That seems like the distance to go from having 100k people in front of you to having 100k people behind you. The distance you'd have to go to run into them properly would depend critically on the width of the vehicle you're in. With about 30k people running the Boston marathon and 60k people running the NY marathon, if you can source a vehicle wide enough to cover the course, it seems like you could pull it off in just a bit over 52.4 miles... assuming that the bodies didn't produce enough drag to slow you down so much that runners were managing to stay ahead of you on the course. (And assuming that marathon runners prioritize completion of the course over running sideways away from obvious danger, but they're marathon runners, that seems like a safe assumption.)
> That seems like the distance to go from having 100k people in front of you to having 100k people behind you
0 metres. Just turn round.
To pass within say 5m of someone you just need to set up shop at a busy train platform and wait. With 1000 people passing every 2 minutes it won’t take long to pass 100k (well presumably about 3 hours)
Ah interesting, I seen the title "run into" as "bump into" or in this context, get to where 100k people are. I don't know any US addresses far from population centers so I pumped in Area 51!
Is this supposed to mean that 100k people live in each slice of the pie? Counting up slices and comparing to my metro statistical area population, that about works out.
It does say that it only works in contiguous US (so no Alaska nor Hawaii nor "abroad" :D ), but seems it also works in Bahamas, for some reason, which as far as I know, isn't part of the contiguous US (yet?).
Indeed, it doesn't seem to think that the fairly large cities of Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Regina, Winnipeg, and Thunder Bay have a population of approximately zero. Anywhere in northern Montana has the "beam" shoot all the way over to Maine before reaching 100K, which isn't quite right since it passes through a couple medium Canadian cities and dozens of prairie towns.
I think this tool would be much more interesting in the western US if they had incorporated Canadian census data as well.
I don't fully understand what this is supposed to visualize, but at least for my location it tells me I'd have to run considerably far into golden gate park, which I imagine is negligible in terms of people.
That seems like the distance to go from having 100k people in front of you to having 100k people behind you. The distance you'd have to go to run into them properly would depend critically on the width of the vehicle you're in. With about 30k people running the Boston marathon and 60k people running the NY marathon, if you can source a vehicle wide enough to cover the course, it seems like you could pull it off in just a bit over 52.4 miles... assuming that the bodies didn't produce enough drag to slow you down so much that runners were managing to stay ahead of you on the course. (And assuming that marathon runners prioritize completion of the course over running sideways away from obvious danger, but they're marathon runners, that seems like a safe assumption.)
> That seems like the distance to go from having 100k people in front of you to having 100k people behind you
0 metres. Just turn round.
To pass within say 5m of someone you just need to set up shop at a busy train platform and wait. With 1000 people passing every 2 minutes it won’t take long to pass 100k (well presumably about 3 hours)
Ah interesting, I seen the title "run into" as "bump into" or in this context, get to where 100k people are. I don't know any US addresses far from population centers so I pumped in Area 51!
Clarity needed on the title or description!
It says right at the top of the website:
> From the pin, a filled 5° slice in every direction. Petal length = distance to 100k people.
You could replace with bump into and the comment would still apply though, no?
Really cool. Makes me wonder where the most remote point in the contiguous U.S. is by this metric.
I live in the one of the densest parts of lower Manhattan, and often explain that when I take a walk around the neighborhood, I pass 100,000+ people.
This map pretty much proves it!
That is a cool visualization.
Punched in my grandparents' town and a bunch of the slices stretched 1500km over three states away. A lot of the US is big and empty.
Is this supposed to mean that 100k people live in each slice of the pie? Counting up slices and comparing to my metro statistical area population, that about works out.
Fun! If you click in the center of Nebraska, US - there are some angles for which you will never find 100k people.
Doesn't work outside the US sadly.
It does say that it only works in contiguous US (so no Alaska nor Hawaii nor "abroad" :D ), but seems it also works in Bahamas, for some reason, which as far as I know, isn't part of the contiguous US (yet?).
Indeed, it doesn't seem to think that the fairly large cities of Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Regina, Winnipeg, and Thunder Bay have a population of approximately zero. Anywhere in northern Montana has the "beam" shoot all the way over to Maine before reaching 100K, which isn't quite right since it passes through a couple medium Canadian cities and dozens of prairie towns.
I think this tool would be much more interesting in the western US if they had incorporated Canadian census data as well.
I don't fully understand what this is supposed to visualize, but at least for my location it tells me I'd have to run considerably far into golden gate park, which I imagine is negligible in terms of people.
This is a killer app for Vancouver drivers.
This is cool and useful. I would love to see the drive time version.