Here’s a Jack Nicholson line from The Last Detail, now debunked by the SDMB:
“Well, kid, there’s more things in this life than you can possibly imagine. I knew a whore once in Wilmington. She had a glass eye. Used to take it out and wink people off for a dollar.”
Hey – I checked the eye socket of a skull we have at work. The skull is that of a middle aged man of mixed African and Caucasian ancestry. The socket is really shaped like a truncated cone, which makes measurement difficult. It’s not squared off at all. And it has bulges into the cone shape that occupy some of its volume, and pockets that deviate outward. Still, the closest geometric volume I can establish for it is a truncated cone like an ice cream cone with the bottom cut off. The diameter of the circle across the smallest part of the truncated cone measures _” (measured across at the point where the bony exit narrows and I simply decided that was the bottom of the socket). The socket is 2-1/4” deep, and 1-3/4” for the diameter of the broadest part of the cone. Anyone know the formula for the volume of a truncated cone?
Even without the volume estimate, I would say you could fit a pretty decent folded piece of paper in an area 2-1/4” deep with a maximum diameter of 1-3/4”; although fat in the socket in a nonskeletonized person would make the area smaller.
Oops. Blank space in the above post was the symbol “1/4” in Word. Sorry. Cone is 1/4" across the bottom circle, 1.75 across the top circle, 2.25" between.
I was all ready to do the frustrum volume calculations by hand, but while I was looking up the formula, up popped this page, which does it for you!
Anyway, we have r[sub]1[/sub] = 0.875", r[sub]2[/sub] = 0.625", and h = 2.25", giving us a volume of about 4 in[sup]3[/sup]. That’s not too bad, that’s about the volume of a cube 1.5" on a side.
If what I learned at art lessons is right, eyeballs remain almost the same size since birth, around 24/25mm.
The eyeball size is one of the standard face measurements you need to get the proportions right. By the way the iris is almost exactly half the diameter of the eye, there´s one eyeball separation between both eyes, and so on and so forth…
I think you mean r[sub]2[/sub] = 0.125"
Gabriella had the small end of the frustrum as 0.25" not 1.25".
This gives a volume of approximately 2"[sup]3[/sup]
Drat, you’re right!
I’m trying to come up with a better way to express the size as something people can viscerally understand. (because, sadly, I have nothing better to do on the Saturday night before Halloween…) If my calculations are correct, you could fit a stack of 20 US quarters in that eye socket!
sigh I suppose this is an appropriately ghoulish activity…
Impossible to tell from the information that you’ve given. A lens to correct astygmatism has a different curve on the side facing you depending on where on the lense you are looking. If held a football in you hands, of example. you would have to cup your hands differently if you turned the ball a bit. The first two numbers are the powers of the lens at it’s strongest and it’s weakest points (of somtimes vice versa) and the last number (the axis) tells where the lens should sit so that it correctly puts the strongest and weakest part over the correct part of you eye. If the lens is put in twisted, the perscripiton is off. You can see this by looking through a astygmatic lens and moving the glasses in circle. 180 is no better or worse than 65 (for example)
For a visceral image, here’s a sequence showing prosthetic eye removal. (Caution: not for the squeamish.)
Sorry, that’s incorrect. Eyes grow just like the rest of the body. Per Ocular Pathology by D. J. Apple and M. F. Rabb (Mosby, 1985), a newborn’s eyeball is about 18 mm in length. An adult’s is about 25 mm.
Shame on the art school that taught you that! Da Vinci would be appalled to hear such stuff being taught by an artist! 
No it won’t. The sizes of the images on this page are specified in pixels, not in real-world units like millimetres. Pixels are different sizes on different display devices. Thus the button displayed on a 14" 320×200 resolution monitor will appear twice as large as the button displayed on a 14" 640×400 resolution monitor, and half as large as on a 28" 320×200 resolution monitor.
Thank you for that backup. I know that’s true. You know that’s true. Anyone who understands that you can have a 10 pixel by 10 pixel image that is 4 inches square or 40 inches square and that the image WILL NOT BE THE SAME gets this.