Further to the newsletterI have done some investigating and there IS and answer!
(,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:43,
archived)
Tsk, what if you cut the pieces into different sizes?
Mu Dinofiddler,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:44,
archived)
Then you deserve all the inaccuracies you get.
my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:45,
archived)
exactlyit's not a perfect system, but I think people know what they're letting themselves in for.
(,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:47,
archived)
The instructions are inprecise! They never told me that inserting the device into my uninary tract could be insanitary and cause internal lacerations!I demand compensation! And more words starting with "in-"
( Mu Dinofiddler,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:47,
archived)
The device is used at your own peril my other username is a porsche , posting shit pictures so you don't have to,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:49,
archived)
Or....
May not be to scale.
www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2004/10/31/how-long-is-a-piece-of-string/
Apparently 13 and a half inches. But it's probably no more than 10 inches in a good light.
i normally go for2(X+1)-1 over 2 = X
where x is the piece of string.
Edit: now expand!
(where x is the piece of string.
Edit: now expand!
skeltonator Needs some new daps.,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:51,
archived)
lolno it's the meaning of the universe, but only if x = 42
( skeltonator Needs some new daps.,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:58,
archived)
hahaha-iI[|D
well i tried
even if it has fallen over!
(well i tried
even if it has fallen over!
skeltonator Needs some new daps.,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 18:03,
archived)
You just need to subtractthe portion of the universe that does not contain the piece of string from the entire universe, to give you the length of the piece of string.
(
Barbarossa is not my real name,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:54,
archived)
No, that would give you........ the four dimensional volume of the string (presumably in secondcubicmetres, if you were doing it in metric).
(,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:56,
archived)
From there it's just a simple matter of higher dimensional integrationof the hyperspherical space-time footprint of the string, to give you its empirical length.
I had assumed that step was basically too trivial to mention in the above method.
(I had assumed that step was basically too trivial to mention in the above method.
Barbarossa is not my real name,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:59,
archived)
Which leaves us the simple matter of measuring the universe
Due to the quasi-reciprocal nature of space time, measuring the external universe except the piece of string will also involve measuring the measuring device, but since space time is curved, this should pose no problem to oh god it's friday I can't be bothered have a good weekend.
.My Chinese friend How Long is tired of your string jokes! Visit his shop!
(,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 17:59,
archived)
The Correct AnswerIf you form the string into a circle and measure distance from the centre of the circle to the edge (ie the radius you can calculate the length of the string using 2.pi.R
This leaves the small problem that if we had such a measuring device, the question could be answered by simply measuring the string, an alternative solution must be sought.
Let us make some assumptions:
The string is at least 1cm in length
Any smaller and calling it a piece of string is perhaps a misnomer, fluff would be a better definition.
The string cannot exceed one ton
Manufacturing such a string would be impractical, and would instead of being named string, would be better termed as a tourist attraction.
String is no thinner than 1.5mm
Thinner than this, and we are entering the territory of thread.
Worst case density is 0.7kg/litre
Otherwise the string will be too weak.
So, we know the maximum weight, and the volume:
1000
---- = 1429 litres or 1.429 cubic metres.
0.7
Therefore, maximum length is
Volume 1.429m
------ = -------------
Area pix0.5mmx0.5mm
So the string length lies between 1cm and 11,644.39km which can be expressed as above
(This leaves the small problem that if we had such a measuring device, the question could be answered by simply measuring the string, an alternative solution must be sought.
Let us make some assumptions:
The string is at least 1cm in length
Any smaller and calling it a piece of string is perhaps a misnomer, fluff would be a better definition.
The string cannot exceed one ton
Manufacturing such a string would be impractical, and would instead of being named string, would be better termed as a tourist attraction.
String is no thinner than 1.5mm
Thinner than this, and we are entering the territory of thread.
Worst case density is 0.7kg/litre
Otherwise the string will be too weak.
So, we know the maximum weight, and the volume:
1000
---- = 1429 litres or 1.429 cubic metres.
0.7
Therefore, maximum length is
Volume 1.429m
------ = -------------
Area pix0.5mmx0.5mm
So the string length lies between 1cm and 11,644.39km which can be expressed as above
Terry Oblong There's nobody here but us chickens on,
Fri 19 Dec 2008, 18:52,
archived)