Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

How Much Does A Cloud Weigh?

simoniker posted more than 10 years ago | from the fluffy-but-heavy dept.

Science 505

MyNameIsFred writes "ABC News is running an article revealing unexpected facts about weather formations. Ever wonder how much a cloud weighs? What about a hurricane? A meteorologist has done some estimates and the results might surprise you..." Reports that include the phrase "more than all the elephants on the planet" are always welcome.

cancel ×

505 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

fp fp fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866302)

fuck you all fp, i rule the toilet from kdawg

TI-89 Issues (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866303)

I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you TI fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of my calculator (a TI-89) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to invert a 7 by 7 matrix. 20 minutes. At home, on my HP48 running at 4 Mhz, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this TI, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

In addition, during this matrix inversion, The calculator will not work. It has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various TI calculators, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a TI that has run faster than its HP counterpart, despite the TI's faster chip architecture. My Casio FX-100 runs faster than this 10 Mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the TI is a superior machine.

TI addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use TI calculators over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

Re:TI-89 Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866462)

From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the TI is a superior machine.

That's what I think of these so-callled "geeks" with their so-called "Operating System" which goes by the name of LINUKS or such.

Don't be afraid (-1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866311)

I, for one, welcome our new meteorological overlords.

NEWS ALERT (Summary) (5, Funny)

error502 (694533) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866313)

Clouds are made of a lot of water. A lot of water is heavy. Clouds are heavy.

In other news, the sky is blue and grass is green.

Re:NEWS ALERT (Summary) (4, Insightful)

digitalunity (19107) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866395)

That's why I never listen to the news.

The sky isn't blue at all. Sunlight shining through our atmosphere makes it appear blue. Evidence of this is any sunset; then it isn't blue at all.

Re:NEWS ALERT (Summary) (5, Funny)

error502 (694533) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866407)

*Gasp!* The sky isn't actually blue! My world has been shaken! ...Grass is still green, right? ;-)

You... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866414)

...aren't one for humor, are you?

Re:NEWS ALERT (Summary) (5, Funny)

Negative Response (650136) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866410)

Um, I read the article, and doesn't it say clouds are made of elephants? Millions of them?

Re:NEWS ALERT (Summary) (1)

error502 (694533) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866430)

Millions of them?

It depends on what kind of math [slashdot.org] you're using.

sad (2, Insightful)

mse61 (678636) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866314)

It isn't saying much when you have to relate the measurement of weight to an elephant so the populous that reads it can grasp the magnitude of the number. In fact I find that rather pathetic...

Re:sad (1)

lpret (570480) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866329)

no kidding, how did this get on slashdot? I've seen huge discussions of Tesla coils by people who design them for a living, and here we're talking about a cloud being heavy -- give me abreak.

Re:sad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866411)

How do you make a living off designing tesla coils? Who uses them besides science museums?

Re:sad (1)

halo1982 (679554) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866334)

its the state of america, today :-/
some day i hope americans will look back on us and think "god they were stupid"

Re:sad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866434)

dont feel so bad, the rest of the world is saying exactly that right now :p

Re:sad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866335)

Something equally sad is your inability to spell POPULACE correctly.

Re:sad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866341)

i haven't been to sleep in 24+ hrs give me a break, k?

Re:sad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866356)

Doesn't know how to capitalize, either.

Re:sad (1)

g0at (135364) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866348)

It's interesting how the "populous" (sic poster) can't relate to the "cumulous" (sic article) clouds.

-ben

I find your sense of superiority pathetic. (4, Insightful)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866363)

I see no reason why most people should have some natural appreciation of what "550 tons" actually means.

Because this is slashdot... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866423)

everyone != me is inferior! Mwhahahahaha!

...

...

......I'm a sad, sad little man.

Re:I find your sense of superiority pathetic. (1)

mse61 (678636) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866425)

It's not a sense of superiority but rather a sense of intolerance for the simplicity of the example. I would hope that most people who have grown up using the English system of measures would have a good grasp on the weight of a ton. A good visual example is nessary but as i interpreted the article is seemed as if the writer was trying to hard to illustrate the shear weight of the clouds buy substuting elephants in for actually physical measurements. By the way what makes you think that a person has any better grasp on the magnitude of the weight of an elephant compared to the maginitude of the weight of a ton?

Re:I find your sense of superiority pathetic. (1)

StewedSquirrel (574170) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866433)

hmmm...

Well, uhm... *I* see no reason why most people should have some natural appreciation of what "550 elephants" actually means.

Perhaps if they did it in terms of Big Macs or copies of "Vogue".

Stewey

The trick, I expect, is to keep numbers low (1)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866485)

You can get some sort of appreciation from thinking of one elephant and building from that to 100 elephants is a reasonable stretch.

However, if you start with a Big Mac, then the number you end up with (say 1 million?) is so large that you are left with something that is still difficult to visualise.

Re:sad (1)

Brymouse (563050) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866370)

It's perfectaly vaild to give the people something to visulize.

How do you handle metric units? I know what a meter is and how long it is, but still convert it to feet before I can visulize it. i.e. a centimeter is about 1/3 of an inch, and a meter is a bit longer than a yard. 100 feet ~ 30 Meters in most peoples minds.

Re:sad (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866452)

...where "most" means "those of us who are still stuck in the non-metric Stone Age".

I knew it (5, Funny)

Kshu (608394) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866316)

I always knew that elephants could fly...

Re:I knew it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866388)

...the hard part is chopping them up into all those little raindrop-sized pieces.

Depends (4, Funny)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866319)

On whether it has a silver lining on not

Re:Depends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866338)

Does silver weigh more or less than water?

Re:Depends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866345)

Try dropping a chunk of silver into a bucket of water and see if it floats.

DUH!

Re:Depends (1)

YOU LIKEWISE FAIL IT (651184) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866461)

Thats density, numb-nuts. Does ice float on water? Does ice "weigh" less than water?

-- YLFI

Math? (4, Funny)

robbyjo (315601) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866320)

Assume an elephant weighs about six tons, she says, that would mean that water inside a typical cumulous cloud would weigh about one hundred elephants.

Somehow it reminds me of RIAA's math equivalent.

Re:Math? (1)

Soul-Burn666 (574119) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866332)

I always thought the clouds and vapor are more like SCO's claims equivelant ;)

Re:Math? (2, Funny)

AntiOrganic (650691) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866351)

I would imagine that a zookeeper at a particularly large zoo, or perhaps safari, would weigh one hundred elephants.

Re:Math? (5, Funny)

error502 (694533) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866366)

If that were actually RIAA math, one cloud would weigh about one elephants. You have to take into account how old they are. A really old elephant is equivalent to two middle-aged elephants. You also have to take into account if they know any circus tricks. The elephants that know circus tricks are equivalent to the weight of five regular elephants. Then there are the wild elephants, which are the equivalent of ten elephants that grew up in zoos.

Re:Math? (1)

error502 (694533) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866380)

Ugh. One cloud would weigh about one *billion* elephants. I'm a retard.

I am not a meteorologist (4, Interesting)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866322)

Or a physicist, or really a member of any pertinent field, but it seems to me that the last bit, about all the elephants ever, is pretty bogus science.

"What we're doing is weighing the water in one cubic meter theoretically pulled from a cloud and then multiplying by the number of meters in a whole hurricane," she explains.

That makes no sense at all. A cloud is very little like a hurricane except that it involves water, air, and differentials of temperature and pressure.

Re:I am not a meteorologist (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866475)

That makes no sense at all. A cloud is very little like a hurricane except that it involves water, air, and differentials of temperature and pressure.

Uh, but that's exactly what a cloud is and what keeps it in the air.

Its an Addiction (1, Offtopic)

soliaus (626912) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866324)

In Soviet Russia, Cloud weigh YOU!

Re:Its an Addiction (2, Funny)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866336)

  1. Fail to correctly type your joke which you think is clever.
  2. ?
  3. Profit!

Re:Its an Addiction (0, Offtopic)

soliaus (626912) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866344)

Oops, forgot to check the "Anonymous" box.

Re:Its an Addiction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866464)

Please stop posting altogether, anonymous or otherwise. Thanks.

Units Units Units (5, Funny)

NASAKnight (588155) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866328)

Doesn't anybody know that elephants are non-standard units? Give me something I can work with here, people. How many library of congresses would it take to equal the weight of a storm cloud?

Stephen

Re:Units Units Units (3, Funny)

g0at (135364) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866360)

Actually, my favourite high school math teacher (in fact one of the best profs I'd ever had) typically spoke in units of elephants, when trying to illustrate concepts involving quantities that were otherwise hard to relate to.

(e.g. "imagine I have root two elephants sitting on the floor here, and then multiply the imaginary part...")

-ben

Re:Units Units Units (1)

DCowern (182668) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866396)

forty rods to the hogshead... and that's just the way I like it!

Re:Units Units Units (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866400)

Man walks into the library of congress with an elephant under one arm, and a cloud in the other.

Re:Units Units Units (4, Funny)

good-n-nappy (412814) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866442)

I was just thinking... could someone convert that to blue whales for me?

Re:Units Units Units (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866460)

Ideally a measurement like this should be expressed in 'Cats and Dogs' as opposed to elephants. :)

Metric Metric Metric (4, Funny)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866499)

A 500 square meter area got an average rainfall of 3cm

500 * 100 = 50000 square cm
3cm * 50000 cm^2= 150000 cm^3

Pure Water having a specific gravity of 1.00
150,000 cm^3 * 1.00 = 150,000grams or 150Kg

Using the imperial system we have to resort to using inches, hands, feet, arms, britney spears, elephents, and the odd library of congress.

So.. (1)

corgicorgi (692903) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866331)

Ones that float is not light,
Those who wander are not lost.

The upcoming version of MS Office.... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866333)

Will not only lock out OO opening all the current docs it does so FLAWLESSLY AND WONDERFULLY now (even though they've maintained backwards compatibility for YEARS), but it will prevent the proper formation of clouds by weighing them down too much, and the Earth will perish. I heard a rumor, and it's portraying MS as a bad guy, so it HAS TO BE TRUE! POST IT ON /.!

Re:The upcoming version of MS Office.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866387)

You missed the part about the clouds. ON-TOPIC. Sheesh.

That's it... (4, Funny)

Fatllama (17980) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866339)

... the cloud is a witch! No wait, ducks not elephants. n/m

Target Audience? (5, Insightful)

i_am_nitrogen (524475) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866340)

Who on earth is this written for? It says at the bottom that at least two people contributed to the report. The language is like that of a 4th grader. Is this what all ABC News reports look and/or sound like?

This makes the BBC seem like something written by Stephen Hawking.

Re:Target Audience? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866413)

Most news is written at the 4th grade level... generaly speaking. This would include NBC / CBS / ABC, though I think USA today is written at the 3rd grade level.

It's sad but true.

aparrently (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866427)

they based the article on the attention span of elephants aswell...

Re:Target Audience? (2, Insightful)

Tokerat (150341) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866451)


...perhaps that's so it may be used in a 4th grade science class? Honestly, I don't think this is exactly hard-hitting journalism targeted at America's most prominent adult citizens...

It's just a neat little factoid little Billy can print and bring to teacher for extra credit. Also, an interesting fact, if it's something you never considered before.

Re:Target Audience? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866489)

i have the inside scoop: it was comissioned for and specifically written for slashdot readers. the evil osdn keiretsu has assimilated the american broadcasting corporation.

tomorrow, peter jennings reports on the 2.6.00.203.17 release of the linux kernel with a byline that reads "teh linux is releasesed".

these are the end of days.

This surprises you? (3, Insightful)

rblancarte (213492) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866346)

We are talking water. Water is very heavy. It is just that water in a cloud is in vapor form, and also floating in the sky that we sort of forget that it is still water.

And to be honest, the numbers (200,000 elephants in a storm cloud) don't shock me. Think of the destruction caused by floods, which are caused by rain. In some ways, it makes sense.

Library of Congress (0, Redundant)

danny256 (560954) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866349)

Assume an elephant weighs about six tons, she says, that would mean that water inside a typical cumulous cloud would weigh about one hundred elephants.

But how many LOCs is it?

An earlier answer (5, Informative)

staplegun (452753) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866350)

Cecil Adams answered [straightdope.com] this a few years back. Sure he uses 747's instead of elephants, but his answer is a bit more detailed.

Re:An earlier answer (1)

mrfeeb (704175) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866394)

w e a k.

Surprised (4, Funny)

cyril3 (522783) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866354)

I'm surprised a meteorologist can get through a degree and on the job training and after all that be surprised just how much water there is in a hurricane.

I wonder if she has ever considered just how hot is the sun. Wow, its hotter than all the space heaters that have ever been made turned on in the drying closet and you locked in for the whole weekend with only a bottle of soda and some salt crackers. Although by saturday night it would feel pretty much the same.

40 million elephants. (4, Funny)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866359)

They use elephant weights in the article to make it easier to visualize. A Hurricane is 40 million elephants. That's just so much easier to visualize than 240 million tons (cubic meters) of water.

Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]

I don't know... (4, Funny)

raehl (609729) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866361)

I'd guess it weighs about as much as Vaporware.

Elephants Smelephants... (5, Funny)

Ironix (165274) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866364)

Yes, and I have a car that weighs over 1 trillion fleas.

Did I mention my laptop that must weigh over 50 field mice...

Yeah, (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866365)

I just don't know how anyone is gonna say anything intelligent about that...

More Imponerables (1)

Lucas Membrane (524640) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866372)

How much does the internet weigh?

How much would it weigh if it was made of water?

How much does all the spam sent on the internet each day weigh?

Is there any place big enough to store it?

How much does the near vacuum in all the CRTs connected to the internet weigh?

How many ergs are there in all the electrons flying at all the CRT's on earth at any one instant?

Re:More Imponerables (1)

StewedSquirrel (574170) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866402)

The answer to the question of life, the universe and everything is....

the answer is.... "42"

Stewey

How do you convert that to midgets? (5, Funny)

tjstork (137384) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866373)


The real question is how many midgets does an elephant weigh? If have 48 midgets per elephant, and I have 600 elephants per cloud, then....

Elephant Units (5, Funny)

questamor (653018) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866376)

Are they Metric or Imperial elephants?

Re:Elephant Units (5, Funny)

Pompatus (642396) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866421)

Are they Metric or Imperial elephants?

Definately Imperial elephants. Since we're talking about clouds, they have to be storm trooper elephants.

Re:Elephant Units (1)

shfted! (600189) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866492)

Or white elephants?

No wonder (4, Funny)

cyril3 (522783) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866379)

hurricanes are so destructive what with 200,000 elephants flying all over the place.

Don't you hate people who can't estimate? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866381)

From the article "That means the water in one hurricane weighs more than all the elephants on the planet. Perhaps even more than all the elephants that have ever lived on the planet."

Assume an elephant generation is 50 years. Assume the average number of elephants in Africa at any one time is 100,000 (this will be way low historically). So, 40 million elephants are born in 400 generations, or only 20,000 years.

So there's no way this atatement "more than all the elephants that have ever lived on the planet" is correct.

When I was studying physics the lecturer was very insistent about us being able to do back of the envelope calculations - for example, how many photons does a 1.5 volt torch make on a full battery.

Cheers,
James

Wow... (4, Funny)

DCowern (182668) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866382)

This opens up a whole new world of "your mom" jokes... "Your mom weighs as much as a cloud." How many people are gonna be able to figure that one out? :-D

Uhhhh (1)

TheAntiCrust (620345) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866383)

GEE, I didnt know clouds have mass... and big ones weigh a lot??? Wow. But please, give me a measurent I can understand. How many kittens does a cloud weigh? I've never picked up an elephant.

Weigh? (1)

Jippy_ (564603) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866384)

Weigh? Forget weight! How much does one cost? I wouldn't mind having my own cumulonimbus hanging around.

Google failure (3, Funny)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866385)

Sure, it can do easy conversions like 1 pint in decilitres [google.com] .

But can it do 1 cloud in elephants [google.com] ? No!

Perhaps Google isn't god after all.

Re:Google failure (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866426)

Well, it can tell you Planck's constant in stone-Smoot-parsecs per fortnight [google.com] so I wouldn't be so quick to judge.

Why do clouds float? (4, Informative)

Aaron England (681534) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866389)

Clouds are composed primarily of small water droplets and, if it's cold enough, ice crystals. The vast majority of clouds you see contain droplets and/or crystals that are too small to have any appreciable fall velocity. So the particles continue to float with the surrounding air. For an analogy closer to the ground, think of tiny dust particles that, when viewed against a shaft of sunlight, appear to float in the air. Indeed, the distance from the center of a typical water droplet to its edge--its radius--ranges from a few microns (thousandths of a millimeter) to a few tens of microns (ice crystals are often a bit larger). And the speed with which any object falls is related to its mass and surface area--which is why a feather falls more slowly than a pebble of the same weight. For particles that are roughly spherical, mass is proportional to the radius cubed (r3); the downward-facing surface area of such a particle is proportional to the radius squared (r2). Thus, as a tiny water droplet grows, its mass becomes more important than its shape and the droplet falls faster. Even a large droplet having a radius of 100 microns has a fall velocity of only about 27 centimeters per second (cm/s). And because ice crystals have more irregular shapes, their fall velocities are relatively smaller. Upward vertical motions, or updrafts, in the atmosphere also contribute to the floating appearance of clouds by offsetting the small fall velocities of their constituent particles. Clouds generally form, survive and grow in air that is moving upward. Rising air expands as the pressure on it decreases, and that expansion into thinner, high-altitude air causes cooling. Enough cooling eventually makes water vapor condense, which contributes to the survival and growth of the clouds. Stratiform clouds (those producing steady rain) typically form in an environment with widespread but weak upward motion (say, a few cm/s); convective clouds (those causing showers and thunderstorms) are associated with updrafts that exceed a few meters per second. In both cases, though, the atmospheric ascent is sufficient to negate the small fall velocities of cloud particles. Another way to illustrate the relative lightness of clouds is to compare the total mass of a cloud to the mass of the air in which it resides. Consider a hypothetical but typical small cloud at an altitude of 10,000 feet, comprising one cubic kilometer and having a liquid water content of 1.0 gram per cubic meter. The total mass of the cloud particles is about 1 million kilograms, which is roughly equivalent to the weight of 500 automobiles. But the total mass of the air in that same cubic kilometer is about 1 billion kilograms--1,000 times heavier than the liquid! So, even though typical clouds do contain a lot of water, this water is spread out for miles in the form of tiny water droplets or crystals, which are so small that the effect of gravity on them is negligible. Thus, from our vantage on the ground, clouds seem to float in the sky.

Re:Why do clouds float? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866401)

Clouds float because they are high

Why do karma whore's whore? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866406)

Because they think if they get enough karma they will be permitted to suck Cmdr. Taco's dick. At this time evidence suggests the rumors are true.

Re:Why do karma whore's whore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866428)

And I guess you're just pissed off because you can't get any karma to speak of, eh?

Sucks to be you.

More accurate methods (5, Interesting)

StewedSquirrel (574170) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866391)

Perhaps a more accurate method would be to extrapolate from the amount of water actually present in a cloud. A "cloud" isn't some well-defined object containing a set density of water. I'm sure a big puffy white one has a LOT less water than a big mean dark one that is the same size.

Then again, when we're talking about clouds... they're just concentrations of moisture that happen to refract and reflect visible light. The air has moisture everywhere. What exactly is the difference in moisture content between a cloud and a "really wet day" in the jungle?

I've seen it rain with very little cloud cover... So while we're at it, why not just weigh the air?

Or we could get around to other even more pointless activities... ANYTHING to get you on /. :-)

Stewey

Re:More accurate methods (1)

Tokerat (150341) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866416)


...got them on Fark, too...

Cloudless Skies (2, Interesting)

chiasmus1 (654565) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866473)

I've seen it rain with very little cloud cover... So while we're at it, why not just weigh the air?

Here in Japan it gets so humid that sometimes it rains without any clouds in the sky. I have always thought that was interesting.

Obligatory Simpsons Quote (4, Funny)

henriksh (683138) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866399)

I, for one, welcome our new meteorologist overlords!

Love those metaphors (1)

Mrs. Grundy (680212) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866415)

I suppose we would be all set if she could tie in:
  • how the weight of a teaspoon of white-dwarf material compares.
  • how many trips to the moon and around the earth something would take
  • How many bowls of Total you would need to eat to equal the nutritional value of one cloud.

But really, from my vantage point on a hot humid evening, listening to the air conditioner's constant drip of water pulled from seemingly dry air, it is no surprise that the atmosphere holds a lot of water. If you consider that clouds form when the air is fully saturated with water it makes a lot of sense that a large thing like a cloud would have a large amount of water in it.

Less than... (1)

falzer (224563) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866420)

It floats, so it must weigh less than a duck.

Re:I see sco... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866438)

clouds.

Guess everytime you look at clouds now you will have to pay SCO.

Shame.

Boredumb (1)

knightPhlight (173012) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866432)

Picture this.. it's 2am and you're a Slashdot editor. The glow of your beautiful 21" LCD bathes you in 60-70hz of XF86 windowed goodness. Having beaten Mindbreaker 256+ times consecutively you decide to submit an article to the masses. Beside your lack of anything to do while the rest of us code/sleep/code in our sleep, you forgo reading the article to see if it contains anything worth reading at all.

*Post*

And now back to dragging and dropping little pins in place...

How about in (1)

xintegerx (557455) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866450)

How about in volkswagen beetles?

Heavy - relative to what? (1)

cra (172225) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866454)

Since it is "floating in thin air", it has to be "lighter than air", wouldn't it? This would be the same principle that makes any boat "lighter than water" even though it might weigh thousands of tons.

And of course a condensed cloud would be prety heavy. You could compress any /.'er down to the size of a pinhead, and he/she(/I) would be pretty heavy compared to any other pinhead.

Oh damn. (1)

mindsuck (607395) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866470)

The phrase "Light as a cloud" doesn't make much sense to me anymore.

The question... (1)

Tokerat (150341) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866471)


...isn't how much water in a cloud...

....rather how much vapor is in FWB Software [fwb.com] ?

(Mods, be gentle...)

Just got back from Fark (0, Troll)

teamhasnoi (554944) | more than 10 years ago | (#6866476)

and boy are my arms tired.

If only we knew what the volume of the cloud was.

I expected to see:

Next Week on ABC NEWS!

Q: What weighs more: A pound of feathers, a pound of gold, or an article with important details missing?

A: The Article with important details missing will weigh you down more than feathers or gold! It also will wear you down faster than 3,004 sheets of sandpaper, and make you sigh more than another SCO press release!

Thanks for reading ABC NEWS! It's better than two buckets of ice cream!

What, no SCO news today? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866488)

What a retarded article.

It depends... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6866495)

of course on what the cloud looks like! An elephant, a pillow, a teddy bear, a plane, ...

Duh!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>