21–30 of 35 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course. I assumed that "15-23" would mean "average", so since the average band size is around a 36, that would probably mean "32D-40D" or something of the sort for "15-23". Either way, the numbers seem absurd.
Volume of cone = pi * r^2 * h / 3. Plugging in r1 of 3 and r2 of 2.5, and h1 of 36 and h2 of 34. Constants cancel out, that's an increase of 2.38 times in volume. This is per cone ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
My double-D's are a thing of the past. But thanks for the "chivalrous" offer. (Please see my previous post about having lost count of the number of bra sizes I've been through.)
Let's not forget wierd bras for those of us whove lost our breasts. Pink ribbons.
What does it say about me that I first read that as "The Physics of Brass" and it was no less interesting?
What does it say about me that I first read that as "The Physics of Brass" and it was no less interesting?
I remember in one of my materials classes they used bras as an example where martensitic metals were used. Apparently these materials were chosen to help bras retain their shape (such alloys are also called shape-memory alloys). However, shape memory alloys usually deform back once heated. I've always wondered if this was true. Anyone who has ever washed theirs in hot water want to confirm?
Wondering if this upvoted article will generate any serious discussion. I stopped counting after I had gone through 9 different bra sizes over the years. I found the article quite interesting.
Do you have any idea what caused this? I have yet to met someone with such a huge variation, except mothers who are breast feeding, but that's another thing and it's expected.
The article punts on why women have breasts. For interesting speculation on that topic and several related ones, http://davidbrin.com/neoteny1.htm is an interesting read.