5 ms·
I'm with you on that, I expect the probability of 'drunks tied together' falling down to increase following the square-cube law. I have a similar theory that t
by electromagnetic 16y ago
I'm with you on that, I expect the probability of 'drunks tied together' falling down to increase following the square-cube law.
I have a similar theory that the reason female washrooms always seem to have too few stalls is because their is a square-law going on. Ever notice how when your wife/girlfriend/friend goes to the washroom on their own they take roughly the same time as a guy, but when they go with their friend they easily take double the time it would for two guys, even assuming only one stall available. This is my reasoning on why buildings increase the number of washrooms rather than simply expanding on the one despite the extra washrooms usually being in inconvenient locations.
I think somewhere some architect built a banquet hall with a 100 stall female washroom and at a function all the women knew each other, meaning they spent like two-weeks in the washroom and resorted to cannibalism.
- philwelch 16y agoFemale washrooms also have queueing inefficiencies compared to male washrooms. Women need a stall no matter what, men only need a stall in some cases and a urinal for other cases. And urinals have much higher throughput.
- r00fus 16y agoNot to mention, when push comes to shove, a guy can urinate pretty much anywhere. I remember back in my college days when I'd go to the bar restroom and the stalls were being used, the urinal was in use, a guy was peeing in the trash can and another dude was using the sink...
- allwein 16y ago>I'm with you on that, I expect the probability of 'drunks tied together' falling down to increase following the square-cube law. I think this is true only up to a point. I imagine that once you get a sufficient number of drunks, that you can simply tie them together tight enough that they'd stay standing like a shock of wheat.