Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Noah's Ark -- About the Size of a Supercarrier

Since I have Google available from my phone, I decided to research how the biblical dimensions for Noah's ark, 300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits compared to a modern aircraft carrier.  The results are pretty cool.

The dimensions at water level of a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier (the pride of the United Stated Navy; aka nuclear supercarrier) is 333 m long by 40.1 m wide.  In other words, roughly the same shape as Noah's ark, but dimensions in meters instead of cubits.  Since a cubit is roughly half a meter, that means that Noah's ark is approximately 1/4 the size of our nuclear supercarriers.  Cool, eh?  There's more.  The ark had a draft (depth of hull below water level) of 11 cubits (see Rashi on Genesis 8:4), and the Nimitz-class supercarrier has a draft of 11.7 meters.  Given all that, it seems reasonable to look at the crew facilities to get an idea of how much life the ark, in a completely natural setting, could support.

The ark had three floors, the Nimitz-class supercarrier has four levels of crew quarters.  However, much of the lower three floors are used for other stuff than crew cabins; namely, storage for the almost 100 aircraft in huge under the hull hangars.  Basically, therefore, the ark straight out of the box could be expected to support a quarter of the population supported by a supercarrier.  How much is that?  Those babies support 5,000+ crew members!  So, again in a completely natural setting and with no necessary recourse to "well... its a miracle", we could expect Noah's ark to easily accommodate more than a thousand people.  Now, there were only eight humans there, but all of the extant (except unicorns, who missed the deadline 'cause they were too busy playing) were housed there for a year.

The Torah classification scheme for animals is different than the modern scientific (for those of you who are willing to call biology science) taxonomy.  But, it is reasonable to expect they agree on gross features.  That is, I don't know if the Torah was distinguishing between different kinds of parakeets, but we certainly know that the Torah distinguishes between camels, lions, and bears.  So I looked up how many families of animals there are.  A bit over 5,000 (5,320, according to Yahoo! Answers best answer).  Pretty darn crowded, but certainly reasonable.

Why did I do all this?  Why is it important?  Obviously, this is not going to change my belief in the veracity of the Biblical account.  On the other hand, HaShem gave us a mind with which to reason and laws that are meant (by and large) to be understandable to us.  After all, the content of the entire Talmud is based the premise that we are expected and required to utilize logical inference as a vehicle to understanding HaShem's most precious gift to us, His Torah.  Moreover, the Torah gives us details of the ark -- physical dimensions, architectural layout, and even how to utilize the space.  Going through those details and understanding them brings us from a bible story that we believe because, you know, its part of the tradition, but we are kind of embarrassed to discus it in mixed (ie, non-religious) company, to "I know, right!?  So cool with all those details that really bring it alive!"

Besides... the ten year old boy in me really likes aircraft carriers, especially nuclear super ones.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: Why Halacha Has "b'di'avad"

There was this Jew who knew every "b'di'avad" (aka, "Biddy Eved", the old spinster librarian) in the book.  When ever he was called on something, his reply was invariably, "biddy eved, it's fine".  When he finally left this world and was welcomed to Olam Haba, he was shown to a little, damp closet with a bare 40W bulb hanging from the ceiling.  He couldn't believe his eyes and said in astonishment, "This is Olam Haba!?!"  "Yes, Reb Biddy Eved,  for you this is Olam Haba." b'di'avad gets used like that; f you don't feel like doing something the best way, do it the next (or less) best way.  But Chazal tell us that "kol ha'omer HaShem vatran, m'vater al chayav" -- anyone who thinks HaShem gives partial credit is fooling himself to death (free translation.  Ok, really, really free translation; but its still true).  HaShem created us and this entire reality for one and only one purpose: for use...