News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Unmasking Northrop Grumman's XRQ-72A. Parent comment

Re:Unmasking Northrop Grumman's XRQ-72A by hoseja on Wednesday April 01, 2020 @03:18AM (#22746479)
That's just a variant of the square-cube law. An owl the size of a passenger jet wouldn't.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Unmasking Northrop Grumman's XRQ-72A by nicoburns on Wednesday April 01, 2020 @07:47AM (#22747710)
Let's all just be thankful that there are no owls the size of passenger jets.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Unmasking Northrop Grumman's XRQ-72A by Piskvorrr on Thursday April 02, 2020 @05:58AM (#22757521)
That's, again, the same law. It would break under its own weight.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Unmasking Northrop Grumman's XRQ-72A by ntsplnkv2 on Wednesday April 01, 2020 @10:44AM (#22749089)
Can you explain this further?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Unmasking Northrop Grumman's XRQ-72A by SECProto on Wednesday April 01, 2020 @11:12AM (#22749462)
If you doubled the length of an owl (or any other object) by scaling it up, then it would quadruple (2²) the surface area, and octuple (2³) the volume.

The parent comment seemed to be suggesting the noise would scale with the surface area, while mass scales with the volume. The latter is definitely true, but I don't know about the former

[ Parent | on HN ]