Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

blog.tanyakhovanova.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 99 posts

Re: A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

#31

Post by davchana »

jacobolus wrote: post #16
CydeWeys wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know you're joking, but the number of steps is well defined and doesn't vary as it's essentially a difference. The difference between two numbers is always the same regardless of whether you're using a 0-indexed or a 1-indexed base system. E.g. regardless of whether you call an element in an array [1] or [2], it's still two elements away from whatever is [3] or [4] -- the number of stairs climbed is the same. So yo…

0-indexing steps is clearly the only reasonable choice. Who in their right mind would call the ground the “first step”?

Ground is never a step; zero or one; not. Because while we are on ground; we are on same level, stairs have not started yet. As soon as we put our foot on upper level than the other foot, stairs have started & that upper foot marks the / lands on "first" step.

Re: A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

#33

Post by dsr_ »

Judgmentality wrote: post #8
aninteger wrote: post #3

Bonus points for doing this while going down. Taking public transportation as part of my daily commute involves a lot of stair climbing and descending. I always find it fascinating to watch the people who rush from bus to train platform and watch them descend 2 stairs at a time (basically always doing long long long) the whole way down. I've never been brave enough to try this method of descending though.

Honest question, why are you afraid of trying skipping steps on the way down? I ask because I've always done this, and when I'm with company they comment incredulously how quickly I descend the stairs. It never even occurred to me it was difficult or special before.

Perhaps because the penalty for failure rapidly escalates to twisting an ankle and goes up to death, with more likely results of bruises or broken bones?

Re: A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

#34

Post by Swenrekcah »

edanm wrote: post #32
chippy wrote: post #25

13 is the standard amount of steps in stairs in houses (in the UK at least). So statistically, you should just go with 13 instead of counting them and you will get it right almost all of the time.

Fascinating! Why is that the standard?

I guess if you divide the standard ceiling height with a comfortable step size you get 13

Re: A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

#35

Post by DougBTX »

davchana wrote: post #31
jacobolus wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

0-indexing steps is clearly the only reasonable choice. Who in their right mind would call the ground the “first step”?

Ground is never a step; zero or one; not. Because while we are on ground; we are on same level, stairs have not started yet. As soon as we put our foot on upper level than the other foot, stairs have started & that upper foot marks the / lands on "first" step.

Following the principle that array indexes are “between” the elements, the bottom of the first step is 0, and the top of the first step is 1. Then the ground, which is equal in elevation to the bottom of the first step, is at 0, and the floor after the last step is N, one past the index of the last valid step, N-1.

Half open zero based ranges are quite satisfying :-)

Re: A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

#36

Post by notyourwork »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #17
js2 wrote: post #5

Yes, but do you start at 0 or 1? Also, is the last step you take onto the floor/landing counted? And when going down, do you use negative numbers? So many questions left unanswered. I feel you aren't a true stair counting nerd afterall. :-)

Please don't. It's bad enough that the US and UK can't agree on floor numbering. :) USA 1st, 2nd, 3rd UK Ground, 1st, 2nd Is the basement in the US 0?

Basement is -1

Re: A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

#37

Post by Someone »

davchana wrote: post #30
js2 wrote: post #5

Yes, but do you start at 0 or 1? Also, is the last step you take onto the floor/landing counted? And when going down, do you use negative numbers? So many questions left unanswered. I feel you aren't a true stair counting nerd afterall. :-)

For me, I have always counted it as a step if my foot-in-the-air lands on a different level than the other foot. So, if I am walking; & approach a flight of stairs going upwards, before until my both feet are on same plane, stairs have not started & I can't start counting. As soon as I step "up", my feet is on different (higher in this case going upwards), I count it as first stair. Same on the other side. I continue…

”I have always counted it as a step if my foot-in-the-air lands on a different level than the other foot.”

That algorithm doesn’t count steps of a stair, it counts the number of steps you take to go up (or down) a staircase.

Those are different if you follow this nerd’s way, which, by the way, has benefits other than making it easier to count stairs. It’s a fairly easy way to get some strength training. I think everybody who can should take stairs two steps at a time. That gives you some cushion in old age, as you’ll be able to go back to one step at a time, and postpones the day where taking a stair becomes impossible.

If two steps is easy, you can make going up harder (I don’t advise that going down stairs) by sitting deeper, with your thighs horizontally, or by taking three steps at a time (four steps is out of reach for most)

Re: A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

#38

Post by fanf2 »

edanm wrote: post #32
chippy wrote: post #25

13 is the standard amount of steps in stairs in houses (in the UK at least). So statistically, you should just go with 13 instead of counting them and you will get it right almost all of the time.

Fascinating! Why is that the standard?

I looked at our stairs at home and they have 13 steps with a rise of what looks like a bit less than 20cm - hard to measure accurately with the carpet. That gives a total height of 2.5m which is nice and round.

A bit of searching around and I find the building regulations permit a rise per step between 15cm and 22cm. And I find a site which says “A typical rise is 2,600mm, which divides easily into 13 200mm risers, or steps”

I roughly measured the overall height of 8 steps and it was closer to 160cm than 152cm so looks like they are the typical dimensions.

Re: A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

#39

Post by chiph »

17 steps at home[0] and 17 each for two flights per floor at work, since commercial buildings have taller ceilings.

[0] This applies both in North Carolina and the apartment in Texas, which had two flights of stairs (3-story townhouse)

Re: A Nerd’s Way to Walk Up the Stairs (2011)

#40

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

Someone wrote: post #37
davchana wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, I have always counted it as a step if my foot-in-the-air lands on a different level than the other foot. So, if I am walking; & approach a flight of stairs going upwards, before until my both feet are on same plane, stairs have not started & I can't start counting. As soon as I step "up", my feet is on different (higher in this case going upwards), I count it as first stair. Same on the other side. I continue…

”I have always counted it as a step if my foot-in-the-air lands on a different level than the other foot.” That algorithm doesn’t count steps of a stair, it counts the number of steps you take to go up (or down) a staircase. Those are different if you follow this nerd’s way, which, by the way, has benefits other than making it easier to count stairs. It’s a fairly easy way to get some strength training. I think every…

Would taking two steps at a time in this was possibly cause more knee-joint wear?
Post reply on HN