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