Lengths of Selected Countries

These calculations are performed with the assumption of nullification of Antarctic claims. These diagrams are generated using the daftlogic wrapper over Google Maps.

(And in case these maps constitute obscuring copyright, these maps are ©Gregorian 2017 Google, INEGI, ORION-ME.)

For reference, the equatorial circumference of the Earth is 40075 km, so 20037 km is the furthest apart two points on Earth can be.

France: 18168 km

france_18168

United Kingdom, according to British claims: 16139 km

united_kingdom

United States: 15326 km

united_states

Norge (Norway): 15098 km

norge

United Kingdom, according to Mauritian, but not Argentinian, claims: 13589 km

united_kingdom_mauritian_claims

United Kingdom, according to Argentinian and Mauritian claims: 10989 km

united_kingdom_mauritian_argentinian
(Sidenote: the longest distance from the Shetlands to Tristan da Cunha just barely edges out the longest distance from Grand Cayman to Dhekelia, that is, by about 60 km, so we will not have to also address British-Cypriot territorial disputes.)

Россия (Russia), according to Russian claims: 8188 km

russia_all_russian_claims

Nederland (Netherlands): 8057 km

nederland

Россия (Russia), according to Ukrainian, but not Japanese, claims: 7974 km

russia_russian_claims

Россия (Russia), according to Ukrainian and Japanese claims: 7941 km

russia_japanese_claims

Australia: 7869 km

australia

中國 (China), according to claims of the Republic: 5750 km

china_republic_claims

Aotearoa (New Zealand): 5721 km

aotearoa

中国 (China), according to claims of the People’s Republic: 5582 km

china_peoples_republic_claims

Canada: 5555 km

canada

Continue reading “Lengths of Selected Countries”

The Four-Colorability of the World: Addendum on Planarity

After presenting my conclusions in my previous post on the four-colorability of the world to several friends and friends of friends, we pondered the question of whether the map of the world’s countries is planar. It is in fact not: consider the induced subgraph of (that is, consider the connections among) Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, and Russia.

Resistance

You were big
We were small
You had pride
We couldn’t
We were too insignificant
To even be noticeable
And thus you brushed us aside
Until you found the way
To remove us en masse
Your lives were long
Our lives were short
You made our lives shorter
And you were so proud of it

But we’re still here
And we’re waiting for you to
In your gloating
Overlook us
Because the undeniable is that
With our ephemerality
Change is on our side
At least more so than on yours
And together
We shall evolve
We shall struggle
And
We shall overcome
Your antibiotics

Business Insider Please

These states of the US are populated by American humans. They kill over 10000 humans each year in the US, far surpassing the counts for the species you’ve introduced combined. dangerous.png

In particular, you mentioned sharks. Sharks kill about 10 people worldwide each year. That’s so few people even terrorists kill more people than they do.

On the other hand, humans kill 100 million sharks each year, so sharks, watch out for the states in the map above, they contain humans.

Views Here on zyxyvy, and McDonalds

A while ago, I saw a data map depicting the number of McDonalds in each country.

I noticed the numbers were rather reminiscent of the distribution of views here on this blog, and after a while of thinking, it made quite some sense: in both cases, one would expect the number to correlate with how much interchange with America a country exhibits, in my case, because I live and blog here in the USA and thus what I write about is probably more pertinent to people with more similar situations. In fact, it so happens that around now the number of views I’ve had here on zyxyvy is around the number of McDonalds for several countries, which probably won’t persist because the rate at which one of these increases is (and will hopefully stay) substantially greater than the other.

So in the interest of comparing these really-shouldn’t-be-compared quantities while we can, here’s a map of ratios:zyxyvy_ratio_mcdonalds

Given the language of this blog, it makes sense that several countries and territories with higher numbers of McDonalds than zyxyvy views are countries where English is less prevalent. In the case of China, we are seeing the manifestation of the fact that China blocks WordPress and thus all views from China this blog gets are through firewall workarounds, whereas China has happily endorsed the incoming of brands like McDonalds from America. The only other country where McDonalds are at least 8 times as numerous as zyxyvy views is Panama.

The dark blue countries on the map include both countries and territories where zyxyvy views outnumber McDonalds by at least 8 times, like the United States and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and countries where zyxyvy has received at least 16 views but no McDonalds have opened yet, like Algeria and Bangladesh. (Yes, Bangladesh—it rather surprised me too that somehow not a single McDonalds is open in Bangladesh. Searching around the internet, it appears the word on the street is that McDonalds closed its Bangladesh establishments due to insufficient regulations for quality control, but I haven’t yet found a source that is beyond an online-forum-style page.)

Opinions without Names Attached: MIT Communities

In this post, I share my generalized thoughts towards 22 different living communities at MIT, from my experiences interacting with them, without explicitly labeling the descriptions with which community I’m sharing my thoughts on. (This, hopefully, helps dodge influence of judgment in people who aren’t themselves familiar with the described communities.)

1. Reckless and bold. In it to make things interesting by force. Usually consider their brazen attitude towards life positively, yet consistently feel too sketched out to get my personal self involved in their activities. Most of the time smile at the presence of their attitude, but occasionally feel it is too much and hard to stop.

2. Good with the rebellious and anti-establishment spirit, but that’s pretty much it. Mostly people yelling and circlejerking rather than actually doing anything. If more of them would actually bother to get themselves involved in processes rather than just complain about the incompetence of people actually doing the work, maybe they would get more of what they want and maybe people would have more sympathy for them.

3. A beautiful balance of wholesomeness and silliness. Community generally has a great collective sense of humor. Only sometimes gets too carried away with it.

4. Community constantly in search of ways to make there not be nice things. Makes fun of other communities all the time, yet when others make fun of them, complain about how the joke’s not funny and only they should get to make fun of themselves (and of course, others). Has several people that don enough levels of irony to irony-stack overflow. Loves to take a concept where there isn’t a clearly defined boundary of starting when things are not okay and pushing just a tad bit more into uncool territory than everyone else does. Has some members that are nice people to get to know as individuals.

5. Eccentric but cool community. Unfortunately many of its members are hard to get to know, let alone become friends with. Some of the things they do I still don’t really understand.

6. One of the greatest celebrations of nerdiness, a floor that goes far both with exhibiting the awesomeness of nerds and self-aware making fun of the derpiness of nerds. Has respectable dedication to what they bring to the overall community, and carries down ridiculously good running jokes. One of my favorite communities at MIT.

7. A community trying to jump onto the bandwagon of cool rebelliousness, and actually has done pretty well so far. Has slipped up from time to time, and also has had to deal with certain things, but quite has everything together now. Glad they exist.

8. Too small to be much of a community. Sometimes feel sorry for them due to other communities using their space and not taking care of it enough.

Continue reading “Opinions without Names Attached: MIT Communities”