this is cool, just shows how huge alaska is

[egp320i]

when you put it into perspective

 

[JGalt]

Hey! You got your Alaska all over my Wisconsin.

 

[Thunk]

If you thunk THAT's big...look how big the sun is...

 

[egp320i]

been through madison before, it's decent and you have good cheese

 

[egp320i]

If you thunk THAT's big...look how big the sun is...

View attachment 1059016

well yeah but kinda apples to oranges, now expand that to the milky way and we are a speck of dust

 

[toobfreak]

when you put it into perspective

View attachment 1059013

I'm not sure that chart is exactly right. A few months ago, I took direct images off of charts and put them together for a non-distorted comparison of the true size of all 50 states if moved down to the same place as the continental USA and came up with this:

Quite a big bigger.
Here is a chart from another website confirming it.

 

[MarathonMike]

I lived in Anchorage Alaska for a couple years as a little kid. What an amazing state!

 

[egp320i]

interesting, so AK is the size of the entire mid west or 1/3 the entire USA

 

[toobfreak]

If you thunk THAT's big...look how big the sun is...

The Sun is actually a dwarf star (that is its actual classification).

Here is the Sun next to Jupiter (Earth is too small to see) and then the Sun next to the star Pollux in Gemini.

Then Pollux (too small to even see here) next to Arcturus, Aldebaran, and Rigel (lower left corner, Rigel is the blue star), next to Antares, Betelgeuse and Mu Cephei.

And there are even bigger stars still. You can actually easily see Antares and Betelgeuse---
Betelgeuse is the bright upper left shoulder in Orion in the winter.
Antares is the bright red star in Scorpio in the Summer.
The Sun is such a small star that from the surface of Pluto, it appears as just another (slightly brighter) star in the sky.

 

[egp320i]

cool, not long ago I installed this star map app on my phone, you just point your phone to some star and it tells you what it is.

All this time the bright star to the east of me is actually jupiter, now in winter the bright star to my west before dark is venus, it's pretty neat

 

[toobfreak]

cool, not long ago I installed this star map app on my phone, you just point your phone to some star and it tells you what it is.

I'm lucky. I don't need an app to tell me what any star in the sky is. I can draw it from memory.

All this time the bright star to the east of me is actually jupiter, now in winter the bright star to my west before dark is venus, it's pretty neat

In a couple of weeks, Venus will be gone. It will have swung around to inferior conjunction and will be lost again in the glare of the Sun.

 

[ESay]

I'm not sure that chart is exactly right. A few months ago, I took direct images off of charts and put them together for a non-distorted comparison of the true size of all 50 states if moved down to the same place as the continental USA and came up with this:

View attachment 1059024

Quite a big bigger.
Here is a chart from another website confirming it.


View attachment 1059025

Dude, for a man working in an engineering field, you seem somewhat hollow and under-educated. The Alaska's area is 1,700,000 sq km, the Texas' area is somewhat 700,000 sq km. That is, in one Alaska 2,5 Texases can be placed. And now compare that with your maps.

 

[para bellum]

interesting, so AK is the size of the entire mid west or 1/3 the entire USA

Alaska is a little over 1/5 of the continental US by area.

AK is ~663K sq mi, CONUS is ~3.1 Million sq mi.

From the tip of the Aleutians to the panhandle is 2,400 miles, about the same distance as NY to LA.

The Alyeska Pipeline is one of the longest in the world at 800 miles, and it crosses 3 mountain ranges and over 500 rivers. It was a major engineering feat in the 1970's.

Alaska is a place of almost no roads. There are some highways in the mainland part, but everywhere else you get around by bush plane or boat.

This is the road map.

 

[toobfreak]

Dude, for a man working in an engineering field, you seem somewhat hollow and under-educated.

Dude, for an idiot who could never work in an engineering field, you are obviously full of bullshit.

That is, in one Alaska 2,5 Texases can be placed.

If you rearrange their shapes as simple geometic shapes (squares, etc.)

And now compare that with your maps.

My maps? Bother were taken from cartographic programs. I didn't just "make them up." How do you explain that the attached image above closely resembles the one I "made?"
Please tell me you are not in any position of importance where you decide anything relevant to people's lives.

Obviously, mine is a lot closer to the truth and Alaska is a lot bigger than just a little over the size of Texas as shown in the OP. Does Alaska look over 250% bigger than Texas in the OP's picture?

If you knew anything about cartography, you would understand that there is a certain amount of distortion in ANY system which attempts to take a round surface and project it onto a flat image.

 

[ESay]

Dude, for an idiot who could never work in an engineering field, you are obviously full of bullshit.


If you rearrange their shapes as simple geometic shapes (squares, etc.)


My maps? Bother were taken from cartographic programs. I didn't just "make them up." How do you explain that the attached image above closely resembles the one I "made?"
Please tell me you are not in any position of importance where you decide anything relevant to people's lives.

Obviously, mine is a lot closer to the truth and Alaska is a lot bigger than just a little over the size of Texas as shown in the OP. Does Alaska look over 250% bigger than Texas in the OP's picture?

If you knew anything about cartography, you would understand that there is a certain amount of distortion in ANY system which attempts to take a round surface and project it onto a flat image.

Dude, my post was all about 'a round surface projecting onto a flat image'. And what you posted was just a ridiculous projection.

This one would be more accurate, though not ideal also (in my view, it barely includes two Texasea into one Alaska). But it depicts a more correct picture of the world than these ridiculous projections for ignorant Americans.

Yes, I don't work in a engineering field. But for me, STEM specialists is an intellectual elite of any nation. Don't smash this perception, please.

 

[toobfreak]

And what you posted was just a ridiculous projection.
This one would be more accurate, though not ideal also (in my view, it barely includes two Texasea into one Alaska).

More like 1.5.

ridiculous projections for ignorant Americans.
Yes, I don't work in a engineering field. But for me, STEM specialists is an intellectual elite of any nation. Don't smash this perception, please.

You're an idiot. You obviously don't know the first thing about cartographic projects nor the difference between such differences as Mercator, Equiretangular, or Gall stereographic. "Ridiculous" projections, ignorant Americans, and STEM specialists, please. You embarrass me. Stick this in your pipe and smoke it, butthole:

Taken right off the web. If you knew anything at all, you would know that there is no such things as a distortion free cartographic projection. Funny you didn't notice that when the OP posted a map where Alaska is barely larger than Texas.

 

[toobfreak]

Here, just to make the whiny little snot happy, I recompensated for map distortions based purely on mathematical (numerical) estimate. The map in the OP used a projection that obviously undervalued the size of Alaska whereas the program I used to create my map overvalued it. I had hoped to eliminate the problem by building my image from localized projections, but something still did not work, so here, to keep the whiny bitch happy, I redid my version to better approximate Alaska based purely on numerical estimate. This is probably very close to actual proportions if you could somehow float out into space and look down on the Earth. It is close enough to serve my purposes.

 

[ESay]

More like 1.5.


You're an idiot. You obviously don't know the first thing about cartographic projects nor the difference between such differences as Mercator, Equiretangular, or Gall stereographic. "Ridiculous" projections, ignorant Americans, and STEM specialists, please. You embarrass me. Stick this in your pipe and smoke it, butthole:

View attachment 1059040
View attachment 1059041
View attachment 1059042
Taken right off the web. If you knew anything at all, you would know that there is no such things as a distortion free cartographic projection. Funny you didn't notice that when the OP posted a map where Alaska is barely larger than Texas.

And what should I get from these maps? That Alaska is about a half of the 'mainland' US? Not sure why you are whining here. I already posted a map that suits better, so it is not ideal too. Do you use a magnifying glass in your everyday life?

 

[ESay]

Here, just to make the whiny little snot happy, I recompensated for map distortions based purely on mathematical (numerical) estimate. The map in the OP used a projection that obviously undervalued the size of Alaska whereas the program I used to create my map overvalued it. I had hoped to eliminate the problem by building my image from localized projections, but something still did not work, so here, to keep the whiny bitch happy, I redid my version to better approximate Alaska based purely on numerical estimate. This is probably very close to actual proportions if you could somehow float out into space and look down on the Earth. It is close enough to serve my purposes.

View attachment 1059044

No, bitch, that is not how things work. You not only posted 'distorted' images implying they were better to suit the actual size, you now try to change them a bit implying the same. And how many Texases are in one Alaska here?

 

[braalian]

I'm not sure that chart is exactly right. A few months ago, I took direct images off of charts and put them together for a non-distorted comparison of the true size of all 50 states if moved down to the same place as the continental USA and came up with this:

View attachment 1059024

Quite a big bigger.
Here is a chart from another website confirming it.


View attachment 1059025

Alaska is big but it’s not that big.

Neither is northern Canada. Or Greenland.

Google “Mercator projection“