this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
40 points (100.0% liked)

earth

12631 readers
9 users here now

The world’s #1 planet!

A community for the discussion of the environment, climate change, ecology, sustainability, nature, and pictures of cute wild animals.

Socialism is the only path out of the global ecological crisis.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's a Bluesky link but he use adult tags as de facto "spoiler" tags. The problem is that content is hidden if you're not logged into Bluesky. Here's a Bluesky mirror site to show the entire thread...

https://subium.com/profile/c0nc0rdance.bsky.social/post/3kpkcq2ecws22

A huge hint...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You limit yourself by only thinking in euclidean geometry. Spherical geometry is a well defined mathematical concept and straight lines in this metric have the intuitive definition of being the shortest path between two points.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Yes, using lat, long, and radius is better than xyz on the earth - usually. But the radius, the 3rd dimension, changes by where you are because the earth isn't actually a sphere. On this path it would get longer until you reached the equator, shorter until the most southerly point then longer again until you hit NZ. It is a wavy line not a straight one. Again you're projecting 3d onto 2d (because you're incorrectly assuming a fixed radius) and saying that that error in projection doesn't matter.