this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
412 points (92.7% liked)

Science Memes

10531 readers
1933 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
412
Chad Pacific (mander.xyz)
submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 46 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's not to scale, right?

[–] [email protected] 39 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

It's the Instagram filter.

https://ourplnt.com/earth-without-water/

The original is a exaggerated estimate (projection) based on a assumed sphere, probably WGS84, because a lot of the global satellite data is formatted as such.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_map_projections?wprov=sfla1

[–] [email protected] 84 points 10 months ago (4 children)

"reality" as in extremely exaggerated deviations from the ellipsoid. Otherwise it would just look like a smooth sphere. Earth has 12'700 km diameter. From the shallowest point to mount everest are just about 20 km. That is a 0.15 % change. You would see nothing.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 10 months ago

To put in perspective how shallow a 0.15% change is, a dimple on a golf ball is roughly 4 times deeper than that (0.60% of a difference in depth).

[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 months ago

Bang on, the Pacific is not 250 miles deep…

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"Smoother and rounder than a bowling ball" is my usual comparison

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I think that would be too much. A bowling ball is really smooth. It would not roll as well with such deviations all over the place.

At a diameter of 22 cm, the roughness would have to be in the order of 0.3 mm, which would not just be visible due to the distorted reflections, it would even be audible while rolling.