xkcd #2936: Exponential Growth
xkcd #2936: Exponential Growth
Alt text:
Karpov's construction of a series of increasingly large rice cookers led to a protracted deadlock, but exponential growth won in the end.
You're viewing a single thread.
just eat the rice smh
bon apetit. when you are done, i will donate one million dollars to charity of your choice. i don't have one million dollars. i will still honor my promise.
there is 2^64 - 1 (roughly
5.53 * 10^171,84 × 10^19) grains of rice on the board.according to google, grain of rice averages at about 30 miligrams (per random google result), which makes the rice on the board to weigh about 553 402 322 211 metric tons.
The total world rice production for 2022 was 776 461 457 metric tonnes (per wiki).
((2^64−1) × 0.03) / (10^6) / 776461457 = 712,72
so there is about 712 times as much rice as the whole earth's 2022 rice production.
this is why it is important to understand basic math in school, even if you don't plan to become a scientist.
because then the covid comes, and all these university of life graduates with their youtube research and common sense have absolutely no idea how fast the exponential curve is growing and what it means for the spread of the illness.
i understand you might have known this and being sarcastic with your post.
nah i could handle it. i hungy
I like rice, rice is great when you’re hungry and you want 2,000 of something.
This was an old story about the inventor of chess and a king. Let me see if I can dig it up....
Yup, I remember now. It was with wheat grains, not rice:
I think there exist a lot of different versions, my 7th grade maths teacher explained it using rice.
I don't see the problem here. It just means more rice for everyone.
This seems wrong...
10^17 milligrams
-> 10^14 grams
-> 10^11 kilograms
-> 10^8 tons
So it should actually be 553 402 322 tons, which means that we can do it only using the rice produced in 2022.
This seems wrong…
10^17 milligrams
(2^64−1) × 0.03 = 5.53 × 10^17 is weight in grams.
but i had an error in the second paragraph where i said this number is number of grains.
the ultimate result (712 times the annual production) is correct.
sorry for the confusion and thx for catching that.
Gotcha, I didn't catch that on my first read-through.