[HN Gopher] Median Center of Population for the United States: 1...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Median Center of Population for the United States: 1880 to 2020
       (2020)
        
       Author : LastNevadan
       Score  : 47 points
       Date   : 2023-08-10 19:01 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.census.gov)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.census.gov)
        
       | ummonk wrote:
       | Technically the spot on the opposite side of the earth is also a
       | median right?
        
         | aidenn0 wrote:
         | Yes because it's the intersection of a meridian and a parallel,
         | which is two points anywhere except the poles.
        
         | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote:
         | Nope. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_median
        
       | carapace wrote:
       | Hmm... The "Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate
       | and Defense Highways"? Started around 1956.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_highway
        
       | paxys wrote:
       | Westward expansion never stopped.
        
       | narcindin wrote:
       | Looks like the 2020 line is just east of Chicago and just north
       | of the SFBA.
       | 
       | The line can't move West or South too quickly as every additional
       | minute represents so many people shifting from one side of the
       | median to the other.
        
         | Retric wrote:
         | Not just movement east west or north south but also births,
         | deaths, immigration, and emigration.
         | 
         | Also of note, the quadrants aren't balanced. You could have 1x
         | in the northwest, 2x in the northeast, 2x in the southwest, and
         | 1x in the southeast.
        
       | biomcgary wrote:
       | I believe Washington DC was close to the median center at the
       | founding of the US. I've often wondered about the effect on US
       | government if the seat of the executive (white house),
       | legislative (capitol), and judicial (supreme court) branches had
       | to move to the median center after every census. We need
       | something to reduce the influence of K street. Something to keep
       | the lobbyists from getting too cozy would be nice.
        
         | ke88y wrote:
         | _> Something to keep the lobbyists from getting too cozy would
         | be nice._
         | 
         | That doesn't make much sense to me. The firms that rent office
         | space on K Street don't have power because of the location of
         | their office... it's the other way around: K Street real estate
         | is rented out by those firms because of the street's proximity
         | to power.
         | 
         | Move the power center and the firms currently renting office
         | space on K Street, DC, USA will instead rent out space on Blah
         | Street, Middlepoint, USA.
         | 
         | More-over, I don't know if moving the capital of the country to
         | the median point as defined in this article makes any sense
         | either. It's one of those "literally everyone loses"
         | propositions because "median" isn't "modal". If anything, it
         | could make sense for the capital to be located at the midpoint
         | by travel time.
         | 
         | But it's all wildly impractical if you stop and think about.
         | The amount of infrastructure alone would require decades of
         | work. And states would have to surrender sovereignty over a big
         | chunk of their (settled!) land. Etc.
        
       | kens wrote:
       | There is a lot of speculation here on what this means, so I
       | looked it up. The median center is the point through which a
       | north-south and an east-west line each divides the total
       | population of the country in half. This is different from the
       | "center of population", which is the balance point if you took an
       | imaginary flat surface and put an identical weight on it for each
       | person. These are both different from the geometric median.
       | 
       | This document explains how the census bureau computed the values
       | and has equations. There are complications since the earth is a
       | sphere (as far as the census bureau is concerned):
       | https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial/2010/prog...
        
         | nonethewiser wrote:
         | > which is the balance point if you took an imaginary flat
         | surface and put an identical weight on it for each person.
         | 
         | And with real weight for each person we'd see a center-point
         | further south.
        
       | s1artibartfast wrote:
       | I'm not sure what median Center of population means. Mean would
       | be the geographic center accounting for location. Is the median
       | just the 50th percentile in latitude and longitude?
        
         | lotsofpulp wrote:
         | I would guess it means 25% live in each quadrant of the map
         | here:
         | 
         | https://www2.census.gov/geo/maps/DC2020/PopCenter/CenterPop_...
        
           | cschmid wrote:
           | Not quite: half are on the left, and half are on the right of
           | the vertical line; and half are on the bottom and half on the
           | top of the horizontal line.
        
         | bglazer wrote:
         | Make a list of lat/long for every person, pick the middle
         | entries?
        
         | sixstringtheory wrote:
         | Someone else posted this link:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_median
         | 
         | It's the point the that minimizes the distance to all the input
         | points in Euclidean space.
        
           | paxys wrote:
           | I'm going to guess this isn't what they actually mean. It's
           | more likely just the spot where an equal number of people
           | live left and right as well as above and below it.
        
             | s1artibartfast wrote:
             | You might be right, but I was more curious about what a
             | technically accurate reading of the statement would mean.
        
           | s1artibartfast wrote:
           | OK, so it is basically/usually the a real data point closest
           | to the mean location.
           | 
           | For something like population, where there are few gaps in
           | data points, you would expect them to be basically the same
           | because there is probably someone within a few miles of the
           | mean.
           | 
           | This means that an extra person in Hawaii impact the "median
           | center of population" more than an extra person in San
           | Francisco because the mean is part of the calculation,
           | opposed to just a stack ranking. Is this correct?
        
       | Ancalagon wrote:
       | Does this include Puerto Rico?
        
         | r00fus wrote:
         | I'm guessing it doesn't - as PR is unincorporated. However,
         | census is used in all sorts of things aside from
         | voting/representation, so who knows.
        
         | deciduously wrote:
         | Puerto Rico's population is around 3 million, less than a
         | percent of the 331 million population of the US. I wouldn't
         | expect more than a slight change to the graph either way.
        
           | s1artibartfast wrote:
           | It is quite far south so it would have a significant impact
           | on the mean, although not the median
        
         | kens wrote:
         | The computation uses the 50 states (or 48 conterminous states
         | for calculations made prior to 1960) and the District of
         | Columbia.
         | 
         | Source: https://www2.census.gov/programs-
         | surveys/decennial/2010/prog...
        
       | AndrewKemendo wrote:
       | Follows the shape of the gulf coast from northwest FL to Mexico
       | approximately which would track the southwesterly flow of people
        
       | ks2048 wrote:
       | I know there's a lot of reasons for this, but I think weather is
       | one of the biggest. I wonder if that ever reverses from extreme
       | heat. Is a full month of 110+ degrees having people reconsider
       | Arizona?
        
         | jiveturkey wrote:
         | A recent Atlantic article says, no. The county where Phoenix
         | is, is still the fastest growing county in the USA, for
         | multiple years running.
         | 
         | Most of the year the weather is good, apparently. Throw in air
         | conditioning de rigeur, and cheap housing (due to no artificial
         | supply restriction), and I guess you have the formula for
         | population growth. Perhaps some politics are part of it too.
         | Total taxes are half that of California. Probably not the #1
         | tax friendly state, but certainly up there.
        
         | lotsofpulp wrote:
         | Dewpoint and relative humidity are huge factors in how
         | temperature is felt. 110F in Arizona might still feel more
         | comfortable than 90F in eastern regions.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100th_meridian_west
         | 
         | >In the United States, this meridian roughly marks the boundary
         | between the semi-arid climate in the west and the humid
         | continental and humid subtropical climates in the east and is
         | used as shorthand to refer to that arid-humid boundary.
        
           | jonah wrote:
           | I don't know. I was just in Northwest Arkansas with 100degF
           | and 99% humidity and then a day later in Phoenix Arizona with
           | 100degF and [?]30% humidity (at midnight!) and it felt
           | similarly oppressive...
        
         | topspin wrote:
         | I went the opposite direction of that line several years ago.
         | It's been high 70's and low 80's all summer. Two low 90 days so
         | far.
         | 
         | Last winter was mild as well.
         | 
         | So yeah, that could happen. Lots of water here as well.
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | Do we need a contemporary reason for it? People have been
         | migrating away from the northeast since the early 1800s, and
         | that is still going on today.
        
         | psychlops wrote:
         | Arizona is tax friendly to retirees allowing a more comfortable
         | living on a fixed income. That can pay for a lot of air
         | conditioning (or swamp coolers).
        
         | bachmeier wrote:
         | Air conditioning changed everything:
         | https://www.energy.gov/articles/history-air-conditioning
         | 
         | > Engineer Henry Galson went on to develop a more compact,
         | inexpensive version of the window air conditioner and set up
         | production lines for several manufacturers. By 1947, 43,000 of
         | these systems were sold -- and, for the first time, homeowners
         | could enjoy air conditioning without having to make expensive
         | upgrades.
         | 
         | > By the late 1960s, most new homes had central air
         | conditioning, and window air conditioners were more affordable
         | than ever, fueling population growth in hot-weather states like
         | Arizona and Florida. Air conditioning is now in nearly 100
         | million American homes, representing 87 percent of all
         | households, according to the Energy Information Administration.
        
         | Eumenes wrote:
         | People are way more tolerant of extreme heat compared to cold
        
           | bell-cot wrote:
           | Yes...up to a point. And there's the similar/related issue of
           | extreme drought. If the wells and pipes run dry, the local
           | population density tends to plummet.
        
           | digging wrote:
           | Which is an artifact of a past age and foolish to bank on.
           | Cold can be dangerous but we basically have what we need to
           | survive at any low temperature in North America.
           | 
           | However, heat can't be combatted when you're outside in it
           | with the same effectiveness. It reaches a point where the air
           | temperature is simply lethal. It reaches a point where the
           | paved ground burns whatever touches it. It degrades our
           | medicines and damages our tools. We've already begun to
           | experience these effects and it will only ever get worse.
           | People should be moving away from hot areas, but instead
           | they're running their AC 24/7 so they can keep pretending
           | they made a good choice a little longer.
        
             | resolutebat wrote:
             | Until you get to wet bulb saturation extremes, you can
             | survive heat as long as you have a supply of water. Cold
             | temperatures, on the other hand, will kill you straight up.
        
               | ke88y wrote:
               | Also, AC uses way less carbon than heat.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-08-10 23:00 UTC)