View previous topic | View next topic

Number of things

Page 3 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

PDR
1162080.  Thu Dec 10, 2015 8:52 am Reply with quote

gruff5 wrote:
Moons will generally have tidal bulges affecting their spherocity.


A feature of most women, too.

PDR

 
PDR
1162081.  Thu Dec 10, 2015 9:09 am Reply with quote

gruff5 wrote:
You still have the neutrons themselves providing "lumps & bumps"


Ah. We file those off.

PDR

 
14-11-2014
1162203.  Thu Dec 10, 2015 11:59 pm Reply with quote

There are more than 60 mountains in the Netherlands, according to an incomplete Wikipedia-list. In Germanic Dutch a mountain is a berg, the same berg as an iceberg. Their man-made VAM-berg hardly is a hill, but in Dutch it's a mountain. The height of the Aalberg, for example, is 9m. The highest hill in the country is the Vaalserberg, 323m. In sane English there are no mountains in the country. In Dutch there are mountains, bergen.

 
Alfred E Neuman
1162272.  Fri Dec 11, 2015 7:06 am Reply with quote

14-11-2014 wrote:
In Germanic Dutch a mountain is a berg


Is Germanic Dutch a 'thing'? Or is it the same as saying Germanic English (English also being a Germanic language). Or is it just redundant?


I know I quoted 14 there, but anyone else please feel free to answer - 14 doesn't usually talk to me.

 
'yorz
1162275.  Fri Dec 11, 2015 7:10 am Reply with quote

Rejoice.

 
Alfred E Neuman
1162294.  Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:01 am Reply with quote

'yorz wrote:
Rejoice.


I'm sorry, is this the hymn rehearsal?

:-)

 
suze
1162392.  Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:58 pm Reply with quote

Alfred E Neuman wrote:
14-11-2014 wrote:
In Germanic Dutch a mountain is a berg


Is Germanic Dutch a 'thing'? Or is it the same as saying Germanic English (English also being a Germanic language). Or is it just redundant?


It's comparable to saying "Germanic English", or indeed "Germanic Norwegian" or "Romance French".

14-11-2014 wrote:
The highest hill in the country is the Vaalserberg, 323m. In sane English there are no mountains in the country.


English convention is that a hill higher than one thousand English feet (305 meters) is indeed a mountain, and so the Vaalserberg is a mountain.

But the highest mountain in the country, come on. Is not that Mount Scenery?

 
gruff5
1163016.  Mon Dec 14, 2015 2:53 am Reply with quote

Hugh Grant convention, too.

 
WordLover
1163336.  Tue Dec 15, 2015 12:41 pm Reply with quote

.....


Last edited by WordLover on Fri Sep 16, 2016 11:06 am; edited 1 time in total

 
gruff5
1163385.  Tue Dec 15, 2015 9:54 pm Reply with quote

Sea level definitions are always going to cause problems with these ancient concepts. A sand dune on a high plateau of 3,000ft high can now be a mountain.

 
crissdee
1163400.  Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:34 am Reply with quote

Unless we can come up with a geological criteria that defines a mountain from any other high piece of land, it is difficult to know what else to use other than sea level. Height from base is problematical in just defining where the mountain actually starts, distance from the centre of the earth also causes anomalies. The only practical solution would seem to be some internationally agreed level as a base line, and as the planet is far from spherical, sea level is the obvious choice. Or we could work the other way and measure distance from the Heavyside layer of the atmosphere. Any other ideas?

 
Alfred E Neuman
1163401.  Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:46 am Reply with quote

According to the sea level definition, I live on top of a mountain. But it's actually just a hill, no-one who sees it would call it a mountain, and it would be pretty unusual or have maize planted on a mountain top.

 
CharliesDragon
1163419.  Wed Dec 16, 2015 6:31 am Reply with quote

suze wrote:


It's comparable to saying "Germanic English", or indeed "Germanic Norwegian" or "Romance French".


Speaking of Germanic Norwegian, though, a "berg" can be a hill/mountain, but I'd define it more often as an outcrop, or even just a large piece of rock. Generally more like an ice-berg, just in stone.

 
tetsabb
1163540.  Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:39 pm Reply with quote

Alfred E Neuman wrote:
According to the sea level definition, I live on top of a mountain. But it's actually just a hill, no-one who sees it would call it a mountain, and it would be pretty unusual or have maize planted on a mountain top.

I always think that, in addition to pure height, a mountain has an element of pointiness to it. So some of the high ground in the Lake District counts on my mind as mountains, while the so-called mountains over in Ireland ate more hill-ish, as they tend to be rounder..
No doubt a geographer would point* out the error of my ways

*SWIDT?

 
14-11-2014
1168205.  Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:39 am Reply with quote

In European bond markets the number of days of a 360-calendar can be 358 or 359: 31st becomes 30th, and February has its actual length.

Only by definition the length of February is 30 days too, so the theoretical length of a year is 360 days indeed, but there's no 30th of February.

 

Page 3 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group