Last time, I was in the store, the last non-Chiquita bananas were two bunches with basically half-sized bananas.
And well, it did cross my mind that I’m basically paying extra for the “packaging” that way, as they have almost more peel than pulp. (The bigger the banana[1] the less surface area it has, relative to the volume.)
But on the other hand, I can portion those small bananas better, so there’s ups and downs, for sure. Which means, it’s actually quite fair that they have some smaller bananas in the store, too.
Last time, I was in the store, the last non-Chiquita bananas were two bunches with basically half-sized bananas.
And well, it did cross my mind that I’m basically paying extra for the “packaging” that way, as they have almost more peel than pulp. (The bigger the banana[1] the less surface area it has, relative to the volume.)
But on the other hand, I can portion those small bananas better, so there’s ups and downs, for sure. Which means, it’s actually quite fair that they have some smaller bananas in the store, too.
Or any other object. ↩︎
You’re going to piss off a lot of mathematicians with that footnote lol
Hmm, interesting. For what object is this not correct? And does it exist in Euclidian 3D space? 😅
Depends on how you define bigger and object. Picture a sea urchin, if the spikes get longer without the center growing…