Explain an airplane in 10 words or less to someone who was alive in 1776.
A metal device capable of transporting large numbers of people
A vehicle flying like a bird.
Mechanical bird capable of transporting humans through the air.
Sailboat of the sky—rigid sails parallel to deck. Whee!
A tin can with wings and wheels. Takes you places.
Big metal can that flies like a bird transporting people.
Smmmeeeeee!
A flying winged boat which transports people with maximum discomfort.
Loud airship transporting people and cargo faster than seven-league boots.
So, is this for freelance or full time?
:P
Flying stovepipe with wings. No, I cannot fathom how it works, either.
Frankly, why create imaginary problems when there are enough real ones?
Lift = .5*c*a*r*v^2
c = lift coefficient
r = density of surrounding fluid
a = wing area
v = velocity.
You said max. 10 words, but nothing about equations or mathematical symbols.
A way to move in the same mannar as birds.
A flying vehicle.
(People have dreamed of such things for millennia, probably forever. It wouldn't take much to explain it, compared to your microwave oven example, for instance.)
Flying machine. No smoking. Fat people pay double.
Flying transport vehicle. 1/1000 chance of dying. Inconceivably heavy.
In witch language? ;-)
Imagine a huge bird. Imagine it taking you whereever you want.
This exercise Is nearly impossible given the dramatic differences between the era of the modern airplane and the 1770's. The explanations above take so much for granted. The listener would have no understanding of so much of the technology that makes flight possible, today or 100 years ago. Most importantly the power needed to get the machine off the ground. Without that how would the listener ever be able to comprehend what you're describing?
This exercise Is nearly impossible given the dramatic differences between the era of the modern airplane and the 1770's. The explanations above take so much for granted. The listener would have no understanding of so much of the technology that makes flight possible, today or 100 years ago. Most importantly the power needed to get the machine off the ground. Without that how would the listener ever be able to comprehend what you're describing?
I believe that's the point of the excercise. To make you think.
A powered kite large enough to carry people long distances.
I'd be afraid all the bird references would lead them to think planes flapped their wings. I really like Paperhead's "show-me" style. This would explain the gliding factor. You could utilize that and add "big enough to carry people, and self-powered."
Perhaps "A giant mechanical gliding bird which makes its own wind." or "A man-made, fixed-wing gliding bird which makes its own wind." Neither convey the transport utility... could they imagine that themselves? Is size important?
Of course, at that time, there weren't many self-powered things (outside of giant factory equipment) nor any form of vehicle propulsion that wasn't living-being powered (animals, rowing). There were fireworks, if anyone had seen them, that might help explain thrust propulsion. Wind mills might help describe propeller power, in reverse.
Think of a hawk gliding in the air, wings fixed.
This is a meaningless exercise.
As if 10 words is some magical "Simplicty Quotient".
Not everything can or should be explained in 10 words.
Here's an "exercise" for you people:
"Explain Einstein's General Theory of Relativity in 10 words or fewer" (yes Jason, correct usage is "fewer", not "less")
Not everything can or should be explained in 10 words.
True, but what's the harm in trying? I find it fascinating to see how people deal with such tight constraints. Some people explain what something does, others explain how it works, others explain the benefit to the audience, etc. What I like about the 10 word limit is that it helps people focus on what they think is most important when trying to explain a topic.
"Explain Einstein's General Theory of Relativity in 10 words or fewer"
- It is not about you. It is about me.
And while I still say this is more about brevity than clarity ;) I don't find it at all meaningless.
But I guess meaning is probably relative.
See, there's this thing called the mile high club...
10 words is arbitrary. What if some future American were to come back in time and explain a "flazomatic" to us and they were only allowed 10 words? It's ludicrous. We'd press that person to tell us more and more.
A better exercise is to explain a complex idea (not an entity like airplane or microwave) in essentials using as few words as possible, like explain the essence of freedom. Adding a constraint like in under 10 words would be crazy.
it's my aeroplane: pleasure spiked with pain!
What birds can do, human ingenuity shall improve and enlargen.
forget the flying thing you clod, the english are coming!
Here's my 10:-
Trust me, ride on it and you will find out.
As short as I can:
Airplane:
A passenger craft that travels above the clouds (England to Pennsylvania in a day).
General Relativity:
A theory of a very precise shape relationship between gravity, matter, space and time (has yielded many extraordinary yet correct and even useful predictions).
Yeah, we invented it.
"We"?
The USA have the highest proportional levels of airline disasters in the world too.
1176: "A fhip of the fky, failing the etherf."
Martin -- Not to pick on you, but you inspired me to google some stats. Is it a matter that more American airlines are flying?
Check this out: From 1945 - 2002, America does lead the world in aviation accidents. But how many other countries had large-scale flight programs up in, say, the 1950s?
Also, 42% of all flights depart from someplace in North America, but they are only responsible for 17% of all accidents. 3% of all flights depart from Africa, yet they are also responsible for 17% of all accidents. Europe has 29% of all departures and 20% of all accidents. Seems to me that I'd rather fly in the US than Africa or Europe.
I believe that's the point of the excercise. To make you think.
Agreed, I'm thinking about the exercise as described. If the goal is clarity, 10 words won't cut it when describing this to someone with no historical context or knowledge of the necessary technology (which didn't exist in their time).
It was in the spirit of the exercise that I questioned this.
Bill,
You seem to have forgotten that, according to directive 1.61803, no human is allowed to learn of the existence of the flazomatic or the Flazomatic Principles until at least the year 2176. Please desist from ment...
Am I saying this out loud? Damn telepat...
“10 words won't cut it when describing this to someone with no historical context or knowledge…”
I naively thought the exercise to best describe a new concept to an impatient audience, rather than communicating a complete concept to a blank slate (I empathize with your frustration if you were shooting for the latter).
I think I skipped a word or two in my previous post (words are not my friends).
Fixed-winged carriage that flies passengers very fast.
Enclosed, pressurized, fixed-wing, gas-powered flying machine. Surprisingly safe.
Boat-like vessel that flies, transporting people far very fast.
A flying machine.
A gaseous combustion propelled ridged flying machine for human transportation .
Can you Yanks get anything right?
Yeah, we invented it.
----
Actually, the city of chard in somerset england claims to be the first in flight.
Theory of relativity in words of four letters or fewer:
http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/txt/al.html
And my personal favourite, computer programming explained in words of one syllable:
http://wws.editthispage.com/stories/storyReader$50
While in part parlour tricks, exercises like these are still inspiring lessons in how to wield language effectively. Verbosity too often only serves to hide imprecision. When specifying interactive products, few skills are more valuable than clear writing.
Lousy food, you arrive in Detroit, luggage arrives in Minsk.
A magical flying machine that servers really bad food
Flying metal tubular boat, smells of farts
a device that allows people to fly through the sky
If an "iron horse" was used to describe the train how about an "iron unicorn"?
If an "iron horse" was used to describe the train how about an "iron unicorn"?
a flying vehicle