<p>Not likely.</p>

<p>Quoting Kelly Brunt, an ice scientist with NASA and at the University of Maryland, from <a href="https://www.livescience.com/63875-weird-square-iceberg-antarctica.html?utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social" rel="noreferrer">What the Heck Is the Deal with This Weird, Square Iceberg?</a> at LiveScience.com:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>What makes this one a bit unusual is that it looks almost like a square,</p>
</blockquote>

<p>which does not rhyme with anything in your suggested 1:4:9 ratio.</p>

<p>The article mentions the obvious</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>And, as with all icebergs, the part visible above the surface is just the top 10 percent of its mass. </p>
</blockquote>

<p>but that only tells you that 90% is under water, nothing about its absolute height above sea level. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-24T01:41:32.663Z
Have a look here https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/here-s-how-weird-rectangular-looking-iceberg-came-be-ncna923601 I still haven't found the correct dimensions, but this does look like it rhymes with the `4:9` part at least. I think the "looks almost like a square" should be *looks almost square*. Edges being "square" in carpentry and other areas can also just mean all right angles, and unrelated to shape or dimensions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_square and also https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/carpenter%27s_square
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-24T07:22:05.427Z
@uhoh Nice find. You should make that an answer
Jan Doggen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-24T11:07:01.990Z
I'm quite shy. Feel free to incorporate.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-24T21:42:30.913Z
[Apparently it's actually not all that square, but more right trapezoidal, as the other end is at a different angle](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6312659/NASA-spots-SECOND-monolith-iceberg.html), but interesting.
JeopardyTempest
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-22T15:18:09.937Z
2018-10-22T15:18:09.937Z
Jan Doggen
<p>There have been rectangular tabular icebergs in the past so this is not uncommon at all. </p>

<p><a href="https://www.livescience.com/63875-weird-square-iceberg-antarctica.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Kelly Brunt, an ice scientist with NASA and the University of Maryland said:</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Tabular icebergs form, she said, through a process that's a bit like a fingernail growing too long and cracking off at the end. They're often rectangular and geometric as a result</p>
  
  <p>What makes this one a bit unusual is that it looks almost like a square," </p>
</blockquote>

<p>So I think we can categorically state that the coordinates in the plane of the sea are not 1:4 or 1:9 or even 4:9</p>

<p>And we also know that underwater there will be a good 90% of its mass so it's going to be closer to a cube than the famous monolith from 2001.</p>

<p>A better photo, showing the whole berg shows just how non-rectangular it actually is at :
<a href="https://bobcat.grahamdigital.com/30b1f2f70fffbc15f96f9b08712619ca2fd656e8/crop-640x360-000.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://bobcat.grahamdigital.com/30b1f2f70fffbc15f96f9b08712619ca2fd656e8/crop-640x360-000.jpg</a><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/AK0wf.jpg" alt="enter image description here">]<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/AK0wf.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer">2</a></p>

<p>A google search for rectangular tabular icebergs returns a few beautiful examples over the last few years. There is a nice photo by <a href="https://fineartamerica.com/featured/3-tabular-iceberg-antarctica-carole-anne-fooks.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Carole-Anne Fooks here</a>, and I really like this one from <a href="http://icestories.exploratorium.edu/dispatches/a-world-of-ice-in-pictures/index.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">icestories.exploratorium.edu</a>:</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/UBmDX.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/UBmDX.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-24T01:44:24.760Z
fyi I have just ran across https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/here-s-how-weird-rectangular-looking-iceberg-came-be-ncna923601 and also left this [comment](https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/15413/what-are-the-approximate-dimension-of-this-iceberg-any-chance-the-ratio-is-14#comment31122_15415)
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-22T15:17:53.803Z
2018-10-25T06:32:36.827Z
2018-10-25T06:32:36.827Z
Rory Alsop
<p>From 17-Oct-2018 NASA ICE <a href="https://twitter.com/NASA_ICE/status/1052601381712887809" rel="nofollow noreferrer">tweet</a>:</p>

<p>I'm curious of the actual dimensions, and if possible a complete photo. And curious in a scifi sort of way if they have a ratio of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monolith_(Space_Odyssey)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1:4:9</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>From yesterday's #IceBridge flight: A tabular iceberg can be seen on the right, floating among sea ice just off of the Larsen C ice shelf. The iceberg's sharp angles and flat surface indicate that it probably recently calved from the ice shelf.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/0dWOh.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/0dWOh.jpg" alt="NASA ICE tabular iceburg from Larsen C"></a></p>

<p>from a following <a href="https://twitter.com/pantagrapher/status/1052601813906743296" rel="nofollow noreferrer">tweet</a> (for clarification):</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/yMA1e.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/yMA1e.jpg" alt="2001 Space Odyssey monolith"></a></p>

<sea-ice><ice-shelf><nasa>
What are the approximate dimension of this iceberg? Any chance the ratio is 1:4:9?
uhoh
# What are the approximate dimension of this iceberg? Any chance the ratio is 1:4:9?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-10-22)

From 17-Oct-2018 NASA ICE [tweet](https://twitter.com/NASA_ICE/status/1052601381712887809):

I'm curious of the actual dimensions, and if possible a complete photo. And curious in a scifi sort of way if they have a ratio of [1:4:9](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monolith_(Space_Odyssey))

> From yesterday's #IceBridge flight: A tabular iceberg can be seen on the right, floating among sea ice just off of the Larsen C ice shelf. The iceberg's sharp angles and flat surface indicate that it probably recently calved from the ice shelf.

[![NASA ICE tabular iceburg from Larsen C](https://i.sstatic.net/0dWOh.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/0dWOh.jpg)

from a following [tweet](https://twitter.com/pantagrapher/status/1052601813906743296) (for clarification):

[![2001 Space Odyssey monolith](https://i.sstatic.net/yMA1e.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/yMA1e.jpg)

**Tags:** sea-ice, ice-shelf, nasa


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2018-10-22. Score: 5 | Accepted answer

There have been rectangular tabular icebergs in the past so this is not uncommon at all.

[Kelly Brunt, an ice scientist with NASA and the University of Maryland said:](https://www.livescience.com/63875-weird-square-iceberg-antarctica.html)

> Tabular icebergs form, she said, through a process that's a bit like a fingernail growing too long and cracking off at the end. They're often rectangular and geometric as a result
>
> What makes this one a bit unusual is that it looks almost like a square,"

So I think we can categorically state that the coordinates in the plane of the sea are not 1:4 or 1:9 or even 4:9

And we also know that underwater there will be a good 90% of its mass so it's going to be closer to a cube than the famous monolith from 2001.

A better photo, showing the whole berg shows just how non-rectangular it actually is at :
<https://bobcat.grahamdigital.com/30b1f2f70fffbc15f96f9b08712619ca2fd656e8/crop-640x360-000.jpg>![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/AK0wf.jpg)][2](https://i.sstatic.net/AK0wf.jpg)

A google search for rectangular tabular icebergs returns a few beautiful examples over the last few years. There is a nice photo by [Carole-Anne Fooks here](https://fineartamerica.com/featured/3-tabular-iceberg-antarctica-carole-anne-fooks.html), and I really like this one from [icestories.exploratorium.edu](http://icestories.exploratorium.edu/dispatches/a-world-of-ice-in-pictures/index.html):

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/UBmDX.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/UBmDX.jpg)

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: fyi I have just ran across https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/here-s-how-weird-rectangular-looking-iceberg-came-be-ncna923601 and also left this [comment](https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/15413/what-are-the-approximate-dimension-of-this-iceberg-any-chance-the-ratio-is-14#comment31122_15415)  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2018-10-22. Score: 7

Not likely.

Quoting Kelly Brunt, an ice scientist with NASA and at the University of Maryland, from [What the Heck Is the Deal with This Weird, Square Iceberg?](https://www.livescience.com/63875-weird-square-iceberg-antarctica.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social) at LiveScience.com:

> What makes this one a bit unusual is that it looks almost like a square,

which does not rhyme with anything in your suggested 1:4:9 ratio.

The article mentions the obvious

> And, as with all icebergs, the part visible above the surface is just the top 10 percent of its mass.

but that only tells you that 90% is under water, nothing about its absolute height above sea level.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Have a look here https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/here-s-how-weird-rectangular-looking-iceberg-came-be-ncna923601 I still haven't found the correct dimensions, but this does look like it rhymes with the `4:9` part at least. I think the "looks almost like a square" should be *looks almost square*. Edges being "square" in carpentry and other areas can also just mean all right angles, and unrelated to shape or dimensions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_square and also https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/carpenter%27s_square  
> **username_1**: @username_0 Nice find. You should make that an answer  
> **username_0**: I'm quite shy. Feel free to incorporate.  
> **username_2**: [Apparently it's actually not all that square, but more right trapezoidal, as the other end is at a different angle](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6312659/NASA-spots-SECOND-monolith-iceberg.html), but interesting.  

---

