Personally I start measuring from the middle of my taint 😌
Diameter obviously. But also, the bottom line is going into trunk wood so obviously wrong.
They are using the wrong measuring unit, instead they should measure the force needed to pull it level.
You’re saying rigidity/turgidity trump sheer length and girth?
The only way to get an accurate measurement is to cut the branch off first.
It is imperative that the cylinder and the larger object remain unharmed.
The cylindet MUST stay intact!
But you’re supposed to measure it twice before that!
I just had some serious flashbacks to all the fucking Handy Manny I’ve watched. Thanks for that. 👍🏻
One each side I guess?
The branch cannot be cut.
The branch is ~4.5" in girth and attempting to cut it off could cause discomfort
🎵Detachable tree branch🎵
Method A on account that that would be the maximum usable length
As a skilled carpenter who’s used to measuring wood, this is the only answer.
Well… It kinda depends. If I were to be ordering stock to recreate the branch or even if I were making a covering for the branch. I’d have to order at least 6 inches of material to cut down.
So I think it matters most how you are intending to use it.
Oh you’re a skilled carpenter? How much wood have you cut in your time
Half as much as they have measured, is my guess.
THIS ia getting philosophical… i mean, first of all, things don’t need to be cut perfectly in half every time they’re cut.
But then your answer is probably an estimate/approximation.
HOWEVER… when you cut one piece of wood into two, is not 100% of the wood cut into?
So either this carpenter measures 50% of his wood aimlessly, or you, sir, are a LIAR
Measure twice, cut once
That’s not how it works with soft bodies though, method B represents potential useable length when pointing down. It’s only distorted because it’s pointing up. For rigid bodies, I’d agree.
So… Non rigid?
If you trim the bushes the branch looks bigger. Pro tip.
Branches and other small cylinders can be sized using M&M tubes
Banana for scale
The generally accepted method used by scientists is to firmly push your ruler against the base of tree at the top of the branch. This is called BPEL, or bark-pressed erect length.
Hehe hehe erect
You measure from the back of the balls.
From the edge of the anus of course… the further edge.
Or… from the base of the skull. The only accurate measurement.
None of them are. You need a graduated cylinder.
482 cm3 here.
I can’t use method B, the tree fruit are in the way.
This can be easily calculated by the formula [(length x diameter) + (Weight / Girth)] / Angle of Tip^2
The correct answer is “between 114 and 152 millimeters” because both measures are relevant and necessary from an engineering standpoint: For the purposes of sizing something such that it can utilize the branch for support, it must be made clear that the branch is solid and whole up to 114 millimeters from the trunk. For the purpose of accidental collision clearance, it is necessary to know the furthest extent of the branch’s reach no matter how damaged or disrupted it is. Furthermore if the branch may break and fall off, giving it at least 152mm of clearance means that it is unlikely to accidentally catch upon something in its descent even if it “hinges” away from the trunk at the base.
But then you’d need to know the angle, too.
My friend says “ouch wtf!!!”
Bend it straight, then measure
It’s method b both for tree branches and for appendages of different creatures
