top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 77 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Wow, the Pacific Ocean must be really wide, like, that's gotta be longer than 2 football fields placed end to end.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Two? Double that number, then double it again...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Be careful with exponentials!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 43 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Ah yes, the optimal packing of 16 Polands

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 3 months ago (3 children)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 26 points 3 months ago

    How do you sink a Polish battleship?

    By placing the entire country of Poland into the Pacific Ocean while the Battleship is in drydock.

  • source
  • [–] 26 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    We haven't found the upper limit yet, but with more research funding we can get closer

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    There's an old mexican comedy show where the teacher asks a student how many centimeters are in a meter - she answers something like "29. And there's even room for more!"

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I like how they started to make a grid then just went "fuck it" lol

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Isn’t the garbage island like the size of at least three Polands these days? At some point it’s going to accumulate enough organic debris to develop its own topsoil and eventually ecosystem.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    It's not really an island though. There's just more garbage there than elsewhere.

    Despite the common public perception of the patch existing as giant islands of floating garbage, its low density (4 particles per cubic metre (3.1/yd3)) prevents detection by satellite imagery, or even by casual boaters or divers in the area.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_Garbage_Patch

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 16 points 3 months ago

    The Atlantic Ocean can hold 17 Polands. Therefore, the Atlantic Ocean is bigger.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Americans will use anything but metric

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 14 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Modelled on a mercator projection which doesn't preserve area, then showing exactly the same size on every latitude

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

    Not true. This is a screenshot taken from https://thetruesize.com/, which addresses the issue you mention. You can see, for example, that the yellow outline of poland is larger than the cyan one nearer the equator.

    Here's one I did myself to better illustrate that effect:

    The Pacific ocean has a surface area of approximately 165 million square kilometres, and poland is about 300,000 square kilometres, so on that basis, you should be able to squeeze around 550 polands into the Pacific, though poorly fitting edges would obviously reduce that, but suffice to say, 16 is well undercounted, and the image accurately portrays that

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    No, it clearly says you can fit 16 poland in the Pacific, not more

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Those three Polands are conspiring against the other 13!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    16!

    It's not wrong.

    The Pacific Ocean is so vast in area it could hold 528 Polands.

    The Pacific Ocean is also deep... Can we start stacking the Polands?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    Thanks. Useful information.

    So since the mean depth of the Pacific's around 4000m, that means, without squishing them, we cannot even fit two layers. If we flip the top layer upside down, we should manage to match the tallest bits with lower bits, and fit them beneath sea level. ... since that top one's upside down now, and staying under sea level would be an arbitrary extra restriction I'd be imposing on myself, we can scrap that arbitrary restriction, and use that upturned flat cut underbelly to plonk a third ontop...

    But that's still not as many stacked as I thought.

    The pacific's tiny.

    It can only hold about 1582 Polands.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    And this is why poland should be the standard unit of measurement.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    Technically correct.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    I've often thought about Poland and the pacific ocean. I always considered you could fit 7 or 8 or 173 or even 9. But 16? That really is mind blowing.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago*

    yeah, but one of those polands is so vast it can hold texas lovingly and tenderly

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    Bigly if true

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    !CartographyAnarchy@sh.itjust.works

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago
    load more comments
    view more: next ›