Hey /tg/, /sci/ told me to ask you guys instead, so here I am. I have an odd question.
Let's say there is a 10 km tall giant and, despite what the square-cube law would say, he is able to withstand his own weight and move like a proportionate human would through unknown means. His density is also somehow similar to that of a normal human.
1 - How much would he weight, assuming he is of average build.
and
2 - How far would he sink into the earth due to his weigh?
>not doing your setting research by yourself.
Shamefur Dispray.
I ain't no mather but I can do this much
Average height and weight for a human European male according to Wikipedia is approximately 180cm and 71kg.
180cm is 0.018% of 10km, so 10km is 5555.5 recurring times bigger than a human.
71 x 5555.5 is 394444.4 recurring kg, or 39.4 recurring metric tonnes.
>>45232384
Weight is determined by volume, not height, anon
>>45232408
Note the disclaimer
>>45232076
What kind of stone is he made of? Rock varies a lot in density from stuff like sandstone to slate and granite.
Defining average human proportions as a rectangular prism roughly 200cm x 20cm x 40cm, and density as 1050 kg per cubic meter.
The volume comes out to 20,000,000,000 cubic meters.
This puts the weight at 21,000,000,000,000 kg, or 21,000,000,000 metric tons.
So this thing weighs 21 billion metric tons, and now I've got to calculate its footprint...
>>45232408
This.
Let's just approximate a human as a cylinder of 1.8m height and 0.4m diameter. That's 4.5 times as high as he is wide. The giant is 10000m tall and assuming the same proportions 2222m wide. His volume is 1.55e11 m^3.
Wikipedia gives me a density of 1062 kg/m^3 for a human body so his mass would be 1.65e14 kg. Which is a lot.
>>45232508
>165 billion metric tons
>>45232467
21 billion
Well at least we can confirm it's in the billions.
>>45232508
For comparison he's about 10 times heavier than the global biomass of fish.
>dragon the size of Australia lands on Australia
>doesn't immediately cause massive geological chaos
>people get all teary-eyed when someone posts >Superman
Why is this allowed
>>45232508
well he'd still be less than a billionth of the mass of the earth. but I imagine he'd still manage to weigh a comparable amount to the tectonic plates.
Assuming the earth's density is like the suns and corresponds to a 1/r relationship. Most of the earths weight would be in the center, so this 10km giant might actually make noticeable holes in the earth whenever he steps. Off hand I'd guess about 150 - 500 meters deep?
>>45232076
Who cares?
>>45232669
OP does.
>>45232669
good question anon. Let's address it. I'm not going to tell you directly, instead i will attempt to guide you towards the answer. Like a teacher, because you need to be taught.
Now see, if someone cares about a conversation topic, they will generally either bring it up, or respond positively to it when it is brought up. Signs someone may not be responding positively are: immediately insulting it, walking away, staying silent, or expressing disdain in some other way I will not bring up now.
Do you think you can find a few examples in this thread of people responding positively to the question and topic brought up by OP?
>>45232655
Well, hit feet would be, what? 2km*.5km each?
That's distributing 165 billion tons over a square kilometer (not sure how to compute that into kg per cm), and that's without even getting into momentum.
What I want to know is that if he can walk as fast as a normal human, would he break the sound barrier with a sprint?
>>45232765
going with that foot size and the weight here >>45232508
pressure would be about 5.8e8 N/m. normal size people would be about 1e6 N/m (assuming 80kg person, with foot size .2 meters by .15 meters and remembering to account for two feet)
So the giant would be exerting about 6000 times the pressure of a normal sized person.
So... I'm changing my guess to less than 200 meters
>>45232076
If we define the average build as 177 cm tall and 70 kg weigh, our giant is 5650 times taller, has 31922500 times the surface area and 116517125000 times the volume.
Since weight is a function of volume, our giant would weigh about 8156198800000 kilograms or 8 billion metric tons.
An estimation footprint size of 300 cm^2 puts our giant at 0.95 square kilometers for the area of each foot.
No idea how to calculate how deep it would sink though.
>>45232778
you mean if he can walk with the proportionate speed of a normal human.
big difference.
>>45232655
Since his feet have a pretty small surface are (and if he walks like a human he doesn't even use the entire surface for each step) I think he'd just sink into the mantle. Give me a sec.
Human foot surface area is about 100 cm^2 apparently. Now I can't just directly scale this up by 5555 times since we only have his height but let's just approximate is from a rectangle of 25cm*5cm (absolutely not accurate). That gives his footprint a size of (very roughly) 0.38 square kilometers.
Now we all know f = m*a
Taking his mass from >>45232508 and earth gravity that gives us a force of 1.618E15 N with which he exerts on the earth with both of his feet. That's 8E14 N per foot. That's gives us a pressure of 2.1 billion Newton per square meter, which is 21000 bar or 2.1 Gigapascal.
That's a lot but I have no idea what variable of, for example basalt, I'd have to calculate this against to see if he would sink. Shear stress?
>>45232986
The earth's crust is 100 miles thick at its thinnest points.
>>45233020
Yeah but can you compress the crust or does it shear out of the way? If it's the latter he has a problem.
>>45233020
Try 5 kilometers.
>>45233020
Factually wrong.
Earth crust's ranges from 5 to 70 km thick.
It's pretty thin on a geological scale.
>>45233213
This. Its comparable to the thickness of an apple skin.
>>45232778
He breaks it by even dragging his feet.
The average person takes about one step per second, and they cover their height in two steps, meaning he walks at 5 km/s.
He'll walk around the world in two hours.
>>45233565
>billions of tons moving faster than any bullet on earth.
Although at his size he would probably feel as in a low gravity, so he would not be able to move as easily.
I mean, if he raised his legs as if for a jumping jack, and waited to fall, it would take him about 30 seconds to touch the ground again.
This is getting weird.
>>45233565
He'd have to swim over half the journey. The average ocean depth would be around 11km so 1km above his head. He couldn't even long jump the bering strait.
So the conclusion is that scaling up a humanoid shape too much results in ridiculousness all around.
Anything much taller than maybe 15m needs to be powered by magic or some other excuse to work.
>>45233765
>tsunamis everywhere.
A 10 km giant is extremly destructive. I don't know why I find it surprising.
>>45233847
Imagine the waves you making doing a cannon ball in a pool who's height is a little more than you are. Imagine the waves you make when you splash your friends. How would water be effected at that size? I know the smaller you get the more water seems gooey due to surface tension and the like but what happens when you get bigger?
>>45233740
Now you know why giants always seem to move slow. They actually move at normal speeds, but due to their size it looks slow by comparison.
>>45233925
Not much unless you break the speed of sound or light of whatever you move in.
>>45233925
It would feel increasingly less "gooey"
>>45234146
It becomes like a car driving through fog: you hardly notice it, but the fog sure does.
This thread is making me appreciate this epic myth.
>In ancient Lanao, there once lived a giant called Umacaan. He was so enormous that when he spread his arms sideward, they spread as far as thirty kilometers apart. Almost anything was within easy reach, best of all, men whom he loved to eat. Men flee at the sight of him. No one dared come out to the mountains for fear of losing their lives at the hands of the man-eating giant.
How tall is this guy /tg/? How mind boggling is it that a goddamn Fighter killed this guy with a sword?
>>45233765
>He couldn't even long jump the bering strait.
He actually probably could.
9.807 m/s2 is very little when you're 10 km tall
>>45234292
You have to account for how much the water itself would impede him.
>>45234286
about 30 km high.
haven't you seen leonardo's vitruvian man?
>>45233565
>The average person takes about one step per second,
There's no way the average person is this slow.
>>45234323
When you're moving faster than the speed of sound it acts like concrete.
Not since the undead computer has there been a thread on /tg/ this good.
Way to keep the dream alive, boys.
>>45234292
The average Excellent tier long jump is 8ish feet or 250cm. The average height of a man is now 6 feet. Assuming he's 10km he'd long jump around 13km. The bering strait at its narrowest is 82km. This is of course ignoring wind resistance.
>>45234286
Barring injuries, deformities, and slight differences your distance from fingertip to finger tip is your height. So assuming his arms are around 30km long each he'd be around 75-80km tall.
>>45234402
The average walking stride rate per second is around 1.2 striders per second. Running is around 160 per minute though so it more than doubles to 2.6 per second.
>>45234560
yeah, but once again physics start getting wonky.
An average man can jump about as high as a third of his height, in this case, 3.3 km, then he would begin to fall at 9.807 m/s2, giving him 25 seconds of air time, unlike a normal human.
>>45232986
I couldn't find information on ignous rocks for some reason, but the compressive strenght of sandstone is (assuming uniaxial compression) 4.746E^0.9665, where E is the modulus of elasticity (M/Lt^2).
this guy can probably pick up a handful of dirt and pitch an extinction event.
>>45233565
reminder that asteroids impact earth with an average speed of 17 km/s
>>45232986
i like how you wrote give me a sec, and then did a bunch of work, an then posted
its like you wrote give me a sec just to yourself
>>45234805
How much does an earth killer asteroid have to weigh to fuck up the planet at 5km/s?
>>45235025
Somewhat less than our 4 mile-high-guy.
>>45232076
well, he is less dense than rock, so even in the worst case he wont sink completely.
>>45234806
I've done that shit on essays before. Asshat professors will dock you points for it.
>if dragons existed, how hot would their flames be?
this thread is silly.
>>45235306
>Implying this stuff isn't a matter security for the realm.
>>45235709
All I can think of when I see this image is:
>Wouldn't that city be destroyed already from the 9.4 scale earthquake she would have caused laying down?
>How thick is that skin?
>How thick are those clothes?
>Wouldn't she destroy the entire city with a single breath or syllable?
>>45235963
>>Wouldn't that city be destroyed already from the 9.4 scale earthquake she would have caused laying down?
I guess she got down gently.
>Wouldn't she destroy the entire city with a single breath or syllable?
Well, nothing is moving on my desk when I breath out normally. Some deep breath or a sigh may be dangerous.
Don't know about the other two.
>>45235253
Well it makes sense to dock you points, because it doesn't make any sense to write that in an essay
>>45235963
>>45236276
She ripped a mountain apart, and the ground has been shifted up with solid pieces that are up to a quarter the size of the city. That city should likely be rubble.
>>45232076
as interesting as the whole "Giants who move at proportional speed are fucking fast" thing is, we still haven't answered how deep would one sink on plain terrain under his own weigh.
as a tentative answer, if the pressure is enough to ignore the material strength of whatever he is standing on, then he would sink according to the density of the medium. so, according to the crust average density of 2.7 grams per cubic centimeter, which is a bit less than three times the density of our giant, I speculate he would sink to about crotch level.
>>45232076
Now, what if the giant was a loli? And a tomboy? And a bully?
>>45236461
Most professors would realize i have other homework equally as long if not longer than there's is and that i can either choose to sleep and eat or do homework and that a slip up so small under the circumstances is to be expected.
>>45236998
It's still a mistake, and what's the point of grading something if you're going to just ignore mistakes because you think that the writer was tired?
>>45236548
Not to mention creating a ditch that's bound to be hundreds of meters wide around it.Tracing a heart.
With no survivors.
>>45236737
>crotch level
If the density for both is true, then it'd actually be almost diaphragm level.. it'd be at least to the naval.
>>45237345
depends on how big the legs are actually. they can easily account for a third of a person's mass.
>>45237342
Another question. Moving her finger at any rate beyond 20mph would fling deadly shrapnel and debris at hundreds of miles per hour in every direction, creating Swiss cheese out of that settlement.
We need someone who works in construction to calculate that. but with the foundations being the sturdiest, and one of the most massive parts of a structure, I'm guessing he'll sink quite a bit without one.
It doesn't matter if he sinks though, under your specifications he is strong enough to wade through the stuff like if it was water.
Does anyone have screencaps of other times /tg/ has calculated crazy shit like this?
>>45237534
Or even worse, it works like a non-Newtonian fluid and as long as he keeps moving he'll stay on the surface. This is also true since his run will mean his feet are hitting water faster than the speed of sound, making he water react like concrete (which an ocean of is literally the only thing that could hold this thing.
>>45234683
After looking some more I also managed to find the value of Young's modulus (E) for sandstone. It's 3.24 GPa - 99.9 GPa. That allows you to calculate the compressive strenght assume you only have force applied from one direction. For a more realistic calculation you also need to take into account the stress caused by the surronding rock, and the Poission's ration, which determines how much the object would spread to the sides when compressed from above (which for sandstone is 0.2 - 0.35). However, I think that is unnecessary for our purposes.
The The lowest value gives the tensile strenght as14.783 GPa and the highest as 406.357 GPa. The highest value would be extremely high for sandstone, though (by comparison, brass has Young's modulus of 100 - 125 and titanium has 110).
>>45236737
The issue is that includes top soil as well as large areas of sand and varying rock densities. He might sink through the first ten feet of top soil then compress the bedrock a few feet before he sinks alot deeper attempting to kick off during stride.
>>45237604
From just a very rough estimate I did that almost seems like sandstone would be like rather soft rubber to him. Imagine walking on swampy/very wet ground. You can sink in if you're not careful but if you are you can walk on it although it feels kinda weird.
Harder and less compressible stone would be increasingly like harder and harder plastic.
I guess he could stand on most ground though he'd always sink through the soil until he stands on bedrock (or until he compresses it enough).
Depth to bedrock can vary wildly, anywhere from 3 to 150 meter is normal but you can have more than that. Considering the guy is 10km tall that's like walking through a few centimeter deep mud at most.
>>45237431
The real question would be: "is it a lady giant or..?"
>>45238042
actually i think op's question sums it up rather nicely. all the needed info is there.
I don't think you're quite grasping the concept of how large a ten kilometer giant is.
Mt. Everest is 8.8 kilometers tall.
Commercial airplanes fly around 50km in the air.
This giant is too fucking giant.
>>45238241
We already determined he weighs less than Everest though, he's mainly tall and not very wide.
The real problems only begin if he falls over.
>>45238271
Or if he starts a light jog on top of *any* ocean.
If the earth was 150m more crushed-down all over the globe, would the planet be smaller enough to end life as know it (perma ice age, earth flys off orbit, ect)?
>>45237891
I keep thinking whether the fact that the mantle is plastic should be taken into account, but my gut tells me no because while it will indeed flow and deform over long periods of time (hence the weight of glaciers pushing the crust down and the ground being slowly lifted back up after the glaciers have melted), it's solid enough that if force is applied for short periods of time (ie. not tends of thousands of years) it behaves as if it's rigid.
The increase of pressure might affect the melting point of rock, but generally more pressure increases the melting point.
>>45238221
It's just that guy trying to turn this into a size fetish thread.
You can't expect those guys to actually read the thread.
>>45232076
1 - a fuckton.
2 - a fuckload.
>>45237575
check 1d4chan. Probably has a few
