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

It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 255 posts

Re: It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

#21

Post by akvadrako »

chiph wrote: post #10
radicality wrote: post #6

Semi related - a few months ago, while not fully sober, I was aimlessly browsing through Amazon and ended up owning a set of two 1.5inch cubes - one aluminium, one tungsten. It’s kind of a silly purchase considering it’s a lot of money for 2 metal cubes, but it’s honestly very impressive just how heavy that small cube is - both objectively, and when compared to the aluminium cube. Also makes for a great talking point…

When I heard that the crypto millionaires were buying Tungsten cubes for fun, I checked into the prices. Amazon lists a 1.5" cube (weighs 1 kg) at $199 and a 4" cube (that weighs 18.9 kg [0]) at $3499. There's no way I'm spending that, but I will admit to wanting to experience their density for myself. [0] free Prime shipping for the win

Tungsten doesn't seem especially heavy; it's a little less than gold.

Re: It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

#23

Post by midasuni »

Hamcha wrote: post #14
a9h74j wrote: post #11

On Earth.

Depends how you measure it. Any X kg/lbs of matter here on earth is still that same X kg/lbs everywhere in the universe. Assuming the scale being used to weight is correctly calibrated to whatever planet it's in, it would still show up as the same amount of kg/lbs.

I assume they were saying

Densest material on earth

There are denser materials, but you would struggle to send them via UPS

Re: It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

#24

Post by jotm »

Blackthorn wrote: post #22

That said, it sure wasn't fun for the mail person when they had to deliver me those two boxes of lead ingots.

I got a pair of dumbbells once (30KG total) that were very efficiently packed in one small box and felt kinda bad about the guy

Re: It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

#25

Post by valbaca »

akvadrako wrote: post #21
chiph wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I heard that the crypto millionaires were buying Tungsten cubes for fun, I checked into the prices. Amazon lists a 1.5" cube (weighs 1 kg) at $199 and a 4" cube (that weighs 18.9 kg [0]) at $3499. There's no way I'm spending that, but I will admit to wanting to experience their density for myself. [0] free Prime shipping for the win

Tungsten doesn't seem especially heavy; it's a little less than gold.

right, just buy 1kg of gold instead

Re: It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

#26

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

halfdan wrote: post #17
aix1 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lead weights continue to be widely used in diving: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diving_weighting_system (there's a section on materials and toxicity).

They are, but as a diver I will never touch them unless they look in proper shape and are the types wrapped in some other material. Some fishy dive centers will have the old style raw lead blocks..

You breath TEL whenever you go near an airport. That's a far more pressing concern than incidental exposure through contact. If that's your threshold you may as well isolate from zinc and copper too.

Re: It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

#27

Post by mikestew »

jotm wrote: post #24
Blackthorn wrote: post #22

That said, it sure wasn't fun for the mail person when they had to deliver me those two boxes of lead ingots.

I got a pair of dumbbells once (30KG total) that were very efficiently packed in one small box and felt kinda bad about the guy

I'll raise you a 114lb/52Kg battery (not USPS, though; FedEx, IIRC):

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00RPOI7F4/

I, too, felt bad for the guy until I saw him toss it on his shoulder like it was nothing, carried to the garage and gently set it down. Not a big guy, either. :-)

Re: It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

#28

Post by droopyEyelids »

grog454 wrote: post #18
Hamcha wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends how you measure it. Any X kg/lbs of matter here on earth is still that same X kg/lbs everywhere in the universe. Assuming the scale being used to weight is correctly calibrated to whatever planet it's in, it would still show up as the same amount of kg/lbs.

"a teaspoon of neutron star material would weigh around a billion tonnes." https://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/n/neutron+star#:~:text=... .

It would be impossible to put neutron star material inside a cardboard box, and the original post was talking about possibility.

Re: It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

#29

Post by ortusdux »

I have a 115lb shipment of small metal parts that needs to be across the country before Wed. Both FedEx and UPS quoted me ~$750 to ship it in a 12"x8"x8" OSB box via 2-day shipping. Fedex one rate boxes have a weight limit of 50lbs. The small boxes are $31/ea to ship. I just finished breaking the shipment up into 3 parts. Heck, next day would be ~$300.

Re: It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

#30

Post by ben_w »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #28
grog454 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"a teaspoon of neutron star material would weigh around a billion tonnes." https://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/n/neutron+star#:~:text=... .

It would be impossible to put neutron star material inside a cardboard box, and the original post was talking about possibility.

If I remember right, given that free neutrons aren’t stable and have a very short half life, it would be explosively unwise even if it was physically possible.
Post reply on HN