Interesting Fact Thread

[Ulster throw in]

There will be fewer births today than yesterday or tomorrow. Nobody wants induced on Feb 29 apparently.

So are the babies all sort of stuck with arms and legs out shouting out at the midwife "feck off I'm not coming out before midnight "

Are you suggesting oh feathered one that the 12-24 hr delay has given the foetus/new born child the ability to clearly annunciate and setout its wishes and whether it gives its consent for said delivery to occur???

[cables]

The 53 current Ulster players have 5 double birthdays.

02-Jan McCall & Wannenberg
11-Mar Gilroy & Olding
01-Jun Muller & Stevenson
26-Jul Marshall P. & Macklin
13-Oct Payne & Birch

[big mervyn]

Of the 22 players in the squad for France, POC (20/10/79) and Trimbie (20/10/84) share a birthday.

September and October have most births. Something do with the long winter nights.

[mikerob]

Of the 22 players in the squad for France, POC (20/10/79) and Trimbie (20/10/84) share a birthday.

September and October have most births. Something do with the long winter nights.

...or does it reinforce the "interesting fact" that there is a disproportionate number of pro sports people who were the oldest kids in their class at school? Apparently this is the same for just about all pro sports and whatever the school year is in a particular country.... so in Australia, Jan/Feb/March are the most common months for pro sports people birthdays.

Being the oldest kids can give a slight edge when it comes to standing out in teams, being selected etc. It doesn't mean that they are more talented than younger kids.

[OneMore]

All it proves is that with 23 people in a room it's likely that at least 2 of them will share a birthday

Ahem! That's NOT what it proves at all - if it proves anything.

All it is saying is that with 23 people together, there is a BETTER THEN 1 IN 2 CHANCE that 2 of them will share a birthday. Nothing about it being likely that at least 2 will share a birthday. There is still a good chance albeit less than one in two that none will share a birthday.

None of this gets around the issue that this is a thread for INTERESTING facts - the only fact around this is that this isn't interesting.

Hi Cap.

I have read this post several times, and I still don't see what you're saying. When you say "BETTER THEN 1 IN 2 CHANCE" [sic], I take this to mean the probability of said outcome is greater than 50%. By my own definition an outcome with a greater than 50% chance of happening, is likely.

Or maybe the distinction you're trying to make is based around whether precisely 2 of them will share a birthday (which is my reading of your sentence in blue) and me saying that at least 2 of them will share a birthday. Well if this is what you're trying to say, you're still somewhat off, with the logic I outlined previously, the tipping point we come to is the point where the probability of everyone having a different birthday is less than 50%. The negation of the bold-ed statement in the previous sentence is that at least 2 will share a birthday, not that precisely 2 will share a birthday.

Maybe I've misread what you're saying and you could clarify? I doubt you've any worthwhile point to make though.

[darkside lightside]

None of this gets around the issue that this is a thread for INTERESTING facts - the only fact around this is that this isn't interesting.

How dare you!!

Come on then, don't just be a hater - give us an interesting fact. And it has to be very interesting...

[Snipe Watson]

The longest recorded flight of a chicken is 13 seconds...............

What about the leap of a frog.......if it was quick enough?

[rocky]

Was Rooster chasing it with a H***-*n?

[darkside lightside]

if the state of Texas was divided up into 5000 square feet allotments, and each one housed a family of four, it could hold the entire population of the world..

That would have been true about 13 years ago, but would be over a billion short now. Texas at that allotment size would house approx 5.99Bn, but the world population passed 6Bn in 1999.

true.. I heard that from Steven Landsburg at a talk he gave a couple of weeks back, I must email him to tell him he's out of date! (don't worry I'll credit you ) In fact though all you'd have to do is give 2 out of every 3 'families' an extra lodger, and you're hunky dory!

[big mervyn]

World Population and the Isle of Wight

The question is often asked “Can the whole of the world’s population be fitted onto the Isle of Wight ?”. It was certainly possible at the end of World War II in 1945, but what about now ?

The UN World Population Counter on 25th October 2007 at 4 pm was 6,756,489,070 people, 30% of whom are under the age of 15.

So, there are 4,729,542,349 adults and 2,026,946,721 children.

For every obese American and European there are at least 10 under-nourished adults in the world, so one average adult can comfortably stand on a rectangle 500 cm wide by 400 cm deep (= 0.2 square metres), with the average child occupying half that area.

Therefore:-

4,729,542,349 adults x 0.2 sq. m = 945,908,469 sq.m

2,026,946,721 children x 0.1 = 202,694,672 sq.m

__________________________ _______________

Total area needed = 1,148,603,141 sq.m

= 1,149 sq km.

But, oh dear, the Isle of Wight is only 381 sq.km

We are going to have to chuck in a few more islands – fortunately we have plenty. How about

Isle of Wight
381
sq.km

Isle of Man
588
sq.km

Jersey
116
sq.km

Guernsey
68
sq.km

-----------------
---------
--------

TOTAL
1153
sq.km

Conclusion:

1. It is no longer possible to fit the world's population on any of Britain’s islands.

2. It would be possible to fit the world's population on our four largest islands, but only up to 2008. After that we will have to start using lots of little Scottish islands as well

[BR]

However, most of them don't want the ba born on Feb 29. Don't know why - I reckon it'd be kind of cool.

I was talking to a colleague about it yesterday on his '13th' birthday - I was asking him waht it was like, but he just grunted and went and locked himself in his room - probably won't come out til he retires.

[BR]

World Population and the Isle of Wight

The question is often asked “Can the whole of the world’s population be fitted onto the Isle of Wight ?”. It was certainly possible at the end of World War II in 1945, but what about now ?

The UN World Population Counter on 25th October 2007 at 4 pm was 6,756,489,070 people, 30% of whom are under the age of 15.

So, there are 4,729,542,349 adults and 2,026,946,721 children.

For every obese American and European there are at least 10 under-nourished adults in the world, so one average adult can comfortably stand on a rectangle 500 cm wide by 400 cm deep (= 0.2 square metres), with the average child occupying half that area.

Therefore:-

4,729,542,349 adults x 0.2 sq. m = 945,908,469 sq.m

2,026,946,721 children x 0.1 = 202,694,672 sq.m

__________________________ _______________

Total area needed = 1,148,603,141 sq.m

= 1,149 sq km.

But, oh dear, the Isle of Wight is only 381 sq.km

We are going to have to chuck in a few more islands – fortunately we have plenty. How about

Isle of Wight
381
sq.km

Isle of Man
588
sq.km

Jersey
116
sq.km

Guernsey
68
sq.km

-----------------
---------
--------

TOTAL
1153
sq.km

Conclusion:

1. It is no longer possible to fit the world's population on any of Britain’s islands.

2. It would be possible to fit the world's population on our four largest islands, but only up to 2008. After that we will have to start using lots of little Scottish islands as well

Belfast City Council would never allow it, they'd insist on the Isle of Man, Sark, Harris, South Uist and Canvey Island have yellow hatchings painted on them.

BCC are very fussy about overcrowding at events - unless of course it's one of their own children's xmas events (did anyone ever hear how th investigation into that went?)

[bazzaj]

The little squirt as Mickey called him in Rocky 2 who out sparred Rocky, was in fact Roberto "Hands of Stone" Duran

[Snipe Watson]

World Population and the Isle of Wight

The question is often asked “Can the whole of the world’s population be fitted onto the Isle of Wight ?”. It was certainly possible at the end of World War II in 1945, but what about now ?

The UN World Population Counter on 25th October 2007 at 4 pm was 6,756,489,070 people, 30% of whom are under the age of 15.

So, there are 4,729,542,349 adults and 2,026,946,721 children.

For every obese American and European there are at least 10 under-nourished adults in the world, so one average adult can comfortably stand on a rectangle 500 cm wide by 400 cm deep (= 0.2 square metres), with the average child occupying half that area.

Therefore:-

4,729,542,349 adults x 0.2 sq. m = 945,908,469 sq.m

2,026,946,721 children x 0.1 = 202,694,672 sq.m

__________________________ _______________

Total area needed = 1,148,603,141 sq.m

= 1,149 sq km.

But, oh dear, the Isle of Wight is only 381 sq.km

We are going to have to chuck in a few more islands – fortunately we have plenty. How about

Isle of Wight
381
sq.km

Isle of Man
588
sq.km

Jersey
116
sq.km

Guernsey
68
sq.km

-----------------
---------
--------

TOTAL
1153
sq.km

Conclusion:

1. It is no longer possible to fit the world's population on any of Britain’s islands.

2. It would be possible to fit the world's population on our four largest islands, but only up to 2008. After that we will have to start using lots of little Scottish islands as well

Isle of Lewis -1,770 km
Skye -165,625 km
So we're still OK Merv

[big mervyn]

Thank f?*k for that!

Skye -165,625 km???? That's twice the size of the whole of Ireland.