4 ms·
I think the universal agreement is actually to measure things in football fields
by kdazzle 2y ago
I think the universal agreement is actually to measure things in football fields
- llm_trw 2y agoNow if we could only agree if we should use soccer or handegg field sizes.
- vundercind 2y agoHandegg, because there’s an actual standard size for them. Which is a worse decision for a sport but makes them better for measurement. Soccer’s trying to make their sport worse by standardizing, but they’re not there yet.
- bmacho 2y agoIt will be more appealing to nerds when they could say "transition frequency of the caesium 133 atom"
- throwup238 2y agoThe number of atomic transitions a cesium 133 atom makes when fired across a football field at the speed of sound.
- tuatoru 2y ago... in dry air at STP.
- rascul 2y agoWhich handegg field size though? There is not just one standard. I think we should use the Canadian size, since they created it.
- whiterock 2y agowhich is also not normalized. A referee once told me that - in theory - football fields can be square. I think it was 80m x 80m since 80m is the minimum length and the maximum width. Correct me if I am wrong.
- madaxe_again 2y agoIf you’re Australian, they can be circular.
- mmcclimon 2y agoField size for American football is definitely standardized: 100 yards between goal lines and 160 feet wide. Lots of Americans will have an intuitive sense for how long something like "three football fields" is.
- sidewndr46 2y agoBut that intuitive size would in fact be wrong. The size we associate with an American football field is more commonly going to be the distance including the end zones.
- croisillon 2y agowith a banana for scale