Doing some garden jobs today, and Mrs Bloke awoke a slumbering hornet when opening a garden umbrella. She exclaimed ‘It’s like a Lancaster bomber’! I’d have gone for B52 myself. To be fair it was impressively big, but maybe not WW2 bomber big.
I love an exaggerated unit of scale. Hailstones like golf balls, rats the size of cats, dragonflies like pterodactyls, a jobby the size of King Kong’s finger.
I was caught in a summer storm last year (north Spain) with hailstones this size, thankfully we were under cover and had parked the car in an underground car park. All the cars out on the street had dented metalwork, massive damage to the trees, etc.
@Edukator – there’s a couple of meteorologists in France well worth following for that kind of stuff. Yann Amice and Gilles André – lots of posts on Twitter
We all know that the geometric object of minimal surface area amongst all shapes with a fixed volume is the round ball, whose boundary is spherical. Water blobs try to minimise surface area and curl into spherical droplets. The physical problem of surface-area minimisation is thus quite well understood. What about the opposite problem of surface-area maximisation? Does the problem even make sense? Indeed it does. Trees try to maximise surface area to get the most of sunlight through their leaves. Sea anemones and sponges work to maximise their surface area to maximise contact with water to obtain food. Gills in fish and animal lungs try to maximise the surface area so that more oxygen goes into the blood. The resulting geometry is hyperbolic—a geometry that is, as expected, quite the opposite to spherical geometry.