Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!ntt
From: ntt@dciem.UUCP (Mark Brader)
Newsgroups: net.micro,net.physics
Subject: Re: Big things are weaker than small things
Message-ID: <759@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 6-Mar-84 12:51:21 EST
Article-I.D.: dciem.759
Posted: Tue Mar  6 12:51:21 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 6-Mar-84 14:24:51 EST
References: <639@seismo.UUCP>
Organization: NTT Systems Inc., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 18

Tom Merrick asked:

  >>I'm not sure why this is, but you cannot pick up a full sized
  >>aircraft by one of its appendages either, but you can do so with a model.
  >>Any experts out there who can comment on this one?

Ted Flinn answered:

  >>Large things are intrinsically weaker than small things.  Since mass
  >>scales as the cube of linear dimension and cross-sectional area as the
  >>square of linear dimension, the stress in members of a structure goes
  >>up as size increases.

And he gave references.  I would just like to add one more: the article
"On Being the Right Size", I believe by J.B.S.Haldane, in the excellent
anthology "The World of Mathematics" edited by James R. Newman.

Mark Brader