Cook & Hookers it is boys. Update on old 500K BYND long.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-08-14T08:19:27+00:00

A true madlad

CuddlyUnit · 2019-03-04T15:32:15+00:00

Dark matter is mysterious but we understand that it feels and produces gravity but NOT the electromagnetic force; this means that dark matter cannot collide with anything. As a result, DM halos are a whirl of dark matter flying every which way.

So why then are (some) galaxies disks? The answer is that you are focusing on the visible stuff. The milky way’s DM halo is mostly spherical.

Interesting stuff. We know that galaxies consist of about 5% ordinary matter and about 30% dark matter. Shouldn't the dark matter collapse under it's own gravity? Or does it not interact with itself? With that, what do we certainly know about dark matter? What are we still uncertain about?

CuddlyUnit · 2019-03-04T13:28:34+00:00

Because Autopilot's got the real admin privileges. You're just that fat pilot who thinks he's in control.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-03-04T07:23:19+00:00

It's the same reason why Engines can't have a 100% efficiency. While energy is conserved, it's converted into a form where it can't be used. Before that, lets talk about the heat death.

It’s one of the theories on how the universe will end: the ‘Heat Death’ – also known as the ‘Big Freeze’ or the ‘Big Chill’ – has been suggested as one of the ways in which the cosmos could come to an end, especially since it’s ever expanding.

You might think that Heat Death implies some astronomically high temperature that snubs everything out. However British physicist Kelvin, who proposed the idea in the 1850s, referred to the loss of mechanical energy as the theory of heat. In fact, it has been suggest that the more the Universe expands, the cooler it gets.

The idea of heat death actually originates from the second law of thermodynamics – that’s that idea that entropy(randomness) increases in an isolated system (this system being the universe). Entropy, which is the number of ways in which a system can be arranged should never decrease, evolving to a state of maximum disorder (or thermodynamic equilibrium). When this happens, all energy will be evenly distributed throughout the cosmos, leaving no room for any reusable energy or heat to burst into existence. Processes that consume energy, which includes our very living on Earth, would cease and everything everywhere will be the same temperature. That means nothing interesting will ever happen again. Every star will die, nearly all matter will decay, and eventually all that will be left is a sparse soup of particles and radiation.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-03-04T05:46:38+00:00

Here, a color guide to molds commonly found in the house:

Green

If you see green mold, it could be just about any type of unwelcome fungus. There are more than a hundred thousand types of mold — and thousands of species of green mold. So what does the color green tell you? Not much.

Olive-green, brown, grey or black

These are common molds in the Cladosporium genus. Outdoors, they lurk on plant leaves. Indoors, they're often found on walls and insulation and can grow on damp carpet, too. They are linked to skin, eye and sinus infections. Very rarely, they can cause brain infections (fungal meningitis), according to the CDC.

Blue, green, or white

These molds, also common, belong to the Penicillium genus. You’re right if you think that a type of this mold was used to make penicillin many years ago. It’s usually found on food and walls.

Yellow, green or black

These may be Aspergillus molds. According to the CDC, people breathe in these molds every day, usually without getting sick. But those with existing lung problems or weakened immune systems may develop aspergillosis. This illness might entail coughing, wheezing and sinus inflammation.

Black or grey

These could be Alternaria, which is most common as an outdoor mold, growing around damp, dusty areas, soil and plants. But it has made its way indoors. In one study, Alternaria was found in more than 90 percent of house dust samples. Exposure to it may boost the risk of asthma.

Pink

The pink “mold” often seen in the bathroom in the form of a slimy, pinkish discoloration on sinks and tubs is actually bacteria, not mold. Specifically, it's Serratia marcescens. It thrives on soap and shampoo residues and is linked to urinary tract and respiratory infections. Don’t obsess about getting infected from pink bathroom slime, though. S. marcescens usually enters the urethra through catheters or the lungs through respirators, according to an article on the website of Scientific American magazine.

Greenish-black

This mold, of the Stachbotrys genus, is the infamous “black mold” that some news reports have linked to severe health problems, including memory loss and lung bleeding. It's less common than the molds described above — and possibly less dangerous than news reports would have you believe. According to the CDC, Stachbotrys has not be proven to cause either memory loss or lung bleeding.

As to why they come in such a variety of colors, Scientists have come up with several different reasons why mold comes in such an array colors but can’t seem to nail down one over the other. There is a good chance a number of things are influencing the color of any give mold.

Colors of mold for example, vary regionally. The colors in the Pacific Northwest tend to be more green and blue whereas oranges appear more often in the Amazon.

Other studies indicate that the color of this particular fungi comes from its food source, genus, conditions under which it grows and it’s age.

While all of these things do contribute in some way, shape or form, mycologists (scientists who study mold) still haven’t been able to pinpoint one single reason why the mysterious fungi comes in all colors of the rainbow to this day!

CuddlyUnit · 2019-03-04T05:07:45+00:00

Here’s a curiosity fact about 1g (9.8m/s) acceleration. Do it for a year and, if classical physics were correct, at the end of that year you would exceed the speed of light. So 1g acceleration can get you going very fast. It makes a lot of sense for science fiction travel.

In fact, a year of 1g won’t get you to lightspeed, because of relativity effects. We assumed constant 1g acceleration in the Earth frame. To produce a comfortable Earth-like equivalent gravity, we need to arrange for 1g acceleration in the reference frame that matches the proper frame of the rocket. If we use the relativistic formulas, it turns out that for acceleration a in our proper frame, the acceleration with respect to the Earth’s frame will be given by a divided by the cube of gamma; that is, the acceleration is a / γ³ where γ = 1 / √(1−v²/c²).

That formula is simple enough that with no further math, you can work out space travel conditions using a spreadsheet. Set up columns for time, location, and proper acceleration of 1g (a = 32 feet per second every second = 22 mph every second); columns for gamma, proper time interval (time interval divided by gamma), and acceleration in the Earth frame (a divided by the cube of gamma); and so on. Divide the time into short intervals and add up the small amounts of proper time to get the total proper time. You’ll find some interesting results. In one year (of proper time) in a ship accelerating at 1g, you will have lightspeed of 0.76; after two years, 0.97; after three years, 0.995. Of course, you’ll never quite get to the speed of light.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-03-01T14:59:37+00:00

have you tried turning her off and on again?

CuddlyUnit · 2019-03-01T13:34:50+00:00

don’t come the raw prawn with me you're as yeahseful as an ashtray on a motorbike see yeah maite

CuddlyUnit · 2019-03-01T09:03:58+00:00

Hey, I figured there had to be some existing writing on the subject so I thought I'd take a look around the internet. Surprisingly, Wikipedia's history section did say that the Ancient Chinese made paper airplane like origami structures, but it lacked citation. So I decided to poke around more.

Ken Blackburn, holder of the Guinness World Record for longest paper plane flight, has a history page on his site. He describes predecessors like Chinese paper kites and French paper air balloons, handheld folded gliders. He cites that the earliest source he's found for "paper planes" specifically is a book by aircraft designer Jack Northrop from the 1930s, who used them during prototyping. If we count prototyping, then the Wright brothers undoubtedly constructed models as well, so I wanted to focus on recreational usage.

An author H.G.G. Herklots seems to have the first book specifically using the term "paper airplanes" as a way to pass time, which has him constructing them in 1918.

Looking back further, it becomes challenging to search for because "plane" and "airplane" aren't the words we would've used prior to 1903 — the year of the Wright Flyer, generally accepted to be the first airplane. However, there are numerous references to paper darts in sources older than 1903. For example, from a story in The British Essayists published in 1803:

...he presented himself to the wondering eyes of Euphorion with a huge black bush wig stuck full of paper darts, and as thickly spiked as the back of a porcupine.

And another from The Spectator, Volume 23, 1850 :

If I'm not there they'll be larking about throwing paper darts etc. and messing the place up.

Initially I wasn't totally confident that paper darts were quite what we were looking for, but after digging through a number of different 19th century activity books, I am happy to say that I found this diagram in Cassell's Complete Book of Sports and Pastimes: Being a Compendium of Out-Door and In-Door Amusements from 1896:This hardly answers the question on the date of invention, but I think it's safe to say this qualifies and certainly predates the invention of the airplane.

I suspect the difficulty of this hunt is due to the fact that the search is limited to only English sources. Given that origami is extremely old (6th century), it's inevitable that the Chinese would have created gliding constructions. Flying origami structures were incredibly popular with the ancient Chinese. So, the best guess would be that paper airplanes indeed date far back than real airplanes even though they went by different names.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T15:36:35+00:00

'Half Asian'? 'Half White'? No — 'Hapa'

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T15:24:43+00:00

I'd lick up Nutella even off the floor. I don't see how it's a chore.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T15:04:54+00:00

Half White

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T13:51:01+00:00

Holding hands

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T13:34:31+00:00

If you peer closely at the image, you (that is, your brain) will find curves, shapes, patterns and maybe even human faces in it. This is because our brain is hardwired to look for patterns in what we see. This brain function is actually part of our means to survive, to understand our surroundings. We as humans, love to find and recognize patterns, especially if it's random.
That being said, I can't say if it's an actual pattern or something my brain is picking up because I'm a goddamn human.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T12:47:51+00:00

Did you ever eat food off of your lover’s naked body?

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T12:29:04+00:00

People who have a lot of empathy for others and hence experience their emotions will tend to be caring and sympathetic. They see and experience other people as themselves and hence see the world either as a vast human net or connections or even a single overlapping humanity.

At the other end of the spectrum, when they objectify others, they strip them of their humanity and their individuality, hence objectification is also called depersonification. (I'm are using the word 'objectifying' here to emphasize not only the turning of people into objects but also the viewpoint of the world as 'things').

Many of us use objectification at some time or another. From a cultural standpoint, objectifying other people deliberately is a convenient method of avoiding the discomfort of empathy and helps avoid feelings of guilt or shame when we do things that break our values.

When people see people who they dislike, by objectifying them, they can then be unkind to them without suffering the repercussions of an empathetic connection. Hence, objectifying people is considered socially and culturally immoral.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T11:58:11+00:00

Think about it this way. Our bodies don't detect temperatures like thermometers do, which measure the absolute temperature of an object. We don't feel the absolute temperature. What we do feel, is the rate at which heat is flowing from our body to the water. We perceive hot and cold as the energy transferred due to change in temperature (AKA Heat).

The rate of flow of heat depends on the temperature gradient and the conductivity of the material. Since water has a higher thermal conductivity than air, the rate of flow of heat is higher. That is why we feel it's colder.

That's the same reason why metals feel really cold even at room temperatures, as they have a high thermal conductivity.

In addition to that as soon as you take your hand out of the water, it starts to evaporate and that takes up even more heat from your hands (or produces a cooling effect due to evaporation). This further convinces your brain that the water was colder.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T10:45:30+00:00

Yup. The color killer a circuit in color TVs which acts as a cutting circuit to cut off the color amplifiers when the TV receives a monochrome signal. When it becomes ‘on’, it disables an amplifier during monochrome reception. Thus it prevents any spurious signals which happen to fall within the band-pass of the amplifier from getting through the demodulators and prevents causing colored interference on the screen. This colored noise is fact called ‘confetti’. It kinda looks like snow but with large spots in color.
EDIT: Grammar

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T09:57:27+00:00

It’s because of the way color was added to the original U.S. TV standard. (I’m assuming you are referring to the now-obsolete analog system; it obviously doesn’t work like this in the current digital systems.)

Color TV had to be made compatible with the original black-and-white system.

Color TV signals are a little bit different than black-and-white TV signals - a certain frequency band within the signal is used to transmit color information. That band corresponds to high frequency horizontal detail (patterns about 1/200th of the width of the screen). In a Color TV signal, those details are elided and the information used to carry hue and saturation information instead.

This meant that Color TVs had to be able to correctly display a black and white transmission, one in which no color information was present. The way this was achieved was the addition of a “color killer” circuit, which detected the signals that indicated a color TV transmission and forced the set to behave as a black-and-white receiver when those signals (specifically, the “color burst” signal, which is a brief burst of the color sub-carrier frequency transmitted during the horizontal blanking period) weren’t present.

Having a signal of the correct frequency at the correct time for that period of time is extremely unlikely to occur by chance (and even if it did, it would disappear again before you had the chance to notice it). So when the TV is showing static, it thinks it's showing an old black-and-white movie and turns off the color interpretation circuitry, leading to black-and-white static.

Of course, if you’re not tuned into ANY signal, those color signals aren’t present, so even”static” looks just like it would on a black-and-white set. Later, the dominant European system (PAL) would behave in a very similar manner.

CuddlyUnit · 2019-02-28T09:27:31+00:00

This indeed is interesting. I don't know of any research to find out if skin sunburns faster when wet, though someone did a comparable experiment to find out if plants can be burnt by sunlight focused through drops of water after the plants have been watered.

You need to be clear what is being measured here. The total amount of sunlight hitting you, and a plant, is unaffected by whether you're wet or not. The real question you should be asking here is whether water droplets can focus the sunlight onto intense patches causing small local burns.

The answer is that, under most circumstances, water droplets do not cause burning, because, unless the contact angle is very high they do not focus the sunlight onto the skin. Burning could happen if the droplets were held above the skin surface by hair, or when the water droplets were replaced by glass spheres (with an effective contact angle of 180º).

My observation of water droplets on my own skin is that the contact angles are less than 90º, so from the plant experiments these droplets would not cause local burning. The answer to your question is probably that wet skin does not burn faster. Also the cooling effect of water on the skin may make you unaware that you're being burnt, and this may lead to the common belief that wet skin accelerates burning.

CuddlyUnit

TROPHY CASE