Hacker News Reader

"D-cup" also isn't enough information to gauge volume. A 36-D is larger than a 34-D. And remember that volume (and hence mass) increases as the cube of length, so two inches more in length will mean a lot more mass.

View on HN

Of course. I assumed that "15-23" would mean "average", so since the average band size is around a 36, that would probably mean "32D-40D" or something of the sort for "15-23".

Either way, the numbers seem absurd.

Volume of cone = pi * r^2 * h / 3.

Plugging in r1 of 3 and r2 of 2.5, and h1 of 36 and h2 of 34. Constants cancel out, that's an increase of 2.38 times in volume.

This is per cone ;)

I love Madonna too!

Exactly the way I'd expect nerds to discuss breasts :)

FWIW: Cup size is an increase in circumference, not length. And cup size is a relative measure. A "D" cup is supposed to mean that the fullest part of the breast is 4 inches more than the ribcage in circumference. So a 34D is going to be much less mass than a 44D (but, ironically, also a lot "fuller" looking relative to the rest of her figure). The last statistics I heard: The average American woman is about 5'4" tall and a size 16 dress size. More girth around the ribcage due to weight means "average" cup sizes that equal more mass because cup size is very much relative to that initial ribcage measurement. (I'm reminded that not long ago there was an article posted on HN apparently about women getting both shorter and fatter on average -- or so I gathered from the comments.)

That's the same point I tried to make.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com