>> ^deathcow:

>> ^HugeJerk:
Nope, it's a sphere.>> ^MrFisk:
So the Earth is round?


gong!
it's an oblate spheroid, a rotationally symmetrical ellipsoid

The deviation in Earth's curvature is tiny - just 1 part in 300, according to Wikipedia, so it's functionally indistinguishable from a sphere. And if you were to inflate a billiard ball to the size of the Earth, the billiard ball would be less spherical than the planet.

@bcglorf well said sir. I heard a funny polemic of how to calculate the volume of meat in a cow, first, just assume a spherical cow...

On that note, I think it is entirely plausible to be environmentally conscientious about being a nasty, irresponsible polluter without the world also coming to an end; an angle that would most likely be an easier sell as well!

this is cool too:

Improved measurement of the shape of the electron - 2011
- J. J. Hudson,D. M. Kara,I. J. Smallman,B. E. Sauer, M. R. Tarbut & E. A. Hinds

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v473/n7348/full/nature10104.html

briefly

"Here we use cold polar molecules to measure the electron EDM at the highest level of precision reported so far, providing a constraint on any possible new interactions. We obtain de = (−2.4 ± 5.7stat ± 1.5syst) × 10−28e cm, where e is the charge on the electron, which sets a new upper limit of |de| < 10.5 × 10−28e cm with 90 per cent confidence. This result, consistent with zero, indicates that the electron is spherical at this improved level of precision."

>> ^hpqp:

Am I the only one whose first reaction when seeing the cannonball hole was "FAKE!!" ?

Tbh I had no idea a cannonball could do that kind of damage. I thought thay travelled a lot slower than 1000ft/s. Something with that kind of mass travelling at close to the speed of sound. I think I'd make sure there was a mountain or something between me and the nearest settlement when firing that thing.

And its not that surprising it missed those trash cans. A spherical projectile with no rifling? Yah, that shits gonna go anywhere it fucking pleases.

In a semi-related note my mum was missed by less than a metre by a bullet from a nearby shooting range when she was a teenager. I almost didn't exist due to similar accident as this

And actually this is in 3 dimensions as sound waves travel from its source (your speakers) to your ears in a spherical manner...like boobs growing bigger and hitting you in the ear holes>> ^bamdrew:

however the setup was audio in a 1-dimensional space, to which I cry NAY! ... also color,... lets call that a sub-spatial dimension... 3.5 dimensions! you monsters.
>> ^Quboid:
>> ^bamdrew:
you fools! ... the audio is another dimension! as is the time across which this video occurs!
you've created another 3D transformers movie... God help us...

Audio's not a dimension, it exists as waves within our 4 dimensional space/time. But the time in this a 2nd dimension, which means this is 2D and therefore have more depth than the actual movies ... (or, I don't know, some other lazy "omg the movies suckzz lol!" type joke, I'm tired).

arguement, flag on boat taken from 1 bridge to another 6 miles away... on a curved earth the flag at that distance should have dropped 16ft, but a telescope placed 18 inches above the water at the first bridge didn't need correction to still see the flag

followed immediately by, astronauts in space seeing the Earth from orbit, taking pictures of a spherical planet... yet this isn't disproving a flat earth, it's proving because gravity affects light thus that is what you are seeing, the curvature of the light

sounds like when something fits your theory, its used
and when it doesn't, its not used
hmmmmmmmmmmm

http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/11/10/14/1840224/throwable-36-camera-ball-takes-spherical-panoramas

Combined with :




Non stop data analysis!!! We are watching you

Wow, I never realized that the Basket ball/Tennis ball diameter ratio was so close to the Earth/Moon diameter ratio. The Tennis ball diameter is too big by just 2.3mm. That's an error of 3%. Pretty dang accurate for common items. Of course, you should probably slightly deflate the Basketball which would better represent the non-spherical tidal bulge of the Earth - and by doing so make the Tennis ball even more accurate of a model.

>> ^moopysnooze:

Yes but dating sites are adverts for yourself... When supermarkets sell ready meals that a lot of people would normally call very salty and unhealthy, they aren't going to want to put that all over the box but instead stamp it with "very tasty" and "convenient". It up to people to be more savvy.
>> ^xxovercastxx:
I've noticed, in normal life, women always think they're fat. On the other hand, visit an online dating/matchmaking site, and women always think they're "average".
On OkCupid, the trend seems to be that if you're 100lbs or more overweight, you call yourself "curvy". Usually "lumpy" is more apt. Christina Hendricks is curvy; Gabourey Sidibe is spherical.



Certainly you want to sell yourself but it's pretty pointless to lie about your physical appearance and then post a photo. Besides, there's plenty of guys who like big girls and none of them will be able to find you if you're lying about it.

Yes but dating sites are adverts for yourself... When supermarkets sell ready meals that a lot of people would normally call very salty and unhealthy, they aren't going to want to put that all over the box but instead stamp it with "very tasty" and "convenient". It up to people to be more savvy.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

I've noticed, in normal life, women always think they're fat. On the other hand, visit an online dating/matchmaking site, and women always think they're "average".
On OkCupid, the trend seems to be that if you're 100lbs or more overweight, you call yourself "curvy". Usually "lumpy" is more apt. Christina Hendricks is curvy; Gabourey Sidibe is spherical.

I've noticed, in normal life, women always think they're fat. On the other hand, visit an online dating/matchmaking site, and women always think they're "average".

On OkCupid, the trend seems to be that if you're 100lbs or more overweight, you call yourself "curvy". Usually "lumpy" is more apt. Christina Hendricks is curvy; Gabourey Sidibe is spherical.

I came here to see the pressure wave on a rump, as a result of a moving object hitting it.

You see. The Riding Crop is moved at an arc towards the target area, at a variable speed controlled by the swinging mechanism. In this case, the Dom. When the Riding Crop makes contact with the rump, resulting in a compression* wave is a marvel to be seen only in slow motion.

Note @cybrbeast observation that the compression wave, caused by Crop impact, is intense at first until the the end when the wave loses it's intensity and dies. Think of it like taking a slinky, placing it on a flat surface lengthwise, and then compressing one end to the other. You can see the wave pulse through the slinky causing each end to bounce as the wave moves from one end to the other.

All of this takes place quicker than the eye can see. Therefore, this was a scientific exhibition of the resulting dynamics of Riding Crop vs a nice rump.

Science can oft be seen as Art.

Edit: After further review, maybe it's not a compression wave. It's more like a spherical transverse wave. Like the wave seen when someone drops a pebble into a pond.


You know what? I can't tell whether it's a spherical transverse wave, or a mixture of both transverse and longitudinal. I guess I'll have to watch it again.

No.

Balls.

Thank you university mathematics >> ^MaxWilder:

"Ball" does not mean "sphere". Balls can be spherical or ovoid, solid or hollow, or even have holes in them (bowling ball, wiffle ball). You can have a ball of wax that is any shape you want.
In sports, balls are spherical when you want a consistent movement, or some other shape when you want unpredictable movement.

"Ball" does not mean "sphere". Balls can be spherical or ovoid, solid or hollow, or even have holes in them (bowling ball, wiffle ball). You can have a ball of wax that is any shape you want.

In sports, balls are spherical when you want a consistent movement, or some other shape when you want unpredictable movement.

I like the " with respect to positive longitude and latitude.. being on the lands, not the sea" bit. hehheh

I kept thinking - What if you happened to turn the map or globe..? O_o?

Yay for multiple solutions in spherical coordinate systems!!