how can the diameter of a bacterium or a red blood cell, something too small to be seen under most microscopes be approximately the same size as the width of a spider web's thread, which has visible thickness even to the naked eye? something's not quite right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.241.115 (talk • contribs)
I had a little check for you, and I think your relative perceptions of the two are inconsistent. On the one hand, Jan Swammerdam observed the shape of red blood cells in the 17th century, which was hardly the pinnacle of microscope technology. On the other, spider webs are especially visible to the naked eye for their diameter; it's much easier to perceive a filament then a point cell. Spider webs are also easier to see because they aren't submerged in fluid, are more reflective and transmissive than blood cells and are subject to effects of diffraction. HTH BigBlueFish 16:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the earth-sun size comparison calculation is incorrect. The Wikipedia Sun article claims the sun has a diameter of 109 earths. 1/109 is .00917. .00917 centimeters is .0000917 meters - 91 micrometers, not 9 micrometers. 206.124.146.40 02:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like you're right. Duly corrected. BigBlueFish 16:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
