4 ms·
This article is quite fascinating, but the title is a bit misleading. The diver was about 100m deep. He was on the sea floor but arguably not "on the bottom of
by brian-armstrong 7y ago
This article is quite fascinating, but the title is a bit misleading. The diver was about 100m deep. He was on the sea floor but arguably not "on the bottom of the ocean" (though maybe, by some interpretation)
- hprotagonist 7y agowhat is the sea floor if not the bottom of the ocean?
- rhapsodic 7y ago>what is the sea floor if not the bottom of the ocean? One could argue that the bottom of the ocean is the lowest point on the ocean floor.
- mc32 7y agoWell, in a way yes, but then so is wading next to the seashore. Think of the converse “at the top of the mountain.” At least I’m thinking some peak and not just on a slope up the mountain.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- rconti 7y agoTo be more of a smartass than a pedant, but... the bottom of the sea? https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-is-the-difference-between-an-ocean-and-a-sea.html https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-is-the-difference-b...
- quickthrower2 7y agoin that case I too have run out of air at the "bottom of the ocean"