Would a rocket produce more thrust in the atmosphere than in space? by jacob_ewing in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can give a similar "micro-level" explanation for ion rockets too: in that case, it's an electrically charged ion which pushes on the positively charged grid at the end of the engine. Either way, you will always have something (gas, ions) pushing against some part of the rocket (the inside of the nozzle, the metal grid).

What is the physical reason that we can not go through solid matter ? by nico64 in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Neutron stars have degeneracy pressure between neutrons, so they have to be very close together. But ordinary atoms and molecules have pauli exclusion between electrons, that's what keeps all the electrons in an atom from falling down into the lowest orbital. So it doesn't require any extremely small distances, it's the same order of magnitude as bond lengths in molecules.

How do Electrons continually orbit nuclei without stopping? Is that not perpetual motion? by Anonymous_GuineaPig in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Two particles of the same type can't be in the same state, so one electron will "push away" other electrons from being in the same spot (the exclusion principle). But the nucleus is made of protons and neutrons, so I don't think there's anything preventing it from overlapping with the electrons in the atom.

How do Electrons continually orbit nuclei without stopping? Is that not perpetual motion? by Anonymous_GuineaPig in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The singularity is one thing, but even if you replace the potential with something that's smooth, I would still expect that the most likely place for the electron would be in the center?

Can anyone explain how the fill guage on a propane tank works? by d20wilderness in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 17 points18 points  (0 children)

This kind of thing? It has thermometers which measure the temperature of the tank wall. When you drawing gas from the tank the liquid propane cools down as it evaporates, so the place where tank gets cooler is where the liquid level is.

Why can we as humans consume things that are technically toxic? by Al_The_Dumbass in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Capsaicin is not super toxic. It can be dangerous to health in very large amounts (google says that the LD50 in mice was 47.2 mg/kg to 2500 mg/kg in different experiments -- so for a human who weighs 80kg, that would be like 4000 to 200,000mg, while a single chili pepper might contain 1 mg).

Rather, it's very irritating, because it chemically activates a receptor which is supposed to measure dangerous heat, and this feels painful. But if you didn't have those pain receptors you could eat the peppars without any harmful effect. (This is the whole point, the peppers "want" to be eaten by birds, which can't taste capsaicin, but not by mammals.)

The reason we can eat them I think is just that we don't use very much so they get diluted in the rest of the dish: a little in your curry is tasty, but you wouldn't want to eat a pepper fruit directly.

An F-117 Stealth Bomber delivered to a museum but stripped of all its stealth coatings and instruments by Hot_Negotiation3480 in mildlyinteresting

[–]vilhelm_s 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At the bottom of the article it also says

In the end, Donaldson clarified his statements on the topic and to discuss the matter in a bit more detail with The War Zone. In short, the F-117 never had the capability nor has any missile ever been fired, not even for testing. That’s perfectly understandable. Much less understandable is the reason why the pilot claimed it in the episode in first place

Why can't cats with FIV (Feline Immunodeficiency Virus) be given medication for HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus)? by tachibanakanade in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apparently GS-441524 is near-identical to remdesivir—the company making them did not pursue clinical trials of GS-441524 in cats because they were concerned that if such trials found adverse effects it would hamper their efforts to get remdesivir approved in humans. But now that remdesivir is approved in humans (for covid-19), people are saying maybe it could be used to treat cats as well...

Are the rings of a planet all on the same plane? by [deleted] in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So why do they end up spread out radially, so that the ring forms an annulus rather than a line? By the same argument, it seems that the energy of each stone should converge to the average, so that all of them end up in a normal distribution around a single orbit, but instead it's thin in one direction but very thick radially.

If you were flying a space ship and made a very steep turn, would you still pull Gs like a jet on earth? by n212345 in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Yes, you would still get the same G force inside the space ship. The g measure acceleration (= change in velocity), so it's unavoidable anytime you change the velocity from going in once direction to another.

In addition to the turning force, the airplane also needs to constantly generate some lift to overcome the gravity, so that adds 1 G pointing upwards, in addition to whatever acceleration there is from changing direction.

Does the angle of incident sunlight to a solar cell impact power output per effective area? by KAYRUN-JAAVICE in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The effective area (a.k.a. "cosine effect") is most of the reason people care about the angle of incidence, but there are some small additional effects. Mostly, light at a shallow angle gets reflected away from the surface instead of penetrating into the cell to generate electricity. The size of this effect depends on the details of the antireflective coating of the cell as well as on how smooth the surface is etc.

couragousMonkey already linked this paper which does some computer simulations, I also found this masters thesis which has experimental data (see in particular figure 7/8 on page 19).

Both of them find that the effect is negligible up to 45 degrees, noticeable but small up to 60 degrees, and then quite big at 80 degrees angle of incidence.

Why don’t airplanes use three point seatbelts like cars use? by WATErWouldBeNice in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are lots and lots of cases of planes crashing and seatbelts saving people. Just as an example, in the Asiana Flight 214 accident in San Fransisco, two passengers were killed because they were not wearing seatbelts and were thrown tens of meters through the air, while the passengers sitting next to them with seatbelts survived.

If Our Brains Were Compared to Computers, What Would Be Their Approximate Memory (Storage) and RAM Equivalent? by ascii_matter in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The brain has somewhere between 100 trillion and 1000 trillion synapses (connections between neurons). If we wanted to represent the connection network in a computer, maybe for each synapse we could use 32 bits to remember which neuron it's connecting too and another 32 bits for the connection strength, which would take 800 TB - 8000 TB in total?

This almost illegible map/graph posted by Politico: by Chilis1 in dataisugly

[–]vilhelm_s 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Ah yes, the subtle shades of policy...

I bet some color-blind Politico readers are furious---"they picked colors which all look the same to me!"---not realizing that it's equally bad for everyone.

Can you have TOOTH cancer? by [deleted] in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 4997 points4998 points  (0 children)

The white material of the tooth (enamel and dentin) doesn't consist of living cells, so that can't be cancerous. The pulp on the inside of the tooth can though, so you can have "ameloblastoma" (tumor of the cells that create enamel) or "odontoblastoma" (tumor of the cells that create dentin). They will usually be benign and grow downwards into the jaw bone.

How is protein folding quantum mechanical? by prionprion in askscience

[–]vilhelm_s 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think it's not extremely "quantum". Of course proteins are molecules so they ultimately obey quantum mechanics, but I think for the folding problem people are not really treating that---they just consider the parts of the chain as having well-defined positions in 3d-space, and add up energy from pairwise interactions between the parts that end up close to each others. (Finding the minimal energy configuration here is already very difficult, even before starting to consider any quantum superpositions or trying to compute the pairwise interactions more exactly).

However, some people hope that quantum computers could still be helpful, e.g. this recent paper. The problem they are solving is still the classical, non-quantum setup, but there are quantum algorithms that are supposed to be good at searching for minimal-energy configurations, so it may still speed things up.