[HN Gopher] July 8 99% of the world's population in sunlight sim...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       July 8 99% of the world's population in sunlight simultaneously?
        
       Author : cft
       Score  : 234 points
       Date   : 2022-07-07 19:05 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.timeanddate.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.timeanddate.com)
        
       | cardamomo wrote:
       | Now I want to know on what date and time the _lowest_ percent of
       | the world 's population will be in sunlight.
        
       | h2odragon wrote:
       | When does the mega sunspot or whatever hafta fire a large mass
       | ejection at us, and how strong would it have to be, to cook most
       | of humanity?
        
         | ben_w wrote:
         | To cook _us_ , it would have to be stronger than is actually
         | possible given the mass, distance, and age of the sun.
         | 
         | To cook our power grid, small enough to be surprisingly common:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_storms
        
         | MacsHeadroom wrote:
         | The sun fires multiple ejections a day big enough to cook us.
         | They just all miss.
         | 
         | It would be like you stepping outside and shooting a bullet in
         | a random direction a few times a day, with Earth being a golf
         | ball miles away.
         | 
         | The golf ball would be destroyed by a bullet. But your odds of
         | hitting it are very low.
         | 
         | Of course, over time the odds become an inevitability.
        
           | marcofatica wrote:
           | Can't wait
        
           | quickthrower2 wrote:
           | Why is this downvoted? Is it wrong? I do like it as an
           | explanation!
        
             | davidcuddeback wrote:
             | Yeah, it's wrong. There isn't even a single CME strong
             | enough to cause aurora every day, let alone strong enough
             | to cook us, and let alone multiple times per day.
        
             | nonameiguess wrote:
             | It is wrong. During the peak of the solar activity cycle,
             | the sun produces about 3 coronal mass ejections a day.
             | During the bottom of the cycle, though, it only produces
             | one about once every 5 days. They do sometimes hit the
             | Earth, too. The largest known was the Carrington Event in
             | 1859, which started some of the US telegraph network on
             | fire. There was one in 1989 as well.
             | 
             | I don't know that there has ever been a CME strong enough
             | to cook all animals on the side of Earth facing the sun,
             | though. The sun is pretty far away and Earth has a nice
             | magnetosphere that is one of the reasons life exists in the
             | first place. It protects us from stuff like this.
             | 
             | Incidentally, a CME cooking the entire Earth was the plot
             | of a pretty terrible Nic Cage movie called _Knowing_ a
             | decade or so back.
        
             | hanoz wrote:
             | I'm not sure about the cooking power but in terms of the
             | scale of things, if the earth were a golf ball, a 2000km
             | wide coronal mass ejection would indeed be like shooting a
             | bullet in a random direction at a golf ball half a
             | kilometer away.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | plasticchris wrote:
       | Australia has less than 1% of the world population? Edit: yep,
       | around 0.3%
        
         | Izikiel43 wrote:
         | Yes.
         | 
         | 7 billion people => 7000 Million.
         | 
         | 1% of that, 70 Million.
         | 
         | Population of australia, 25.7 Million people. So not only less
         | than 1%, less than 0.5%
        
           | avalys wrote:
           | Holy crap, Australia has approximately the same population as
           | New York City. That's nearly an order of magnitude less than
           | I would have guessed. I had no idea!
        
             | tempestn wrote:
             | An order of magnitude higher and it'd be of similar
             | magnitude to the entire USA.
             | 
             | I tend to think of Australia as pretty similar (if
             | literally polar opposite) to Canada. Similar population and
             | standard of living on a similarly large but largely
             | inhospitable landmass.
        
               | cecilpl2 wrote:
               | Australia is basically Hot Canada.
        
               | 3pt14159 wrote:
               | Australia: Our brother to the hot south with more sex
               | appeal and far less marriage material.
        
               | adra wrote:
               | I was just quoted a stat that said boomer retirees have
               | sex way more frequently than any of their younger
               | cohorts. So weird and depressing if true.
        
               | BurningFrog wrote:
               | Travelling there it felt like Big California.
        
               | spiralx wrote:
               | Australia has almost everything wrong you can think of
               | climate-wise: cold Antarctic currents hitting the west
               | coast causing dry winds with little moisture, on the east
               | coast there's a narrow strip between the coast and the
               | long N-S mountains that gets moisture, but even then the
               | mountains are barely high enough to trap winds and cause
               | rainfall. The very north gets monsoons, the inland is a
               | baking desert and only the very south is temperate.
               | 
               | If you want an idea of scale, there's a single cattle
               | farm in Australia operated by less than a dozen people
               | that is larger than Texas.
        
               | eesmith wrote:
               | Anna Creek is 23,677 km2 according to
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Creek_Station and
               | 15,746 square kilometres according to
               | https://www.williamscattlecompany.com.au/anna-creek .
               | 
               | Texas is rather larger than Anna Creek, at 676,587 km2 of
               | land according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas .
        
             | CodeSgt wrote:
             | I'm pretty sure NYC has a population of like 7 or 8
             | million, about a third of Australias.
        
               | tempestn wrote:
               | Depends where you draw the line. The 5 boroughs alone is
               | about 8M, but the broader metropolitan area is something
               | like 20. (And even beyond that it's still pretty densely
               | populated compared to most places.)
        
               | hackernewds wrote:
               | The broader metropolitan is not usually what people
               | consider as NYC. New York state maybe
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | The broader area is more like that little corner of the
               | state plus half of New Jersey.
        
               | prpl wrote:
               | New York MSA is 20M, CSA is 23M
        
               | quickthrower2 wrote:
               | NYC = NSW approx then.
               | 
               | Lol and I think Sydney is getting "too busy"
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | Australia also happens to have the seemingly same amount of
             | useable land space as NYC.
        
             | Sharlin wrote:
             | To a good approximation Australia is a desert surrounded by
             | a narrow, narrow strip of livable land. It would be pretty
             | remarkable if it had a population close to that of the US.
        
           | greenpeas wrote:
           | Less than two "australias" away from 8 billion now.
           | https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
        
       | quakeguy wrote:
       | Combine this data with the newly detected ozon-hole above the
       | tropics.
       | 
       | https://www.yahoo.com/now/ozone-hole-found-over-tropics-1538...
        
       | avalys wrote:
       | Wow, what a fun statistic! Even if it's pushing the common
       | definition of "sunlight" quite a bit.
       | 
       | Also makes me wonder what fraction of the world population is
       | awake at a given time, and what that fraction looks like plotted
       | against 24 hours of the day.
        
         | madcaptenor wrote:
         | https://blog.cyberclip.com/world-population-by-time-zone has a
         | plot of population by time zone; I can't find numbers.
         | 
         | Some quick guesses:
         | 
         | - the most people are awake at around 14:00 UTC. That's 23:00
         | in Japan (the easternmost big population, at UTC+9 - sorry
         | eastern Australia!) and 6:00 PST/7:00 PDT; most people who
         | would be sleeping are in the Pacific.
         | 
         | - the most people are asleep at about 22:00 UTC - that's
         | 23:00/00:00 in Western Europe (depending on the season) and
         | 06:00 in China, so you get those two big population centers
         | (and India in between them) sleeping.
        
         | cft wrote:
         | A practical issue- if you have a world-distributed workforce or
         | an international news agency, what's the best geographical
         | location for the headquarters?
        
           | lbotos wrote:
           | What are you optimizing for? Once you clarify that your
           | answer will be clear.
           | 
           | - Access to capital? - close to "action"? - Airport hub city?
        
             | cft wrote:
             | Overlapping business hours
        
           | cupofpython wrote:
           | Are we channeling through internet cabling or magical
           | straight lines?
        
             | mr_toad wrote:
             | > magical straight lines
             | 
             | Sufficiently advanced technology
             | 
             | http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/mar/19/neutri
             | n...
        
             | WJW wrote:
             | Does this actually matter? Internet cabling vs magical
             | straight lines would amount to less than 1 second
             | difference, so emails/slack/discord/IRC/etc (basically
             | anything except video chat) would barely notice.
        
           | beebeepka wrote:
           | The core
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | The pressure to be successul must be intense there though
        
           | thfuran wrote:
           | Wherever is most legally favorable from the perspective of
           | liability and taxes, probably.
        
           | spiralx wrote:
           | London has long benefitted from its position allowing its
           | working day overlapping everywhere from the US West coast to
           | Japan, even if barely at those extremes. Most of the world's
           | population lies between UTC-5 and UTC+5 I believe.
        
             | yorwba wrote:
             | Most of the world's population lives inside the
             | Valeriepieris circle
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valeriepieris_circle which is
             | covered by the time zones UTC+5 through UTC+8.
             | 
             | So if you want to be as close as possible to as many people
             | as possible, somewhere in Myanmar would be a better choice
             | than London.
             | 
             | Of course the calculus changes if you also consider how
             | much money each of these people has access to.
        
             | morepork wrote:
             | Given India is UTC+5.5 and China is UTC+8, plus many other
             | large countries are outside that range (Indonesia, Japan,
             | Bangladesh, Mexico, Phillipines) I think you need to
             | stretch it a bit
        
               | morepork wrote:
               | Given OP's 10 hour range, UTC+0 to UTC+10 is almost
               | certainly going to be the 10 hour range that includes the
               | most people. It includes all of Asia, Europe and Africa,
               | and excludes both the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.
        
               | ascar wrote:
               | It also excludes the west coast. -7 to +9 goes from West
               | Coast to Japan and Indonesia, placing UTC+1 (CET e.g.
               | Berlin) in the middle.
        
             | decremental wrote:
             | Is that "most of the world's population" in the same sense
             | as "Mohammed is the most common name?"
        
       | skilled wrote:
       | > Norway
       | 
       | > Sunlight
       | 
       | pick one
        
         | antihipocrat wrote:
         | In summer you can only pick both options.
        
         | speedgoose wrote:
         | Norway is very sunny in summer. You can see the midnight sun in
         | the north but even in the south it's enough light to be outside
         | all the time around June.
         | 
         | In the extreme north it's worse: " In Svalbard, Norway, the
         | northernmost inhabited region of Europe, there is no sunset
         | from approximately 19 April to 23 August."
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_sun
        
           | skilled wrote:
           | Well, I clearly live in Norway having given that example. It
           | was a joke about the current weather situation in North (but
           | not extreme North) as it is one of the more timid Summers in
           | recent years.
        
       | corrral wrote:
       | Seems related to the fact that you can draw a surprisingly-small
       | circle over part of Asia and have more people inside the circle,
       | than out. Human geography is _very_ uneven.
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Probably more related to the fact that if you look at the globe
         | from above the Pacific, you see mostly water:
         | 
         | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Globe_-_Pacific_Ocea...
        
         | ninju wrote:
         | I believe you are referring to the _Valeriepieris circle_
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valeriepieris_circle#/media/Fi...
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valeriepieris_circle
        
           | corrral wrote:
           | Yep, that's the one. Ballpark 7% of the Earth's surface, or
           | 15% of the land-surface area (guesstimate based on the whole
           | circle being about 22% of the land surface area--but much of
           | the circle is over water). Over 50% of the population.
        
         | mc32 wrote:
         | Lots of things on Earth are unevenly distributed. Mineral
         | deposits, water, fertile land, mild climates...
        
           | firebaze wrote:
           | Quite probably only if we're ignoring the z-axis (depth), at
           | least when talking over minerals. I think it will be a game-
           | changer if a few km of rock won't be a hindrance anymore. If
           | that ever comes, that is.
        
             | mc32 wrote:
             | Some elements are kind of well distributed but not others:
             | gold for example, or minerals or hydrocarbons, or even
             | wind.
        
               | mr_toad wrote:
               | There's a huge amount of gold (and other stuff) dissolved
               | in seawater. Something like 20 million tons of it. The
               | trouble is that it's too evenly distributed.
               | 
               | https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/gold-ocean-sea-
               | hoax-sc...
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | Sure, but there's still a big difference between 50% and 99%.
         | In this case it wasn't just about population, most landmass was
         | also covered.
        
           | corrral wrote:
           | Well, right, it's the intuition/viewpoint that takes it to
           | "huh, neat and a little surprising, but believable" rather
           | than "no fucking way!" that's similar, I'd say. If you're
           | familiar with one of these (or other, similar) bits of
           | trivia, the other one's probably more believable on your
           | first encounter with it, because you've already been exposed
           | to the underlying insight that makes it possible.
        
         | spiralx wrote:
         | Doesn't 80% of the world's population live within 100km of the
         | sea as well. And I'd guess most of the remainder live close to
         | major rivers and lakes.
        
           | quickthrower2 wrote:
           | Makes sense. Rivers are the original infra.
        
           | hanoz wrote:
           | Are you proposing The Spiralx Donut?
        
       | s3ctor8 wrote:
       | This is interesting, but why is it written so strangely? The
       | overuse of bold text is grating too.
        
       | bombcar wrote:
       | Technically correct - the best kind of correct.
        
         | chadlavi wrote:
         | I'm gonna requisition you an upvote
        
       | rufus_foreman wrote:
       | Duplicate of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32014622
        
       | ComputerCat wrote:
       | Growing up in a household where we'd be constantly reminded of
       | the longest day of the year and then have summer vacation
       | reminders of "the days are getting shorter now" I'm not sure how
       | I feel about this statistic...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-07 23:00 UTC)