|
|
|
|
|
|
by masklinn
3693 days ago
|
|
|
> And you could maybe detect mountain ranges by running your fingers on them, but not really by seeing them? On a 30cm globe, the Everest would peak ~200µm above the globe's average surface (though it would possibly/probably be too small to even represent), the tibetan plateau would be ~100µm above the average surface. It seems detectable[0] but would require a pretty ridiculously smooth globe, I don't think a plastic-and-paper globe would work. [0] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130916110853.h... > The smallest pattern that could be distinguished from the non-patterned surface had grooves with a wavelength of 760 nanometres and an amplitude of only 13 nanometres. |
|
|