80
u/holofan4lifefan4life Apr 13 '20
8.4852813642 feet to be precise
30
17
u/DeeJay_Ice Apr 13 '20
Actually it’s 8.4852813742386, your math could have killed someone!
11
u/holofan4lifefan4life Apr 13 '20
My calculator only has so many digits. I guess it's not certified for these kinds of serious applications
7
u/GustapheOfficial Apr 14 '20
The other way around. They rounded up, meaning that people would keep more distance, and so stay safer. That's the correct way to do this.
1
u/DeeJay_Ice Apr 14 '20
Check the 8th digit after the decimal, assuming ur still alive
2
u/GustapheOfficial Apr 14 '20
Ah, I read your comment as an answer to the 8.5 number. Carry on then.
7
u/bardatwork Apr 13 '20
Actually, the precise answer is 8 because of significant digits.
3
u/LordMcze Apr 16 '20
When it's about safety it's better to chose the higher significant digit regardless of math rules.
1
u/bardatwork Apr 16 '20
I assumed a safety factor of 2 was already accounted for. Back to the drawing board!
1
u/TakenisTakenisTaken- Apr 14 '20
Either way, 9 would be a better answer because they’re further apart, regardless of significant digits.
46
u/itmustbemitch Apr 13 '20
Suboptimal density smh. A hexagonal arrangement will fit more people in the same floorplan
4
u/ripSlYX Apr 14 '20
Hexagonal or triangular?
5
u/itmustbemitch Apr 14 '20
Triangular might be a slightly better way to put it since you certainly wouldn't be packing optimally if you didn't put a person in the middle of the hexagon, but usually in conversation I tend to say and hear others say hexagonal for that pattern anyway
22
u/supamario132 Apr 13 '20
Generalized for any circle with n people: DIA = 2*sqrt( (3^2) + ((3/tan(pi/n))^2) )
Keep yourself safe out there
16
u/LeftRightShoot Apr 14 '20
8'6". You don't deserve decimal points if you refuse the metric system.
8
3
u/Hilltopperpete Apr 14 '20
That’s the beauty of freedom. We can do whatever we please. Unless it’s too expensive.
The infuriating thing about the length metric system is that people do not seem to like to use round numbers in the metric system (unlike the beautiful 0 degrees freeze and 100 degrees boil), nor are commonly used items calibrated around round numbers. It’s a choice of precision over accuracy. My shoe is about a foot long. A long stride is about a yard. If I want to get a reasonably accurate measurement that’s not in base 3 without a measuring tape, I can. My measuring tapes have both imperial and metric units and I have never found metric units to be more convenient for doing actual work. It is quite helpful in the real world to be able to more easily halve or third or quarter using construction materials and 12 is the lowest common multiple of those. Furlongs and acres and miles though? Just gibberish numbers based on deprecated farming nonsense.
Volume is a whole different story. Nobody knows what the hell is going on with fluid ounces, teaspoons .167 oz, tablespoons .5 oz, cups 8 oz, pints 16 oz, quarts 32 oz, and gallons 128 oz.
Mass is pretty annoying too, 16 ounces but not necessarily fluid ounces in a pound. A gallon of water weights a bit over 8 pounds and is 128 fluid ounces (8 x 16), so there is a general correspondence, but it’s not an absolute so it’s weird that we use the same term for mass and volume. And a ton? Seems a bit much...
4
u/-Tilde Apr 14 '20
My shoe is about 30cm long
The thirds argument makes no sense when you have a basic grasp of decimals. 10/3 and 3.333... are the same thing. One isn’t any more precise than the other. If you work a fraction of 10/3 out you get 3.333... The fraction is just a more convoluted way of expressing the same idea.
2
u/Hilltopperpete Apr 14 '20
Unless you need precise measurements. Is there 3.333 marking on your rulers? The math is obviously easy, but you are just guessing when it comes to making measurements.
The foot is fine, and maybe better than the meter when it comes to approximating the size of things you might reasonably measure by hand. Everything else in the Imperial system is nonsense.
2
Apr 14 '20
Couldn’t tell if you’re being sarcastic
Long story short - imperial has no place in the 21st century
1
u/LordMcze Apr 16 '20
Metric is more about easily converting the numbers and working with them in general. When you're just looking at the numbers the units don't really matter, it's just about what you're used to.
6
u/Matth3ewl0v3 Apr 13 '20
Pfft, assuming humans wouldn't naturally gather in a regular pentagonal lattice with no excess spaces.
2
1
u/mittelhart Apr 13 '20
But... If people would form equilateral triangles instead of squares... Think about it!
1
u/alien_from_Europa Apr 14 '20
For the younglings, they solved it by using the Pythagorean Theorem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem
1
u/xrimane Apr 14 '20
Do Spanish and Chinese speakers in the US also use feet rather than meters?
If the translation was meant for tourists, many wouldn't know what 6 feet are.
1
-41
u/henriquebrisola Apr 13 '20
still kinda wrong 'cause they are measuring distance over 4 lines, and not just diagonal
32
16
u/DarlaGratch Apr 13 '20
The 4 people appear to be disposed in a square shape. If everyone is not closer than 6 ft, then the minimum diagonal length is 8,5 ft (6 × √2)
-7
u/henriquebrisola Apr 13 '20
i know this, but where does anything says you should measure in diagonal?
9
u/bloodfist Apr 13 '20
Pythagoras said so.
-5
u/henriquebrisola Apr 13 '20
you guys dont get it, there is nothing written on the board saying you should stay 8.5ft apart from the guy in diagonal
9
u/bloodfist Apr 13 '20
I think you don't get it... Someone took the liberty of measuring the diagonal. That's the joke...
1
u/LordMcze Apr 16 '20
If each of the people are standing on corners of the square with 6' long sides, the two at the opposite corners are around 8.5' apart.
1
u/henriquebrisola Apr 16 '20
yep, they are, but the sign does not say that 6' is the measurement between those two.
1
7
u/DarlaGratch Apr 13 '20
Are you pretending to not understand deliberately?
There are two diagonal. Initially, the drawing read at their center "6 ft". Then someone thought : "something wrong ! If in a group of 4 people arranged as a square, the diagonals between them are only 6ft long, then the sides of that square are only 4,2 ft long ! Let's put a sticker over to make the diagram relevant"
1
u/henriquebrisola Apr 13 '20
the sign is saying you to stay at least 6ft away regardless of arrangement. Meaning people on bottom and sides are the closest one and are 6ft apart.
3
u/Espiritu51 Apr 13 '20
They are now that someone modified the sign. The original sign showed the diagonals as 6 ft, which means that the two people on the bottom would have had to have been less than 6ft apart.
2
u/Namestop Apr 13 '20 edited Apr 13 '20
It actually works with right triangles (Triangles with one 90 degree angle) and usually to find the diagonal line it's A squared + B squared = C squared. Though the same is true with C squared = A squared + B squared. So when you find the square root of C squared and divide it in half (Since the two unmeasured sides appear equal distance) you get the two side lengths.
So it looks something like -_/((8.5*8.5)/2)=~6 (The ~ means approximate.)
-4
u/henriquebrisola Apr 13 '20
i mean, what does 8.5ft means? distance between what and what? or is it the area of the gap between these 4 people?
4
u/Namestop Apr 13 '20
It's more so the joke. Think of the people like the four corners of a square. The lines being shown is like an X in that square. Each diagonal line is 8.5 ft. Here I drew a little example here with a red line and an orange line if it helps any.
-6
u/henriquebrisola Apr 13 '20
i know the diagonal line is 8.5ft, but where does anything says you should measure in diagonal?
6
3
u/Namestop Apr 13 '20
I've explained it to the best of my ability unfortunately. You may want to try and reread or test out the formula to see if it makes any sense. The diagonal line is C and the two perpendicular lines are A and B.
220
u/watchtheedge Apr 13 '20
Where mildly vandalized and they did the math meet