= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Emile comments on A fun estimation test, is it useful? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (49)
For the great lakes I was off by so many order of magnitudes I'm too embarassed to go count them. Probably about ten.
"Ten thousand trillion litres should cover it!"
"Nope"
Oops.
Me too. 5 out of 10, and the ones I missed were close, except for that one. Couldn't figure out how I was that far wrong. So I took another look at the answers.
The first seems reasonable. 230km by 100km by 1km deep. The second seems ... wrong and just weird. 2.3 x 10^4 cubic km would be 2.3 x 10^13 cubic meters.