Crickets and toads are setup to jump horizontally rather than vertically. From what I've seen, a cricket might be able to jump horizontally the length of a blender, but I think it would be close. The ones that look like spiders especially seem to disappear and appear somewhere else pretty far away. No way it's popping the top. We jump farther horizontally than vertically. I don't know what jumps vertically. A flea can, but it probably generates lift. The average cat does jump higher than almost all humans in that they can jump over your head from a standing position. It's a very rare human that can do that without a running start. The only one I know of is Leon Battista Alberti. The guy was an architect, a writer, a painter, a musician, a scholar, god knows what else. But if he couldn't have done that, I wouldn't have remembered a thing about him.<sup>*

*</sup>Movie quote...anyone...anyone?

Take the cat example and my suggested power law. The cat jumps easily 5 times its height. It is also about 20 cm (ground to head). So what would the crude stupid law above suggest? 20/0.3=67 so 67^(1/2)~8x. So a cat is 8/50 of the ant ratio ie 6.25x its weight in energy released. Thats not so bad and close to the 5x number experience might suggest for jumping. Next try a frog.

Frogs jump higher than would be predicted from their muscles. They have legs like springs. Some say they can jump up to 10 feet high.

"Froghoppers can jump 70 times their own body height. They’re the 2nd highest jumper among animals compared to body size. However, froghoppers generate the most force per body weight of any animal when jumping - more than 400 times their body weight. They initially accelerate at 4,000 metres per second per second and in a millisecond reach a take-off velocity of four metres per second."




"It is usually claimed that the best jumper in the world is the Flea. They are longest and highest jumper among animals compared to body size. Fleas can jump 220 times their own body length and 150 times their own body height. If we were to scale up a flea to our size it would be like us jumping nearly 400m in distance whilst jumping over a 250m high building! Now that’s a big jump!"




"The Jumping Spider can jump 100 times its own body length. Imagine a person who can jump as long as 2 jumbo jets."




"The Kangaroo Rat can jump 45 times its own body length. They are longest jumper among all mammals compared to body size."



http://www.onekind.org/be_inspired/t...lists/jumpers/

I get why you are presuming that there is a lid. If I were going to shrink someone to the size of a nickel and put them in a blender, I'd certainly not want their innards all over my kitchen.

I am curious as to why a Renaissance Man such as yourself would think that the lid would be upside down though.

You would want to measure the various creepy crawlies in their full outstretched position since you would presumably still be bipedal if we shrunk you to the size of a nickel. You would be capable of reaching approximately 1" high with the tips of your fingers from a standing position if you were height of a nickel. I am guessing that from the top of the blades to the top of the blender would be around 8-10" in a standard blender.

Maybe a bit smaller than this guy say 50% of his height? And this blender doesnt have huge blades and are originating from the bottom rising up a bit.

They didn't say which blender. What if it were this one?





The largest blender in the world, built in five days by Wink Eller, Greg Scott Abbott, Lisa Legohn, Christoff Koon, Eric Scarlett and Frank Payne (all USA) in Santa Clarita, California, USA, measures 4.79 m (16 ft 4 in) tall, 2.43 (8 ft) wide, 3.04 m (10 ft) deep and was unveiled on 6 July 2004 on Discovery Channel's 'BIG!' television show. The blender was used on 28 March 2004 to make a 1, 324 litre (291 gal / 350 US gal) smoothie.

The tumbler itself can hold approximately 2,649 litres (582 gal / 700 US gal) in total and measures 3.04 m (10 ft) tall, 1.21 m (4 ft) wide and 1.21 m (4 ft) deep. The build was completed using the following materials: Tumbler: (4) 5052-H32 Sheets of rolled aluminum Windows: 3/4” Plexiglas Base: Frame is made of 2” x 2” steel square tubing, and structure is skinned with aluminum sheeting. Power: (20) 12 Volt car batteries Motor: DC Series wound 100 horsepower Motor Controller: (1) Zilla EV 1000 amp Buttons: Aluminum with red Plexiglas

The blender is not set to start on its own with some timer. Some man or woman will start it. So start screaming and jumping to catch their attention and nobody would blend a tiny human, its just so out of this world. Only 1% chance to run to a psychopath. Some of the jumps may get you to the top even.

If the human that was shrunk is a woman, start stripping in sexy style dancing and there is no way in hell a guy would blend her lol! Think King Kong or some stupid programs that have strippers in your desktop if you have ever seen in junk email or something to know what i am talking about.

The giant would blend a tiny human.

That is quite disturbing. Up until now, I was under the impression that this was a hypothetical situation.

I was merely guessing the height of a standard blender from memory. That picture is what a typical American would think of as a blender. Since we now have visual evidence, we can conclude that my memory is off about the height of standard blenders.

There are other types, such as an immersion blender (that is what I use for my blending needs), but they would have to take that sort of blender apart to put you in it. If you were in that sort of blender, I think the proper thing to do would be to sit around and occasionally yell "Help! I've been shrunk to the size of a nickel and placed in this immersion blender!."

Clearly that can't be correct. Presumably someone shrunk you down and put you in a blender. That is not the behavior of the sort of person who would be against blending you.

First of all this is an extra assumption that they are the same person or that another human was able to do that to you and not some other phenomenon or accident.

If that were the case then do you even begin to imagine what is the purpose of getting out??? Why bother with such interview question? You would be killed or recaptured by them anyway even if you got out and even if you destroyed the blender they can lock you in some box and go get a new one that is deadlier.

So sorry this line of thinking is wrong and not necessary and you fall victim to it by constantly wanting to find a reason to disagree with me.

The natural assumption here is that some undisclosed phenomenon shrunk you and now the blender will start on its own or someone usually not related with the shrinking will start it. Otherwise resistance is futile right?

My argument for help or stripping is on the humorous side of course that hopefully a real human would appreciate at the interview. King Kong hated humans but the brave sexy girl that stood up to him captured his heart...I suppose Google wants to hire people that show empathy and care and faith in mankind also dont they? ;-)

He hits the top of the lid with the bottom of the lid.

That's how masque would defend.

Renaissance Man was in fact the source of movie quote from Danny Devito. It took me awhile to remember where it was from before I posted it because I thought it was Robin Williams from Dead Poet's Society which would have been appropriate this week had he said it, but he didn't.

I've already implied why they would bother with the interview question.

Do you believe that mice are extinct because humans try to kill them? If you escape, you would have the problem of getting to a more friendly environment, but that would come after you solve the immediate problem of not being blended.

Have I mentioned that the purpose of interview questions like this is not to determine whether you can escape from a blender?

Coming to the conclusion that resistance is futile would show a lack of grit and determination. This is true no matter how many times they say that the result of your attempt fails.

Perhaps you have just been captured by a rival tech company and if you can escape and get back to your home company, they will use their deshrinkifier to restore you to your normal self.

It is a fine argument. They still say that you get blended. They ask whether you have any other ideas.

They would, I imagine, say that the top of one of the lids breaks due to slamming into the bottom of the top lid. I am still presuming that the interviewer is skilled.

It is on my list of movies I didn't find particularly enjoyable. Renaissance Man, not Dead Poet's Society.

My experience with blenders is that they close and secure by eg rotation or you put a cap in it. The fact is a small mass human of the mass of a tiny almond say would be unable to push to open anything. If they had the proper speed to do it in the case of a not rotation-lock cap, that collision would kill the little human anyway.

If the blender has material in it you can climb on top of it and try to hold on to the roof.


Keep in mind a human taken down a scale of x200 (2m to 1 cm) at same density is now having a mass of only 0.01gr lol.

Such mass cannot open anything lol.


But its interesting to ask now if that thing can fly! Take out your shrinked clothes and create surfaces with them and start flapping and see what happens. You can aid that by jumping also and then try to float. Basically try to simulate as much as possible a butterfly. Your hands and legs will be now providing a lot more energy per unit mass than at the current human size. So start flying. At 0.01gr you better believe it its possible with a small surface area created around you.


PS: This is also a strategy to take the interviewer to an area they are not comfortable or able to do any math or physics without some tables, papers assistance etc and so they will be unable to defend the argument against flying since insects can do it nicely and all you would need here is not to fly like them so fast and expertly but just to float and remain higher or reach gradually any target which is doable within a few seconds. If you remove your jacket (interview suit say) for example you already have a huge area for lift. Then you have your shirt too. A leaf falls to the ground slowly but what if it started flapping now?

I think that the first question I would ask is whether there is a lid on the blender. "I think I might be able to jump out. Is there a lid on the blender?"

That is the second question I would ask. If they are on a hiring spree odds are that there are loads of us in the blender. It would be an opportunity to show what they call "leadership skills" by stepping on other applicants faces in a frantic climb to the top.

All they have to say is something like "you try, but you lack sufficient strength" or "you try, but you find that you are not sufficiently coordinated to generate sufficient lift."

You would nearly definitely be hired if you take off your coat and start hopping and flapping your arms like a freak. There is no way that the interviewer could resist.

I wonder whether you would be small enough for van der waals effects to allow you to climb the glass like a lizard. You might have to get naked and do the centipede. It is probably best to not act that one out.

My brother interviewed for Google a few years ago and was asked something similar to the blender question... he tried to clarify the question and they just looked at him, shrugged, and smiled. I don't think they're ever answering additional questions about the scenario - they just want to see where you go with it.

Only 1 lid. Consider the top part the top but it still has some thickness that that you may define as thin as you like, even a single layer of atoms. The rest is the bottom. You hit the bottom of the top with the bottom in the same sense as you would hit a nail with a hammer.

What clarification did he attempt to get? It is worth asking him if you don't recall.

I don't think that masque would use that defense.

For the blender question, did they specify you and only you are dropped into the blender? I mean, if there's no liquid or other stuff to get jostled around and sweep you into the blades I assume you can just hug the glass. I don't think the blades typically take up more than about 50% of space in the middle area.

They apparently don't specify, but you are correct about your typical blender. I'd be a bit concerned about air currents jostling me and generally would prefer to not be inside of a running blender either way.

Yeah, I take back what I said - there's no way he pops the cap. That would be like a human trying to move tens of thousands of pounds assuming the same velocity.

I generally think interview questions like this are pointless but I've actually learned quite a bit from this thread.

I've always wanted to see a tornado from a safe distance.

I got what superpower would you have?

Caught me off guard to get a question like that. Legal job.