A semicolon. ;)

A "semi" is usually larger than a truck.

A 'nary'?

Hmm, a semiannual event is twice as large (often) as an annual event.

Yeah, I'm not even close, am I?

Semi-trailer.

A semiconductor is LESS conductive that a pure conductor.

Semi-automatic weapons are usually more legal than automatic ones...

The Seminole are a larger group of people than the Nole.

OTOH, if the semicircle is similar to the circle in the sense of having the same area, then its perimeter will be 1.0254 times the perimeter of the circle!

[(2+pi*sqr(2))/2pi]

Bored 3L: Fantastic! I deeply, deeply regret to say that it was entirely unplanned, but I'm delighted to see the accidental connection even if it was just accidental.

I see Donald Clarke beat me to Semiramis/Ramis.

For a Notre Dame alumnus, this one is easy. If you've ever seen the football team, you know that 'semi-literates' are _much_ larger than 'literates.'

Why has it taken over an hour for someone to get the correct answer?

A semicolon.

In that case I'll be saying "no" to that semicolonoscopy.

A Semite is larger than a mite.

dpruett:

Uh guys - a semicircle is not even a circle, it is half of a circle.

It's a legal fiction. And the dog does have five legs.

Semiotic[s], being the philosophy of sign[s/age], is larger than an individual sign.

OTOH, "otic" is "pertaining to the ear" so why is semiotic not half an ear - or at least loss of hearing? Any medical types out there?

BABH: A semicircle has a greater perimeter than a circle with the same area, but a smaller perimeter than a circle wth the same radius.

I agree with John A though. Semiotics is the best answer I have seen thus far. Otics might be the study of ears, but semiotics would be the study of signals and resulting communication.

BABH: Are you sure?

For a semicircle with radius r (and area 0.5*pi*r^2) to have the same area as a circle with radius R (and area pi*R^2), then r = R * sqrt(2).

The perimeter of the semicircle is pi*r + 2*r, and the perimeter of the circle is 2*pi*R. Equating the two and substituting in the value for r from above, I get that the ratio of the perimeters is:

(pi + 2) / (sqrt(2)*pi)

which is equal to 1.15 when I try to calculate it.

Of course, the perimeter of anything that has the same area as a circle had better be bigger than that of the circle. The circle is the shape that minimizes perimeter given a fixed area. (And the sphere is the shape that minimizes surface area for a given volume, etc.)

Since "semicolon" is the adjudicated answer (and a clever riddle it was), I'll fight the hypothetical just because I've had too much coffee:

A semicircle is smaller than a circle (that is, than a circle that's otherwise similar, which is to say that has the same radius).

Nope. A semicircle is exactly 1/2 of a circle. Hence a semicircle is half a circle that's otherwise congruent to a full circle. All circles are similar, at least in Euclidean space. "Semi-" has nothing to do with "similar".

Obviously all congruent circles are also similar, but similarity is an overinclusive description of the relationship between a semicircle and a circle of the same radius.

There! I think I've metabolized some of that devil's brew now.

I really wish the idiot commenters here would not feel it necessary to clutter up the threads with their non-responsive and pointless answers or attempts at humor (e.g. semiotics, semiannual, semi-anything, etc.). It happens on virtually every thread but this is about the simplest example.

I have said for a long time this board should be restricted to lawyers - hopefully passing the bar suggest some indication of having the ability to read and enough respect for others' time as not to feel compelled to write down every harebrained thought that enters your mind.

So please, if you are unable to read or think logically, DO NOT POST ON THIS MESSAGE BOARD. Same for non-lawyers. There are 500,000 non-legal blogs in the world, go there please.

The volokh riddle was brilliant, don't vandalize it.

A semisubmersible is usually larger than a submersible.

Two that almost work: seminude would be large than a nude (because of the extra clothing) but I could only find the word as an adjective. If anyone can find a noun usage of the term, it would qualify.

And (not convincingly) we might say that the class of semigroups is larger than the class of groups, as the former strictly contains the latter; so one could almost say semigroups "are" larger than groups (similarly as to semirings).

The problem with semiquaver is that the dictionaries I checked said a semiquaver was the sixteenth note itself, not the printed representation of that note. So I don't think semiquaver works.

I really wish the idiot commenters here would not feel it necessary to clutter up the threads

...me too. (?)

I can't figure out if the man from mars is lampooning the classic stuffed shirt post or if he's serious, in which case he's lampooning himself.

As for the question, a moon semi-obscured by the Earth (Half Moon) would be larger than a moon fully obscured (New Moon). I suspect we haven't yet guessed what EV had in mind, however.

I think that the circle/semicircle/perimeter thing could be better phrased as: a semi-circle has a higher aspect ratio than that of a circle.

Semesters (measured in weeks or months or gallons of tears cried) are certainly larger than esters, which are measured in angstroms. :) But I don't think that EV was getting at that.

Jeff Hall writes,

semitrailer

Isn't a semitrailer just a kind of trailer, formed therefrom by removing the front wheels? (Disclaimer: I am not really an expert).

So it is not a "semiX larger than an X" as was the requirement.

Thus, I believe only semicolon and seminude so far satisfy the question.

Hoosier wrote at 1.11.2009 10:44pm:

May I mambo dogface to the banana patch?

First you'll need to steal some underpants so you'll be a seminude. After that, just break on the second semiquaver and keep the cowbell syncopated.

I hate to mention it because he's been so bitchy assertive, but man from mars is generally correct about the trailers v. semitrailers bit. However, many - but not all - semitrailers these day are far too long to legally be used on highways as flat pull trailers - so maybe just partial credit? Loved the post.

Semibluff comes close.

A semibluff is like a bluff, in that the bidder expects to be behind the caller - but such that the bidder believes that, even if called, he has a reasonable chance of hitting cards that make his the best hand.

The canonical and most common example of a semibluff in Texas Hold'e'm arises after the flop, when two of the flop's three cards are of the same suit as each of the cards held by the bidder. If one of the following two cards to be dealt has that suit, the bidder makes his flush and wins. For example, suppose the bidder holds 6 and 7 of diamonds, and the board is Ace of diamonds, King of diamonds, 3 of clubs. Suppose the bidder checks, and then the other player makes a strong bet indicating he has a King or Ace, say $50. The bidder might semibluff here by raising all-in for $500. This is a bluff in that the current strength of the bidder's hand does not support the all-in, and the bidder hopes the hand is not called. But if he is called, he has a good chance to win against even a very strong hand, like AK of spades, since all he needs is one more diamond.

Now, a semibluff is larger than a bluff in these two ways.

First, at least in standard cash games, the cash amount be on the semibluff is larger than that of the standard bluff, particularly on the flop. The check-raise all-in, for example, is a common semi-bluff but unusual for a bluff on the flop. On the flop, the far more common play is what is called a "continuation bet", a relatively small bluff that is made purely as a bluff to try and win against players who also have nothing.

Second, the expected value of the semibluff is greater than that of a bluff: if a bluff is called, the bidder always loses; if a semibluff is called, the bidder sometimes wins. (If the bid is not called, the value is the same, that of the pot).

Thus, whether "large" refers to size or to value, it makes sense to say that a semibluff is larger than a bluff.

Oops, of course I didn't submit semicolon - that was the intended answer.

I'm not convinced that a semicolon is larger than a colon. If we're going by amount of ink used to make each, it wholly depends upon handwriting or font.

Fub

I think we all need more cowbell.


Re: Semi-trailer--Not to be overly technical, but . . .

I'm not sure that one works. Doesn't the "semi-" apply to the articulation, and not to the trailer? "Semi" is a shortening of the phrase "semi-articulated trailer."

It is actually a trailer. Not half of a trailer. And I can't think of what half of an "articulated" would look like, it being an adjective an all.

theo,

"a semi-circle has a higher aspect ratio than that of a circle."

Well, everything does, depending on how one defines aspect ratio. At least greater than or equal to.

Semi-precious is a categorization of stones that are by definition more common than precious stones and this group is thus "bigger" than the group of prescious stones.

I think this is a good idea. I have some minor technical quibbles however that cause me to have reservations about whether it fully answers the call of the question however, which is to find a semiX larger than an X.

First, it seems to me the original riddle implicitly required that the "semiX" be one word, because semiX is. It is true that "semiprecious" is one word, perhaps with a hyphen, but your post actually seems to argue that "semiprecious stones" and not just "semiprecious" is the answer, which would be two words.

And if you allow two-word phrases like "semi-precious stones" then almost anything works.

For example, you could say that there are more "semicircular half-moons" than "circular half-moons." Or more semiotic professors than otic professors. And so on. Thus, I think the puzzle implicitly only allows one-word answers.

I also was not quite clear, not being an expert on precious stones, on the exact meaning of the words you used.

Semi-precious is an adjective, right? When you write "semi-precious is a categorization of stones" that makes it sound to me like semi-precious is a noun. If it were a noun, your argument would be more forceful, since it would not need the stones as a second word; but I have always understood it to be an adjective.

So, for these reasons, although I think it almost works, I had a few technical issues with whether it truly qualifies.

The semitrailer is so called because it does not completely trail the tow vehicle; instead roughly half the weight of the st is borne directly by the truck tractor's wheels through the "fifth wheel" connection. Further, there are plenty of true trailers with only one axle, so the "remove the front wheels" derivation makes no sense (else the trailer would become a skid).

For tandem or triple "trailer" rigs, the second and third semitrailers become true trailers by use of converter dollies (an assembly of one or two axles surmounted by a fifth wheel, pulled from one of the forward trailers).

a 'semiamatuer' is a person who retains amateur status but receives funding from a sponsor and/or prize money. so they are performing at a higher level of competition than an amateur, and are therefore 'greater'

I don't know how long a "nar" is, but I doubt that anything is larger (or at least longer) than a seminar.

Ummm...I respectfully reject the premise that a semi-circle is smaller than a circle. Small/large refer to length and area, both of which are definitive geometric parameters.

The "semi" prefix when applied to "circle", refers to SHAPE, rather than size.

For example, a circle with a radius of x would have an area of Πx² and a semi-circle with a radius of y would have an area of ½(Πy²).

If the radius of a circle was 10cm (area = 20approx. 314cm²) and the radius of a semi-circle was 20cm (area = approx. 628cm²), the "size", or area of the semi-circle would be in fact larger than the "size of the circle....

The "size" delta premise, as presented, is only true if the radius of the semi-circular shape results in an area (size) that is less than the compared circular shape. This limit was not applied to the premise, so the premise is faulty. Not all semi-circles are smaller than all circles.

Before I was a lousy attorney, I was a lousy engineer...

I hate to be so far down the comment thread, but I believe I have the definitive answer:


The 1974 film "Tough" starring Dion Gossett and Christopher Townes, ran only 1 hour 27 minutes.

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809371498/info

However, 1977 the film "Semi-Tough", starring Burt Reynolds and Kris Kristofferson, ran longer, at 1 hour 47 minutes.

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1800115726/info

Dan Schmutter

TCO wrote at 1.12.2009 3:41pm:

semicolon is less of a break than an actual colon just as a semiconductor is less of a conductor than a conductor.

I'm shocked, utterly shocked, that this thread would deteriorate into an attack upon the late Arthur Fiedler.

Tony Tutins

Your description of "semis" seems correct to me, and is what I was saying as well. So what is your take on the linguistic question? Mine is that this was a good answer to EV's question. But I will defer to you, who are wise in the ways of overland freight.

Mt Lassen:

Ummm...I respectfully reject the premise that a semi-circle is smaller than a circle....This limit was not applied to the premise, so the premise is faulty. Not all semi-circles are smaller than all circles.

I concur with your conclusion that not all semicircles are smaller than all circles. Moreover, your mathematical proof of this fact, in which you compared the formulae for the areas of circles and of semicircles, and then proved mathematically that some semicircles must have a smaller area (and thus be smaller) than some circles was irrefutable.

Nevertheless, even assuming that some semicircles are larger than some circles, it seems natural and reasonable to me to say that a semicircle is smaller than a circle, because it's still smaller than the corresponding circle:- than the circle from which it derives. Similarly, one reasonably says a semicolon is larger than a colon because the colon associated to a semicolon is one from the same font, which is smaller; and one reasonably says a seminude is larger than a nude because the associated nude lacks clothes - even though some colons are larger than some semicolons;-and some seminudes are smaller than some nudes. Similarly, it makes sense to say "adults are larger than children" because, within a natural and similarly chosen set of these, we expect the mean and median size of the former to be much greater than that of the latter, even though some adults are smaller than some children (this was my argument that a semibluff is larger than a bluff).

Dan Schmutter
Re Semi-Tough: Clever.

bornyesterday

a 'semiamatuer' is a person who retains amateur status but receives funding from a sponsor and/or prize money. so they are performing at a higher level of competition than an amateur, and are therefore 'greater'

He might be greater in the sense of more skillful, but why would he be larger which is what the question asked?