Video size: 1280 X 720853 X 480640 X 360
Show player controls
As a Brazilian, I will accept any measurement that shows that the Amazon is longer than the Nile, even if you have to count Pedro's toilet pipes that dump into the river to increase its length.
lol I don't get it is this some sort of competition? if yes then thats a really stupid one
@Xeon Elite dont defending the shitty government of Brazil, but is the most devastating area mostly because is the country with the most part of amazon
Nat geo society, Britanica, OSU: Nile - 4,132 miles || Amazon - 3,977 miles. Maybe brazil needs to call another research group.
If people are going to count the curve around Lake Victoria, why wouldn't the Amazon River count the southern route?
@DanVGS 10:57 They added the mantaro, we could say that’s the starting point then why did they add the Apurimac river? 11:08 They added another river fro some unknown reason. (Probably because of bias.)
@-Petrichor- nope, on the amazon they never added more than one different route, it's the same route that comes from different tributaries, but it's still a constant line. watch the video again.
@DanVGS Then by your logic they should also add blue nile but they didn’t.
@-Petrichor- the white Nile is also a tributary to the Nile, so by your logic they should start counting only when the white and blue Niles merge
@Jayit The counted a tributary of a tributary of a tributary and that’s not cheating but counting lake Victoria is?
Elementary school: The Nile River is the world's longest river!RealLifeLore: Are you sure about that mate?
@mm34nn_TTA I went to school both in Brazil and in Japan, and in both I was told the Amazon was the longest.
@Tahar Touati Actually, China elementary schools teach the same thing. NILE longest Amazon largest.
as someone from amazonas (brazil) we always learned that the amazon river is the world's longest river ❤️
I'm from Colorado and I've hiked the tallest mountain in Colorado. The highest mountain and second highest mountains in Colorado are neighbors and there is only a difference of 10 feet between them. The two mountains are Mt Elbert (14,439 feet) and Mount Massive (14,429 feet). Here, it is tradition for many hikers to take a rock from the base of one of the mountains and carry it all the way to the top of their respective favorite and deposit it at the top. My rock is on the top of one of the mountains. I can't tell you which other than the fact that it is the tallest. I am suggest that surveyors of the respective Amazon and Nile rivers bring shovels with them next time. When they get to the source of their river... start digging.
Instead of breaking the length in smaller parts of 10 KMs, you should have broken down into the lengths of Toyota Corolla
Easier to understand if you don’t know the metric system
i though bananas
Maybe put a banana for scale
Definitely would’ve found the correct length this way
I think there's some problems with what's being described here. Definitions of rivers aside (which _is_ a big issue; like whether lake Victoria counts as part of the river), there's no fractical problem and not much other measurement problem. You just need to measure the shortest distance possible. No running along the edge of land, and hence no fractal problem. When it does encounter land it only hits the "pointiest" tips, so it doesn't get much worse the more you zoom in. Sure there's still the issue of water levels changing the measurement distance, but that can be dealt with in it's own way (like measuring at max an min)
@DoubleMonk050607 Mendoza What? That doesn't matter because meters are universally defined as the length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299 792 458 of a second. A centimeter, milimeter, or nanometer's definitions are derived from the definition of a meter. You will get the same result regardless of metric.
The only problem with this is that for practical purposes, measuring the shortest distance possible would be misleading for boats that have to travel the river and want to know the distance they have to travel.
@TJ, plus, where is the center. Do you measure it down to 100 meters, 50, 10, 1? What is 1 meter is too much? Let's try a centimeter, a millimeter, or a nanometer
But there is. Did you not pay attention? Using centimeters allows you to follow the river and always be centered in the river, using kilometers sometimes allows you to be in the river, sometimes jumping over land because it can only be so curved and still measured accurately. Using a different scale greatly changes how long a river is as well as makes way for the country border paradox the narrator also mentioned. Theoretically this problem becomes more and more of an issue the smaller your scale is / despite a smaller scale being more closely accurate.
Rivers are not infinitely long, even if you use infinitely small measurements. In mathematic, there is a concept known as limits. I can understand the issue with measuring some rivers, like the Amazon, because they have so many tributaries. But the curves would only cause the river to reach a limit of so long.
@Loll0saurus Who measures rivers by the shoreline? That doesn't make any sense.
@Neeraj Krishnan G at what point does 'land' stop? How far from the beach? Does it change with the tide? What if the land near the water isn't accessible to be measured?
@Neeraj Krishnan G But that length could be ridiculously long - far longer than any sane person would say the length of a country’s coastline actually is.And which coastline is longer will depend on how fine grained you get.
You are wrong. If you decide to measure the lenght by using river bank and infinitely small measurements, the limit approaches infinity.
Correct. What he says in the video is wrong.
Coastline paradox arises mostly from lines heavily zig-zagging in tiny scales. But rivers are not one-dimensional lines, they have widths, so I believe the paradox can easily be avoided with carefully chosen definitions. For example: given two points A and B on the river, the distance between A and B is the shortest distance one would have to travel while remaining on the river surface. That should smooth out any zig-zags. Now all you have to do is choose such A and B that would maximise the distance (B obviously should be adjacent to a sea or ocean). That should not only bypass the coastline paradox but also prevent such "tricks" like adding the lake coastline instead of a shorter path across the lake.
The narration, the hard work done by the team, and especially the editing is just extremely good.
We all know who found the true source of the Nile: Jeremy Clarkson, James May, and Richard Hammond.
We all knew that
LOL I REMEMBER WATCHING THAT EPISODE
My rules for river measurements:1, Take the longest continuous waterway that exists in the same river system. (Despite what name it is called)2, Measure the length of the actual riverflow, like you were on a ship following it. So yes, every curve counts, and not just the distance that the river bridges across. 3, Always use the river's center line for determining the river's length. 4, Always take the longer rout around islands, and at the river's mouth.
I'd measure it by shortest travel distance (as if by boat). This would jump edge to edge of the river, but would at least be consistent for all rivers, and take into account any amount of bending. It also has a reasonable reason for measuring this way; if you wanted to travel the river by boat or kayak, this is the minimum distance you would have to travel. It doesn't entirely eliminate the "make the segments shorter and the river gets longer" problem, as you still have to travel the inside curves of river bends. :/
The fractalness of water is easy to see. Just realize that every stream of water is in itself just like a river, feeding into an ever bigger river. They're all the same, but just at different sizes. Which explains why you can't truly measure the longest river, as you'd never be able to stop with each infinitisemaly small stream, which are always changing in lengths, sizes, and paths.
They also flow different directions hence making them different rivers. Also having different start points and the same end point are 2 different rivers. At the meeting point you can argue they are arbitrary.
@F F Nay lass, I just want us all to create river art, and stop quarreling over which has more droplets. :)
@Yore Mothra by your definition, a short and wide river can be longer than a narrow and long river
Ok then, fair enough. Let us instead paint scaled down replicas of each river and see which required more pigment. BAM, easy, y'all welcome
Right, the names of the rivers are arbitrary. So we renames parts the same name.
I don’t think the limit of the river’s length as you reduce the unit to 0 is actually infinite. It will just approach the true path length of the river, which is kind of like a line integral over that curve. Rivers aren’t infinitely nested repeating fractals, contrary to the analogous image you showed lol.
Let’s take the moment to appreciate how much effort RealLifeLore puts into his content for us. Great job
A different, albeit pretty impractical, method of measurement is to release a floating tracking device, record the distance and route it travelled, and then re-do the process to refine the result. Ideally, this process would be done hundreds, if not thousands, of times until the average distance through every tributary and distributary (where the river splits to 2 or more different rivers, usually occurs at rivers' deltas, but could also happen before that).Although it isn't the end-all, be-all solution -- for example, what would happen if the device enters a lake, floats aimlessly on the lake's surfaces, increasing the measured distance, before flowing out from the lake's mouth into a different river? But this method might help to better understand the distance a water droplet travels, the likely course, the volume, and the duration.
The problem is that they don't have clear rules to measure the rivers length because I think when measuring the length they should take the widest tributary for example not just the one that will make the river longer
I used to have a "mileage pen" that when rolled across a map would give the number of miles from start to finish. I expect that a more precise and accurate sort of device could do this measuring- and all one would have to do is run it on the length of a river. This would certainly tell one how far one would travel when following the river from start to end. That's not "really" the actual geographical length of the river, I suppose, but it would tell you how far you'd have to sail to get up or down it. That seems to be the real meaning of "longest" river in practical terms.
As a human, whose ability to conceptualize comes from my experience as a human, I think the standard unit should be a small vessel, say 4m, riding centered between banks (in cases where the water splits and comes back together, it should be whichever channel is larger). This, to me, would give the lengths meaning. This doesn't happen with road lengths, or the distances between cities. Also, I chose 4m for the length of the vessel/resolution, because I had a 12 foot long alumicraft and it was the perfect size for a couple friends and a case of beer.
@obviously matt Don't measure the center, sail it. Or row it. Or motor it. It'll give you a good enough result. Though I might go for a canoe. Well, not me. Someone who would actually want to row the rivers. With a GPS. Any volunteers? :)
You convinced me at ' case of beer'
I csn hear your voice as I read
@Jay Straw lmao room for one more crew? I got 🔥🌲🌲🌲's...
That's how traditional racetracks are measured IIRC (either that or is the average between the inside and outside lines, I don't remember)Meanwhile, NASCAR ovals are measured like 15ft/4,5m away from the outside wall/line, which means all of NASCAR's measurements are bullshit because EVERYBODY uses a shorter racing line. No car has ever traveled 500 miles to finish the Daytona 500.My only doubt is for places like the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, which is NOT a NASCAR oval but isn't a traditional racetrack
I understand how fractals make it impossible to get a precise measurement of the length of a coastline but for rivers there must be smarter options. My suggestion: you send lets say 100 small GPS tracked floating devices down a river, measure how long the path was each of them took, middle it out and that's your length. For this you only need to reach one accepted consensus on where a river starts, after that you'd have only numbers and no more opinions. Something similar can't be applied to coastlines but everyone could agree that it makes no practical sense to measure a coastline in any smaller fractions than 10 metres. Once everyone uses the same denominator you will again be able to compare results. Of course this information is of questionable value, it's not scientifically valuable and if we are only using it for country cock comparing contests then the time of scientists is probably best invested elsewhere.
I love rivers man. They're like natural magical roads through the wilderness where you can float and explore until the end of time.
I love rivers man. They're like natural magical roads through the wilderness where you can float and explore until you are fatigued and eventually drown surrounded by piranhas... Sorry, just felt funny to write it like that :D
When a river takes multiple paths from point A to Point B (for example, around an island), shouldn't you take into account how much volume of water flows along each branch? Either choose the branch with the most flow, or take a weighted average of them.This could easily be used to decide where the "endpoint" of the Amazon or Nile river is (or at least the average distance from the last comon point and the ocean). It is less useful for determining the staring point of a river.
Personally I feel like the length of a river should be the addition of all of the tributaries put together. Kinda like, if you wanted to travel on every section of the Nile, how long is your journey, not counting cut backs to go over bits you've already been on. Just feels more intuitive to me. Like say you have a 'map' of a river made with string, with obv separate strings connected where they diverge and converge. I feel like the length is how much string you need, not how much is the longest uncut piece of string you have. Wrt lakes I feel like they should pick a mid point and travel in a straight line through the midpoint when the river travels through the lake. Although picking a midpoint is always controversial, but I'll think about how I want to define that later.
I just have to say that the Amazon River is so beautiful, its like a paradise. Amazon rainforest is a truly beautiful place, protect it!
"The length of the river approch to infinity as you take smaller measuring units"The length of the river doesnt approach to infinity as you take smaller units, it approaches to the actual length. Also, taking smaller units to measure doesnt necessarily increase the length of the river.
The major tributaries should definitely be considered when determining the length. They are afterall needed for bifurcation ratios.
Something : *exists slightly bigger than France RealLifeLore: *laughs in evil
"Honey, I'll go out expedition to measure a river length""Fine, but don't get too political""I won't"
@Sokka I think they’re talking about how Austronesians settled Madagascar
@Grand Theft Avocado they didn't need to
@Grand Theft Avocado Lots of people gave various answers but my answer is that travelling across a continent is not easy, especially in those days. There's bad guys, there's a need for food, disease. You could live your life along the Nile and just slowly make your way across, but it would take more than 100 years. What you need is a boat load of (non expiring) food, weapons to protect yourself from any raider, a doctor, a navigator. Essentially, it's a huge journey that even the ancient Romans couldn't complete. Some could live at the source, but unless they travelled the whole way down the river they'd never be able to prove that it was the source.
@jackie biskan ok
I would say the most fair way to measure is the following: imagine you have a really long measuring tape. Put it in de water, as long as you can continue rolling it out in the water, *as long as it stays stretched*, that measurement is the legal. The longest possible road can be taken. That way al branched are considered and no stupid bends are legal.
Yesterday, I happened to be looking at a map of the Big Blue River in Kansas and Nebraska. It's a tributary of the Kansas (Kaw) River. It rises near Aurora, Nebraska and flows into the Kaw at Manhattan, Kansas. It flows about a half-mile from our house, on its way to Marysville, Kansas where I'm originally from. It's about 60 miles by road between the two. I wouldn't even want to guess how long the river is between the two points, but I would 'guesstimate' somewhere between two and three times that far.
In short we just need standardization. Taking account into the best measuring unit, how to define the source and the end of a river, the tolerance of change in length of river over time, yada yada, etc. I believe someone in geology field must have done intensive research into all these, but political influence must have get into the way of reaching a conclusion.
The main stream is the way most water run through. Then the scale must be the same for all compared rivers. Still a strait river vs a very meander rich one may be much different depending on scale. You need to set an international standard as many other technical things.
I kinda wish we had EXPANDING river measuring instead, where the winner decided by the wide of the mouth of the delta.because, it's not how long but instead how better and more skillful you can use your river; also, thicker is better.
Bruh, just say u want The Amazon to be the longest
Adding the Missouri river to the lower Mississippi does NOT 'triple' the length because you have to subtract the upper Mississippi then. 3760 is NOT triple of 2348 miles.
Thank you so much for uploading this video. It is helping me get through the pandemic!
"you could measure more and more molecularly and your answer would keep moving towards infinity"what? how?? technically it keeps moving up, which is the direction of infinity, but it would not imply infinity in the same way that it would move towards the mathematically perfect answer that you could get from measuring the river in the way that you choose. maybe this was supposed to mean "your answer could change infinitely depending on how granularly you decide to measure it" and that would be true, but isn't the solution to this just standardization??? this feels like armchair philosopher "deep" talk trying to sound intellectual instead of a practical discussion of measuring the length of rivers.
We all know, James May is the discoverer of the true source of the Nile.
Amazon river wins. Call it a day.
Hamster would want to dispute that
There it is. The comment I was looking for👌
The Gramatti River is what are beloved Top Gear/Grand Tour Hosts traced to its' beginning. It's the father east, therefore the farthest from the Straight of Gibraltar. (Source of the Grammati, to Lake Victoria, to the Nile, through the Mediterranean Sea, to the Straight of Gibraltar.)
The amount of distance you travel walking aside it from the start to the end should be the indication of its length and the longest ending point since it’s still part of the river should indicate the end and start of the rivers
The important question to ask is: Did you measure from base to tip?
Love your videos! I’m in my schools quiz bowl team, and I learned most of it from you!
I always love your content! Please keep it up
I always thought it was silly they included Lake Victoria into the measurement. Lake Victoria is, well a lake, and while the source, does not constitute the river. It's measurement should be at the mouth of the where the two meet.I did some quick measurements on google maps, and according to that same logic, the Great Lakes system and the St. Lawrence seaway would make a 2500 kilometer "river".
@BeingTheHunt but did they include the shoreline or just measure the center of the lakes?
@rodrigopaim82 A lake in a watercourse is part of that watercourse, just a particularly wide part of it. If water is flowing into the lake from the section of the watercourse upstream of the lake, and is flowing out of the lake into the section of the watercourse downstream of the lake, then obviously water must be flowing through the lake from the point where water is entering the lake to the point where water is exiting the lake.
A lake in a watercourse is part of that watercourse, just a particularly wide part of it. If water is flowing into the lake from the section of the watercourse upstream of the lake, and is flowing out of the lake into the section of the watercourse downstream of the lake, then obviously water must be flowing through the lake from the point where water is entering the lake to the point where water is exiting the lake.
@Me Neither I mean, I think it technically is, by these standards, but colloquially its not in Canada generally.Its not that different from any other controversy about river length, its reasonable to argue that a river can start at its furthest source, and we know that water flowing through the great lakes inexorably ends up in the St Lawrence, so why not count them?
@Greasher That being said...What defines a river...? The course of its water over a certain geographic area...? If that's the case...then the Amazon remains totally fresh ...with a percepable flow for quite some miles into the Atlantic Ocean before becoming brackish...especially in the wet season. 1500's explorers noted that the water was drinkable many miles before land was sighted. So...Are 'banks' required to make a river...or just the water....? 🤔
I guess it's kinda arbitrary which river you consider longer so I just like to say it's the Nile because the Nile is important to so many people and so much of history. The Amazon is already winning the most water title easily.
is there a similar controversy for the measurement of the world's longest road? road systems probably fit the same criteria and have the same problems as rivers, only theyre manmade
Minnesotan here, it was cool to hear Lake Itasca mentioned! Although I should point out it's pronounced "Eye-tass-ka". There's also some controversy as to if it's the real source of the Mississippi. Many people consider it to actually be Lake Nicolet, which is connected to the opposite end of Itasca by a small creek.
Virgin “longest River fan” vs Chad “largest watershed by annual rain volume”
Personally, I think you should measure the length of a river by measuring how long a semi-sized boat would have to travel to get from one end to the other, and if it branches you should follow the biggest branch. Still, it doesn't really matter as you should always state precisely what you are measuring and what branches you have used
srsly who cares how l ong is the river??? they are both big but ofc amazons are much much more bigger water volume ofc
that's actually highly inaccurate because of many properties of nature, and I am pretty sure this is the rudimentary way of measurements people from the 1800s used to measure river length
not very precise,rivers can vary a lot
@Abiez so the length of the river becomes infinity? 🤣
In addtion to what others have said, another issue with your idea is that the boat could travel laterally along the river (in zig zags), which would significantly increase the perceived length.
"The length will approach infinity as the measuring units get smaller."*frantically goes to measure pp on the molecular level*
. LMMFAO 😂
I have an idea of how to measure River length:Step 1: get boatStep 2: get odometerStep 3: drive boat with odometer from start to end of the River
Step 4: Pay the boat owner by the hour.
what about the waterfalls?
@Manikanta Pinabakala I think OP is more pointing out that a simple river with curves and no tributaries can still be accurately measured without measuring with small straight lines, which makes the infinity argument in this video factually incorrect.
Yeah, that seems pretty easy, but which tributary do I start first? For an instance, take the Nile, do I follow the While Nile or the Blue Nile? Or, or, or, do I start from Alexandria (mouth of the Nile) and then reach Khartoum (where the Nile divides into Blue and White) and then add both the White Nile and Blue Nile distances to the distance from Alexandria to Khartoum???Huh, pretty sick.
The claim that you could measure up to infinity is not true, as it would be physically impossible to use units shorter than the Planck length. So there is a limit.Also not mentioned: do you measure along the Thalweg (which constantly changes, along with meanders), the center line, or some average of the length of the left and right banks?
Wouldn't measuring a river on the molecular level make the measurement more precise instead of a huge number?
A river's length changes throughout centuries. This is because silicate and other minerals erode on one side of a river than the other. This erosion leads to a concave side, the side with harder, more stable minerals; and a convex side, the side with more erosion. This leads to a curve or bend in the river which increases throughout the ages, thus increasing the river's length. When the curve reaches a point where the two ends of the curve meet, they form an oxbow or horseshoe lake which is independent from the river. The river then returns to a straight line, thus its original length. New channels and merging rivers could also be formed by erosion, though this is rare due to the variation in thickness and hardness of soils and minerals surrounding the river.In theory, the Nile is longer in length than the Amazon, which leads to more curves therefore longer. Overtime though, this varies and the length of the river also varies. It depends when the lengths of the rivers were recorded and how precise the measurements are.
@FiredAndIced Yeah, you can just say the Nile is the longest river and that's it, it ends there.
Just run a program to find the fastest path throughout the river, and have the discovering end when it hits the end. Then from all the points scanned, find the shortest route
This reminds me of a video I watch discussing the length of the US coast line and dispute on what country has the largest coastline in the world. Wish I could remember who made that video.
I have a solution. If main river has two or more smaller rivers attached to it, do not go by the measurement of lengthiest one but take the length of the main sub river (which carries more water to main river). In this was we can avoid measuring small small sub rivers or streams which is giving less volume of water.
wouldn’t the length of the river just approach a limit? i know it can’t be definitively calculated.. but it would simply approach a limit, not infinity
My geography teacher gave us once a similar task to measure length of a river, but we had to do it with a string instead, so we could bend it to the shape of that river
@rainman I was thinking the same as you
@Alpachino Barlatino no you would not, despite the narrator complete misunderstanding of the subject, the length of a river is NOT fractal, because no-one is measuring the length of a river by trying to measure the length of it's banks. That is also how you know that the Niles 'revised' measurement is bogus, if they, as the video claim, tried to measure the coastline of lake Victoria to add to it.
@Baz Erk Or a small map...
@ᖫ PÅragøn ᖭ you would still need an infinitely long string to measure the river with complete accuracy.
I’m pretty sure he meant a string on a map and cut off the excess
Oh, Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hammond and James May found the source of the Nile about ten years ago. Made a whole documentary about it that’s quite entertaining.
Personally, I find it really odd that we name one piece of a river system with a particular name but then name other parts by a different name. I mean, we obviously get that they're all the same river system. I mean, it's called the Mississippi River Basin after all. Shouldn't the entire thing just be called the Mississippi river? We don't say, oh.. the Pacific Ocean isn't actually the largest ocean, because it includes the South China Sea, which China won't allow us to include in the Pacific Ocean because that would imply it's not exclusively theirs.Of course, I suppose that metaphor breaks down a little when you have to then extend it to rename all the oceans in the world with the same name.
The tributary issue is a definitional one, and real. The fractal measurement issue is easily ("easily") resolved in the case of a river though - you take the shortest route along the river (i.e. imagine you stretch a string between source and end, and stretch taut).
Great exploration and explanation of history of rivers. 🏞
RLL: "The length will approach infinity as the measuring units get smaller."Integral calculus: "Am I a joke to you?"
Exactly, this is why scale exists. So we dont measure galaxies in inches, or construcion materials in light years.
I was thinking this same thing
@Thomas Tarkington I agree, this argument did not follow for me in the context of rivers in the same way that it works for coastlines
THANK YOU. I had to stop the video right there, that's not how it works at all
this argument is true for coastlines, but for rivers just measure in the middle.
I traveled by boat up the Amazon and could not see the shores for a very long time! Loved the trip.
I would enjoy these videos more if you also used miles, feet, inches when describing distance.
I would say it’s the Amazon River is the longest. I’m with you when when it comes to cooking. My knives are terrible. My sone bought these knives for me for Christmas. They are the best! It seems I waist a lot of food so I’m going to have to get a service for that also. I hate shopping of any kind. The grocery store where I live are terrible. Small & very crowded. Thanks for all this!!
I thought this video seemed familiar because Atlas Pro made one similar 3 years ago. Both are well made. Keep up the good content.
3:57 This statement is misleading. Infinite chunks of infinitely small size don’t necessarily add up to infinity (see also: Zeno’s Dichotomy Paradox). It is well within the realm of possibility that as you approach infinitely small measuring steps, you also approach a fixed value.This is also true for coastlines. The number approached will be very much higher than a more useful value, but the value “increasing to infinity” is kinda a thing people just say that they assume is correct. Fractals have an infinite scope, whereas the world has a fundamental smallest length.
@ole86 But when we’re talking about something analytic/logical like mathematics and counting, why would we be constrained by empirical/physical limits like the plank scale?I can easily talk about “half-a-plank”, whether or not such a thing would exist in real life.
Yeah dude let me just get out my Planck length ruler and measure the entire river to check if the value converges.
Finally someone says that. everyone who attended even engineering classes at an university, should know that
@emil huzjak Setting aside the point where you claim that the measurement of the length of a coastline never begins to converge, infinity is not a good practical description for an unknown finite number. It is easily possible to say "the exact length of a coastline could never be determined unless you are given an infinite amount of time to find it," and that is clearly not the same as "the sum approaches infinity."As for the midpoint, you would have to base the midpoint of the river on the two banks either side, and now it's the shoreline problem again.
The measurement of the length of a coastline never begins to converge in practice no matter what scale you use, so infinity is a good practical description. I think a little lack of mathematical rigor is to be forgiven.The problem is the video describes the length of the river and of the river *shore* like they're synonymous. The length of the river should be something like the length of the line down the middle and is very finite and measurable (just differs based on the path).
So, here is my rule for river lengths!So, if a river connects to any other river, that river will not count, all of the main entrances of a river are counted and if the river ends to a lake, it must go to the northern, southern, western or eastern most point of the lake.
3:40 similar to the coastline paradox
Why would you use small blocks of that river?Use a string then measure the string piece used and convert based on whatever the map scale is.
Serious question. Does a river's length qualifies as a coastline paradox?Why not take a satellite photo, draw a continuous line following the river and measure the length of said line using a software?While yes, a river's topography changes over time, a date can be added to show when the length was measured.
Even though the last research was done by the Brazilian geographic society, but it looks reasonable enough to me. Unless the Egyptian geographic society could find a hidden small tributary for the Nile River which beats that measurement, I will accept the fact that the Amazon River is the longest river in the world.
It is obvious the Brazilians didn't like loosing the title for the longest river they intentionally curved out the last found tributary .Hahaha !!! The Nile river can still beat the Amazon if Africans want to play foul like them by curving a new tributary that goes through the Sinai peninsula to Israel to benefit more than waiste into the Mediterranean sea !! How about that ?
@father luciano aight
@Craig Smith the lowball estimates would be on lake Victoria. Which makes the Nile smaller
@Lemmy Pop k, i have been informed
@Craig Smith OK, so we can rule in all the small rivers that make up the Amazon before it gets its name, just pick the longest one. At that point the delta thing is really irrelevant, cause the Amazon wins again.
I saw your video about the longest river and I think you have some non correct information. The source of Amazon river was discovered by czech scientist Bohumir Jánský in 2000 and his team also determined the length of the river at 7062 km.
Interesting that you mentioned adding the Missouri to the Mississippi. However, you failed to mention that the Missouri is presently longer than the Mississippi. Every time an ox-bow curve cuts through or flood waters change the delta, they flip-flop. They are that close in length.
Yup, 2,341 VS 2,340
I would use extremely large , "to scale" maps and star laying out a string to trace the path. then measure the string.
Great video as usual! Minnesotan here - just for the record, the local pronunciation for Itasca is eye-TAS-ka!
"It's not about how long it is, it's about what's inside that counts" - Pinnochio
Thats what she said
Oh man I thought it was about how you used it.. --> back to the drawing board...
I've heard that length is overrated, it's about the width.
I never knew measuring Rivers was so complicated
A more accurate approach can be sailing a boat down the river (the defined main stream) and measuring its length by the traving speed and duration of the sailing
I found it funny/interesting to hear the pronunciation of "Itasca", the origins of the Mississippi River, simply because I know what it is and never heard it used in this way before. In the video he pronounces it like "it-uh-skuh" when it really is pronounced as "eye-task-ah".
As a former brazillian, gotta say that that way pur scientists used to measure the river was by far the most brazillian thing I've ever seen
As an American, I welcome the new measuring unit of "Frances Per river basin."
@The real Speedwagon texi
@Ross Ashland that doesn't make sense if you know Latin. Octopus has the Latin plural ending of -i just like most Latin words that end in -us. But all Latin nouns that end in -as (e.g. libertas = freedom) have the plural ending -ates (libertates). So Texates would be the "correct" Latin plural of Texas.
@The real Speedwagon one Texas, many Texi. Like octopi.
As an italian, I must admit it's easier to cover the amazon with wyomings
@The real Speedwagon I’d say Texases. Adding just one S would make it look stupid. ES looks better.
The world needs to come to a consensus of what length of measurement should be used to measure coastlines and rivers. 5 to 10km should probably suffice
There’s some incorrect statements in this video. Wouldn't cause the rivers length to be infinity by using a small unit of measurement assuming the middle. The real way to measure a rivers length accurately is to take a boat and drive approximately in middle recording the distance the entire way and that would be the length..
We should embrace a standard method of deducing the length, for example using another specific length , such as the smallest/largest/average width as the segment length f.e. Or, just always use 1 meter or smth.
I don't care of the Amazon or the Nile only the Loire river will stay in my heart as my beautiful one ♥
As a Minnesota native, the way he pronounced "Itasca" broke my soul.
I know how Itasca, Illinois is pronounced been there many times. I figured Minnesota’s would be similar.
literally, i just posted a comment about that and i was hoping someone else said something
Americans and Canadians mispronounce a lot of Australian place names, e.g. Brisbane is "briz-bn" not "briz-bain", Melbourne is "mell-bn" not "mell-born", Gladstone is "glad-stn" not "glad-stone", Geelong is "ji-long" not "jeeeee-long", Canberra is "kan-bra" not "kan-berra" etc. Americans also cannot tell the difference between Tasmania (a state of Australia) and Transylvania (the north-western region of Romania). Some Americans, even those who work in the US postal service, cannot even tell the difference between Australia and Austria.
@assbeatexr yeah, from the Ojibwa tribe
@Daniel Laux I'm in MN, too, like John (who possibly could be a relative, I have some Ericksons in my family), and I'd accept Eh-TASK-ah. But never IT-as-kah, like they said. The emphasis is always on the second syllable. Both the county and the lake I have heard native Minnesotans refer to using the short vowel in the first syllable, instead of the long, although the long is generally more common. But putting the emphasis on the first syllable is an anathema to all Minnesotans! Ya sure ya betcha!
The history channel probably spent more time talking about that aliens created the Nile then how long it is on their homepage...
You do not get the fractal length problem when measuring rivers. If you measure specifically the mid point of the river, smaller measurement units do not increase the length
There's also inaccuracy as far as meanders and islands go and there are probably tens of thousands of meanders and islands on the Amazon. You must use a smaller measure of unit and have an AI apply it to a very detailed satellite image to better estimate its length.
I believe the length of rivers/coastlines converges to an unknown real number rather than diverging as the measurement unit length -> infinity.
I find the whole obsession with river length a bit misguided to begin with. There are many ways to judge the importance of a river, for instance culturally speaking the Nile is certainly more important than the Amazon. But when we talk about "physical features" the Amazon is the king of all rivers and it's not even close. The Amazon carries more water than the next 7 largest rivers *combined*. It's a whole different beast than any other river on this planet. Maybe some other river is technically a little longer, but really that's insignificant. The Amazon truly stands alone, just like Lake Baikal does as far as sweet-water lakes are concerned.
Amazon is indisputably longer,
Yh...but the Nile is longer
Its called the shoreline paradox where lowering or increasing the measerament unit greatly changes the outcome
I worked for a mapping company in Colorado and we would digitize features like rivers by drawing a line down the center of the river and then boom we would get a measurement
Yes it is possible to measure the length of a river you would just get in a boat where the river begins and float to where the River ends. It's this videos makes something that can be practically measured into some strange mathematical task for no reason. And no matter how you measure it it's not going to be infinitely long.
Which is the river, and which is the tributary, is somewhat arbitrary to begin with. When I look at where the Ohio joins the Mississippi from a satellite view, it looks to me like the "main" river is the Ohio and the Mississippi is feeding into it but the cartographers of history marked it the other way around.
As a Minnesotan, it is pronounced (I-task-a) not (it-is-ca), love the videos.
I love the smooth transition to the sponsor info, well done 👍
1. They say the nile used to run from east to west.2. Comparing them by volume would be the only way to see which one is superior.
length doesn't have the same fractally unbounded problem as the shoreline perimeter problem.Let there be a river of arbitrary length and shape with a defined starting point and a defined ending point.There is a minimum length path that can be drawn between the points, staying within the bounds of the riverbanks, such that no other path can be shorter than it, even with an infinitesimal rule.Up your math game bruh!
@Cade Snyder The example given by RLL, to which my criticism is referring, begins at 3:00 and ends at 4:15 In this example RLL is talking about river length, not shoreline length, and specifically a problem of path drawing from A to B (source to mouth). Towards the end of the example, they start describing an emergent property of unbounded length as the unit of measure approaches zero. This is a description of the coastline paradox. After RLL gives this example, they then mention fractals in reference specifically to measuring of coastlines of nations.Just because RLL correctly related the unbounded perimeter of a fractal to the coastline paradox does not mean that the earlier description of it applied to river length is correct."Don’t insult people who are being informative just because you don’t like the example they are using."What insult did I make?Where did I say I didn't like the example?I think the coastline paradox is a great example for demonstrating that the perimeter of a polygon can be unbounded. I've used it when teaching abstract algebra when I was a math teacher."Up your social skills bruh!"I don't believe RLL is in the business of refusing any criticism. That you think that discussion about the misapplication of a concept is "poor social skills" suggests you're well fit for leadership in a major US political party. Also, didn't you just call me an "asshole"?
He was talking about shoreline when he mentioned fractals, he isn’t trying to describe the shortest way from A to B. Look at it this way: draw a dotted line straight through the center of the river, then disregard the other half of the river altogether. Now, what are we looking at? *gasp* It’s a shoreline.Don’t insult people who are being informative just because you don’t like the example they are using. Nitpicking and being an Armchair Expert isn’t going to improve the video that you chose to watch but rather make you into an asshole who apparently always needs to prove you’re the smartest in the room.Up your social skills bruh!
@ReywasHere I'm not saying the method I described is perfect. But, unless you have specific flaws or a better system, your complaint is pointless and useless.
@ReywasHere It's the most realistic measurement, just because it can be measured infinitely doesn't mean it is infinite if you're sailing on it
Although shortest path within the banks is just another measuring system, with its own flaws.