haired ugly drummer dude?
I think Peter would never be seen in public with a wooden leg
So that leaves 1
Any more math questions? Need to wait though, I am running out of string, man this earth with no mountains is still friggin huge.

NwBie

Quote
Originally posted by JB88
if a chicken and a half in a day and a half can lay an egg and a half, then how many wooden legged monkees does it take to kick the seeds out of a dill pickle?
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: hitech on February 09, 2005, 12:19:36 PM
JB88: African or Europen Dill pickle?

HiTech
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Swoop on February 09, 2005, 12:34:09 PM
Stop that it's silly.

(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/209_1081438631_swoop.gif)
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: JB88 on February 09, 2005, 04:08:06 PM
lets say "european" as everyone knows that no monkey could beat up an african pickle.

;)
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: brendo on February 09, 2005, 04:19:27 PM
Mechanic , the answer is 2 hours
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: DREDIOCK on February 09, 2005, 06:24:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by hitech
Billard ball: Might be more smoth but very close for all purpose.

Earth: Evererst 37000 ft I.E. aprox 7 miles ocean depth about same.
I.E. +- 7 Miles over 8000mile dia. I.E. +- .001 %

Billard ball: 2.5" would equate to .0025 tollarance, not sure what the tollerance is but wouldn't suprise me if it is under .001.

HiTech


(http://www.animationlibrary.com/Animation11/Science_and_Body/Eyes/grey_eyes.gif)
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: RightF00T on February 10, 2005, 03:34:03 PM
Or about a henway...
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: hitech on February 10, 2005, 03:49:11 PM
You realy think it is 3 or 4, RightFOOT?

HiTech
Title: Mathematical conundrum
Post by: Jackal1 on February 10, 2005, 04:09:22 PM
Quote
Originally posted by hitech
You realy think it is 3 or 4, RightFOOT?

HiTech


I`m personaly leaning towards 3, but there can be instances where 4 would be closer.