In 1930, the 22M-pound Indiana Bell building was rotated 90 degrees

Re:In 1930, the 22M-pound Indiana Bell building was rotated ... by MrDunham on Wednesday April 19, 2023 @10:19AM (#35628506)

True, but radians or degrees are general more abstract.

"0.24 degrees per hour" (assuming 12 work hours per day) just doesn't really ring to me... and I have a mechanical engineering degree.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:In 1930, the 22M-pound Indiana Bell building was rotated ... by Someone on Wednesday April 19, 2023 @10:44AM (#35628787)

It gets worse when you call it 14.4 (arc) minutes per hour.

Ignoring the ‘arc’, that’s dimensionless. You could just call it “0.24” ;-)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:In 1930, the 22M-pound Indiana Bell building was rotated ... by Dylan16807 on Wednesday April 19, 2023 @01:33PM (#35630950)

I guess it depends on how you do the ignoring. "minutes" by itself usually means "minutes of hour", but I would argue that if you take "minutes of arc" and ignore the "arc" the better answer is "minutes of ____"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:In 1930, the 22M-pound Indiana Bell building was rotated ... by jmkb on Wednesday April 19, 2023 @10:50AM (#35628846)

Picture an analog clock and it can be 0.008 hours/hour... about one percent of an hourhand's movement.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:In 1930, the 22M-pound Indiana Bell building was rotated ... by em-bee on Wednesday April 19, 2023 @11:13AM (#35629156)

measuring degrees doesn't seem useful anyways, because it is not the rotating speed that is impressive but the speed against the ground at the outer edge.

[ Parent | on HN ]