Hacker News Reader

Comment by dang | Hacker News Reader

[stub for offtopicness]

Well, that's the first time I've seen cubic miles used as a unit. For reference it's about 4.4e19 litres or 4.4e16 cubic metres.

It’s similarly difficult to have an intuitive grasp regardless. And I’m an SI-loving engineer.

> The new figure stands at approximately 43.9 million cubic kilometers

quoted from the article

e19 and e16 are both absurdly large, which is probably why they used miles. Maybe kilometers would be better for folks who need it in SI.

Edit: And I see someone quoted the value from the article apparently few of us read completely.

I don’t think it’s that uncommon. For one thing, it is listed in the NIST Guide to the SI (https://www.nist.gov/pml/special-publication-811/nist-guide-...)

It also, IMO, beats acre-foot as a generic way to describe volumes (who even knows an acre is a chain by a furlong?)

The length of a mile varies across jurisdictions though. You'd think the world atlas would be mindful of the gap.

Cubic Miles? Who does scientific measurements in Miles? Some people apparently.

The title was in suspended animation so I added the answer from the article. The article is trying to make its primary audience, the Americans, easier by converting it to miles.

I would imagine most Americans on this website are capable of comprehending liters.

Are you suggesting that most americans have a good grasp of how much water a cubic mile is?

Surely the standard unit for this sort of thing is multiples of well known large lakes or seas?

A cubic mile isn't a widely-used measurement of volume. Everyone knows what a 2-liter of soda looks like.

But everyone knows how long a mile is, and can imagine a cube one mile long one mile wide and one mile high. Though we can't truly grasp the scale, we can at least understand the magnitude of a value of ~ten million.

But quoting a value of 4.4 x 10^19 liters is meaningless for most people.

"Of course, that's 22,000,000,000,000,000,000 two-liter soda bottles!"

So cubic miles seems like a reasonable unit for this pop-science article, despite the fact that you likely wouldn't use it in a published journal article.

> But everyone knows how long a mile is

Yeah. Long. I doubt most people can eyeball something in the distance and say with accuracy "yeah that is about a mile away" because a mile is really long and people are bad at estimating things. Now do it for 10 miles.

A relatable example like someone has mentioned "its about 10 dead seas worth" would have been a better play.

I’d guess a lot of Americans can look at a globe and eyeball 100 miles or 1,000 miles. At least American adults with a lot of driving experience. When you get into the millions of cubic miles of water, I think the best way to visualize it is a cube sitting next to the globe.

I refuse to acknowledge anything but multiples of Libraries of Congress.

I think I'm going to need a conversion to bald eagle volumes, or square hamburger-feet.

This is liquid: Cans of Coke or Coors are standard units (CCC)

In this case, 1.48 * 10^20 CCC

Just picture how long a mile is, and then imagine a cube where each side is that long.

I'm an American, and I like to think that I can comprehend liters, but I think for enormous volumes like this it's easier to visualize distances cubed.

Like for a million cubic miles, I know that's a cube with 1,000 mile sides. That's like New York to Miami (don't ask me about cities in Europe...okay I'll go out on a limb: Paris to Rome?). I can visualize that cube of water on a globe.

But how many liters or gallons is that? A lot! But billions? Trillions? I probably would instinctively say billions, but with a tiny bit of mental arithmetic I'm suspecting it's up in the trillions.

edit: I came back to confess that indeed I am an ignorant American who has no intuitive sense of exaliters. My SI volume comfort zone doesn't extend much past teraliters.

In that case it should have used soda cans as the unit.

Also, who knows what a cubic mile of water is?

~10M cubic miles of water is ~10 Mediterranean seas.

That's a lot.

But the earth is enormous, so, is it really that surprising?

Framing the amount of water in the Earth's seas in terms of one of the seas feels a bit circular :D.

the article is talking about water within the crust, which is different from water in the seas

i.e. there's 10 mediterranean sea's worth of water underground that we can't sea from space

Some of us are measuring the space in seas.

Any normal measurement unit here is going to be hard to grasp on it's own without translating it into an equivalency; XXXXXX olympic swimming pools or XX Y ocean.

My unit of choice here is teaspoons.

I prefer banana equivalent mass.

1 cubic mile is about 14 billion bathtubs.

finally a sensible metric!

well that's around 2 baths for the entire world

Cubic Miles? Who keeps the metric system down?

This is equivalent to: 1/30th the volume of Earths Oceans.

17x the volume of the Greenland icecap.

Or 3.72x10^20 US gills

but how many cups is it?

About 1.8e20 US cups according to Google.

Surprisingly little compared to the volume of the oceans. Makes me wonder how much is in Mars' crust

Or about 2e17 hogsheads

The fact that a site called "worldatlas" uses antiquated (and in this case, meaningless) U.S. units, tells you all you need to know about internet bias towards a US audience. Fun fact: there are ~1 billion English speakers outside of the U.S.

"Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents."

"Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Reply on news.ycombinator.com