 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
For entirely boring reasons, I was looking at the table of hat size
conversions appropriately located at http://hatsizes.com/
I used a simple regression to reverse engineer the equation from this
table, and it seems to be:
US_size = circumference_inches / pi + 0.037
So, the division by pi makes sense to me, but does anyone have any idea
where the + 0.037 comes from?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler wrote:
> So, the division by pi makes sense to me, but does anyone have any idea
> where the + 0.037 comes from?
Rounding?
--
Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler wrote:
> So, the division by pi makes sense to me, but does anyone have any idea
> where the + 0.037 comes from?
Thickness of the hat? I.e., inside measurement vs outside measurement?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler wrote:
> For entirely boring reasons, I was looking at the table of hat size
> conversions appropriately located at http://hatsizes.com/
>
> I used a simple regression to reverse engineer the equation from this
> table, and it seems to be:
>
> US_size = circumference_inches / pi + 0.037
>
> So, the division by pi makes sense to me, but does anyone have any idea
> where the + 0.037 comes from?
Minimum size of a human skull?
Circumference / pi is what we maths bods like to refer to as
"diammeter". So the hat size is the hat diammeter plus a small offset.
(What unit is that by the way? 0.037 inches?)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler wrote:
> For entirely boring reasons, I was looking at the table of hat size
> conversions appropriately located at http://hatsizes.com/
>
> I used a simple regression to reverse engineer the equation from this
> table, and it seems to be:
>
> US_size = circumference_inches / pi + 0.037
>
> So, the division by pi makes sense to me, but does anyone have any idea
> where the + 0.037 comes from?
Maybe they allow for some hair in addition to the scull diameter (?)
--
Tor Olav
http://subcube.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
>> So, the division by pi makes sense to me, but does anyone have any
>> idea where the + 0.037 comes from?
>
> Maybe they allow for some hair in addition to the scull diameter (?)
I think that this idea and Darren's sound the most plausible (in this
case it's not due to rounding). Still, I think I'll write them a
handwritten letter in florid prose with several diagrams and tables on
parchment paper inquiring as to the true reason so that my curiosity may
be fully satisfied.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler wrote:
> handwritten letter in florid prose on parchment paper
Don't forget to use your fountain pen.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Kevin Wampler wrote:
>> handwritten letter in florid prose on parchment paper
>
> Don't forget to use your fountain pen.
>
I was planning on it!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler wrote:
> For entirely boring reasons, I was looking at the table of hat size
> conversions appropriately located at http://hatsizes.com/
>
> I used a simple regression to reverse engineer the equation from this
> table, and it seems to be:
>
> US_size = circumference_inches / pi + 0.037
>
> So, the division by pi makes sense to me, but does anyone have any idea
> where the + 0.037 comes from?
Rounding error.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
