All the people on the planet

[Supernick]

What's the smallest area of land that everyone in the world could stand on?

[auro]

I once was told that the population of the UK could stand on the Isle of Wight..... as far as the world goes ..??
Perhaps Africa ?

[drbsparks]

The population of the earth can infact all fit on the isle of wight not just the uk. But there would be standing room only.

[trilobite]

god, where would we all p*ss? It would be worse than Glastonbury !

[bernardo]

The Isle-Of-Wight answer is an urban myth.  If that were true, each person would only have less than two-thirds of a square foot to stand on (i.e. about one-and-a-half shoe-areas).  A more realistic answer for a densely-packed crowd (i.e. four square feet per person) would be 932 square miles, i.e. one and a half Londons or 6 Isles of Wight or half of Devon or a ninth of Wales

[fantastical]

If all one person needs to stand on is 1 square foot of ground (scrunched but possible because of the law of averages), and you accept that there are 5 billion people on this planet, an area of land roughly 13.4 square miles should do the trick.

Now, as for the consequences of 5 billion people standing on this relatively small area, I don't want to guess...but if you consider the average weight per human to be120 lbs. (rough guess), that becomes 600 billion pounds of matter sitting on that small area of dirt. What would happen if everyone decided to jump in the air simultaneously!!?

[Quizmonster]

Bernardo's perfectly correct about the Isle of Wight's being a non-starter as a place for the world's population to stand.

According to the 'Encyclopedia of Britain', the Isle of Wight covers 380 square kilometres or 147 square miles. There are over six billion people in the world now. Given that they are all different sizes, let's imagine that the average 'area' required for each standing person is about � a square yard. I'm no mathematician, so I suppose I'll be shot down in flames here, but I calculate that 147 square miles = just over 441 million square yards...ie space for about 880 million people. That's not even one billion, never mind six!The Isle of Man is a bit bigger at 227 square miles, but there is still nowhere near enough room, nor is there if you shared the people out around both islands.

On the figures above, you'd require an area of about 1000 square miles. (I can only repeat...I'm no mathematician!)

[jenstar]

Manhattan, because it's got all those multistorey buildings.

[jenstar]

"The Isle-Of-Wight answer is an urban myth. "

More of a rural myth, really.

[helghast]

there are almost 6 and a half people in the world

[helghast]

sorry 6 and a half billion people

[j2buttonsw]

and rising http://www.ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop

[helghast]

i already knew that it was rising. therefore the answer to supernicks question is we don't know as the area that the world's population can stand on will keep on getting bigger as the population increases. also we can't tell EXACTLY what the population is at a precise moment in time we can only forecast it or estimate it.

[Quizmonster]

None of which stops us from making an educated guess.

[bernardo]

deamo Ha ha ha!  Six and a half people!  Ha!

 

chaotic1 must have miscalculated somewhere because 5 billion people with 1 square foot each would be 179 square miles. (There are 5280 feet in a mile).

 

jenstar rural myth: brilliant!

 

j2buttonsw if everybody were squashed together at 1 square foot each, the world's population would very soon stop increasing.

 

By the way, the reason I allowed 4 square feet per person in my original answer is because (according to the Guinness Book of Records a few editions ago) the sizes of crowds are estimated on the basis of four square foot per person in a dense crowd, or nine square feet in a loose crowd.

[fantastical]

Don't all forget: 1 "square" mile is 5,280 feet across both sides. This makes it contain over 27 million "patches," each being a square foot in area. How many of these "square miles" of land do you need to account for 6.5 billion people? Consider for simplicity that they only need 1 square foot, and for efficiency.

Simply take the square root of 6.5 billion (to find out what number needs to get multiplied by itself (squared) in order to have 6.5 billion of these 1 square foot "patches"). That number equals 80,622 feet:

You need an area of land 80,622 units across (1 foot in this case) and 80,622 units down, in order to get 6.5 billion "compartments," or "patches," of area for each human being.

Defining a compartment to equal1 square foot, the dimension of total area for 6.5 billion people, each getting a 1 square foot compartment of land (c'mon its possible), needs to be just 15.27 miles across (80,622/5280 = 15.269). This kinda shows how small the world really is...or how big...or how much extra time I have on my hands at the moment!

[fantastical]

bernardo's response came up just as I was completing the last entry...I didn't get a chance to read it. But...in my defense 5280 square feet of land (1 square mile) needs each dimension to get multiplied to figure out how many compartments of 1 sqauare unit each there are (5,280 x 5,280 = 27,878,400). 15.27 square miles has roughly 233 individual 1 sq mile compartments, each containing 27 million of these 1 sq foot compartments. Multiply these numbers together (233 and 27) and you get near 6291 which is in millions, which equates to 6.291 billion.

Does that make sense?

[bernardo]

Not quite, chaotic1.  Everything you have said is accurate, except that a square which measures 80,622 feet by 80,622 feet is 15.269 miles by 15.269 miles, which means that the square has an area of 233 square miles, which is about one-and-a-half Isles of Wight.  Even if it were only 5 billion people, it would be 179 square miles.

 

I think that the error you made first time round was not to square the 13.4.  In other words, you were considering an oblong one mile wide and 13.4 miles long, rather than a square 13.4 miles by 13.4 miles.

 

In your most recent answer you said "15.27 square miles has roughly 233 individual 1 sq mile compartments".  But a square which measures 15.27 miles by 15.27 miles (and which therefore has 233 individual 1 sq mile compartments) is 233 square miles, not 15.27 square miles.  You could say "15.27 miles, squared" but that would be a bit confuzzling.

 

Having said that, I'm sure you would need substantially more than one square foot per person, even if everybody is very squashed.

[fantastical]

I confused this for that, squared miles for miles squared, I guess. You're right, but you see my point. A square of 15.27 miles across by 15.27 miles down would be 233 SQUARE MILES (it's been a while since my last math lesson). It all makes sense now. Thanks b

[bernardo]

I've thought of a simpler solution.  Why don't we just fill up the Isle of Wight with as many people will fit comfortably, and then kill everybody else in the world in a nuclear conflagration?  Then the "Isle of Wight" answer would be correct by definition.  You wouldn't even need to squash people too much.

[fantastical]

Then you introduce a host political implications. How does one get to this isle? Can you get citizenship easily? I don't think I would have an easy time. As for international equality, maybe we could get one city parceled out of each nation that would be safe from nuclear fallout buried beneath the ground in a nuclear shelter. Then each country would have a lottery to see who gets membership to this shelter. Wasn't there a sci-fi flick like this? I think I'm just confusing mattters.