5 ms·

We have 600 * 10^9 pixels, at 330ppi resolution this would correspond to 1.828 * 10^9 inches, or 4.618 * 10^7m, i.e., about 46200km. Now, there are different S

We have 600 * 10^9 pixels, at 330ppi resolution this would correspond to 1.828 * 10^9 inches, or 4.618 * 10^7m, i.e., about 46200km. Now, there are different Starship Enterprises of somewhat varying lengths, but let's take NCC 1701-D, because that's the first one I found data on. Wikipedia puts its length at 642.5m [1]. Thus, it ould be about 71880 Starship enterprises for the given length (not accounting for any other dimensions of course). More interesting, it's a bit more than the circumference of Earth (~40000km). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_%28NCC-1701-D%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_%28NCC-1701-D%2...

skrebbel 13y ago
I'm really interested as to why you two consider a fictional space ship a good "underbelly feeling" measure of size. I like Star Trek, but I have absolutely no feeling for the size of the Enterprise. I'd believe it if you said it was 3km long, but also if you said that it was 400m long. Not meant as a harsh criticism though, I like the math and the geekiness :)
- DougWebb 13y ago
  if it helps, the largest cruise ships are around 300m long.
- TeMPOraL 13y ago
  I remembered it has around 700m, but didn't remember the exact figure. You could probably also ask either of us about the inner workings of transporter or the warp field dynamics ;). It's a geek thing. You spend too much time with something, it feels natural to you ;).
- mkr-hn 13y ago
  This might help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpgyrIlhoyw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpgyrIlhoyw It's missing the rear end, but it's about half of the ship's total length.
- incision 13y ago
  Different spatial intelligence? Personally, I'd say I have a better feeling for "starship enterprises" or "battroids" [0] in terms of length or height than the ubiquitous "football fields" or "empire state buildings". Both those fictional measures are things I've visualized being inside of or next to countless times. I can't say the same about the other two. 0: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VF-1_Valkyrie#Battroid_mode http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VF-1_Valkyrie#Battroid_mode

skrebbel 13y ago

I'm really interested as to why you two consider a fictional space ship a good "underbelly feeling" measure of size. I like Star Trek, but I have absolutely no feeling for the size of the Enterprise. I'd believe it if you said it was 3km long, but also if you said that it was 400m long. Not meant as a harsh criticism though, I like the math and the geekiness :)

DougWebb 13y ago
if it helps, the largest cruise ships are around 300m long.
TeMPOraL 13y ago
I remembered it has around 700m, but didn't remember the exact figure. You could probably also ask either of us about the inner workings of transporter or the warp field dynamics ;). It's a geek thing. You spend too much time with something, it feels natural to you ;).
mkr-hn 13y ago
This might help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpgyrIlhoyw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpgyrIlhoyw It's missing the rear end, but it's about half of the ship's total length.
incision 13y ago
Different spatial intelligence? Personally, I'd say I have a better feeling for "starship enterprises" or "battroids" [0] in terms of length or height than the ubiquitous "football fields" or "empire state buildings". Both those fictional measures are things I've visualized being inside of or next to countless times. I can't say the same about the other two. 0: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VF-1_Valkyrie#Battroid_mode http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VF-1_Valkyrie#Battroid_mode