> A study has been made, and is about to be published, by John McMullen...
> This study showed that for a body size shift of 10% there was only a 1%
> change in the diameter of the tracheal orifice.

When we talk "body size shift", are we talking a change in mass, volume, or
linear dimension?

I ask because diameter is linear and, generally an increase in volume with
linear proportions remaining in a constant ratio, would imply an increase in
each of the three spatial dimensions by the cube root of 10, which is
approx. 2.15.  2.15 is not far enough from 1 (which could be anywhere from
about 0.5 to 1.5) for me to be able to get much out of this.  If we are
talking about a dimensional increase of 10% in all dimensions, though, then
that is a volume increase of 33% and that would be interesting!

Anyhow all this gets confusing if the meaning of terms is not clearly
defined.

allen

When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is
possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is
impossible, he is very probably wrong.
            -- Arthur C. Clarke, Clarke's first law

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---