Things you've always wondered about but couldn't be bothered to find out

[¼½¾]

13 hours ago, hughesie27 said:

After decades of screw topped lids why are we still putting up with leaky milk bottles when opened and placed on their side?

TIP: Put a bit of cling film over the top before putting the lid on.

 

TOP TIP: End the problem of leaking milk bottles by storing your milk in old hot water bottles. 

[superjack]

Something I've always wondered about the universe:

The big bang happened approximately 14 billion years ago. Now, according to the laws of physics nothing can travel faster than light. Going by that theory, the universe can be no larger than 28 billion light years providing the speed of expansion is the speed of light. My question is, how can the universe then be the size it is currently, approximately 93 billion light years?

[Unknown user]

14 minutes ago, superjack said:

Something I've always wondered about the universe:

The big bang happened approximately 14 billion years ago. Now, according to the laws of physics nothing can travel faster than light. Going by that theory, the universe can be no larger than 28 billion light years providing the speed of expansion is the speed of light. My question is, how can the universe then be the size it is currently, approximately 93 billion light years?

 

I don't believe a word of any of the theories. It's all on far too massive a scale for us to possibly understand, it's like bacteria trying to understand Chinese.

None of it makes sense for good reason I reckon.

[superjack]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

 

I don't believe a word of any of the theories. It's all on far too massive a scale for us to possibly understand, it's like bacteria trying to understand Chinese.

None of it makes sense for good reason I reckon.

Not quite related to my question, but my belief is that the big bang was a supernova, and every other supernova creates a new universe. This would make existence infinite, with an infinite amount of universes in existence. With thoughts like this you would think I've been smoking something good. ?

[Maple Leaf]

On 14/06/2019 at 20:24, superjack said:

Something I've always wondered about the universe:

The big bang happened approximately 14 billion years ago. Now, according to the laws of physics nothing can travel faster than light. Going by that theory, the universe can be no larger than 28 billion light years providing the speed of expansion is the speed of light. My question is, how can the universe then be the size it is currently, approximately 93 billion light years?

 

Good question.  The answer is probably somewhere in the attached link, but I can't figure it out.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe

 

EDIT:  The answer might lie is this quote from the above article.  Note, some things can travel faster than the speed of light.  That's what it says!!

 

However, due to Hubble's law, regions sufficiently distant from the Earth are expanding away from it faster than the speed of light (special relativity prevents nearby objects in the same local region from moving faster than the speed of light with respect to each other, but there is no such constraint for distant objects when the space between them is expanding; see uses of the proper distance for a discussion) and furthermore the expansion rate appears to be accelerating due to dark energy.

[superjack]

1 hour ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Good question.  The answer is probably somewhere in the attached link, but I can't figure it out.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe

 

EDIT:  The answer might lie is this quote from the above article.  Note, some things can travel faster than the speed of light.  That's what it says!!

 

However, due to Hubble's law, regions sufficiently distant from the Earth are expanding away from it faster than the speed of light (special relativity prevents nearby objects in the same local region from moving faster than the speed of light with respect to each other, but there is no such constraint for distant objects when the space between them is expanding; see uses of the proper distance for a discussion) and furthermore the expansion rate appears to be accelerating due to dark energy.

Thanks for sharing that mr Leaf. I’ve just finished reading it and, like most things to do with the size of our universe, it has completely blown my mind.

[peter_hmfc]

If you have a phone attached to a computer via a cable (for charging purposes) and then you pull the cable out at the same time at either end, is there electricity trapped inside the cable?

[Unknown user]

11 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

If you have a phone attached to a computer via a cable (for charging purposes) and then you pull the cable out at the same time at either end, is there electricity trapped inside the cable?

 

Kind of, but no.

Electricity involves the flow of electrons, like rivers involve the flow of water.

There are electrons in the cable but as soon as they stop moving around the circuit it's not electricity any more.

 

NB I'm taking this on trust, I've asked the same question - I don't personally understand electricity at all and it's possible I've got this completely arse over tit. 

[jambo89]

[¼½¾]

3 hours ago, Smithee said:

 

Kind of, but no.

Electricity involves the flow of electrons, like rivers involve the flow of water.

There are electrons in the cable but as soon as they stop moving around the circuit it's not electricity any more.

 

NB I'm taking this on trust, I've asked the same question - I don't personally understand electricity at all and it's possible I've got this completely arse over tit. 

Huv ye no heard of static electricity?

[Maple Leaf]

33 minutes ago, Lemongrab said:

Huv ye no heard of static electricity?

 

Indeed.  That's the type of electricity in lightning bolts.

[Samuel Camazzola]

Regarding reports and debates on the moon landings and the associated conspiracies, why do all the 'believers' get very emotional, defensive and aggressive when discussing the matter?

[Cade]

It's not a matter of belief. 

It's a matter of independently verified scientific fact.

Conspiracy theorists are a threat to society.

[Samuel Camazzola]

3 hours ago, Cade said:

It's not a matter of belief. 

It's a matter of independently verified scientific fact.

Conspiracy theorists are a threat to society.

But why do a high number get rattled by it all? Witnessed a lot of it recently. 

[superjack]

Do people in New York have random pictures of western hailes around their flats?

[been here before]

1 hour ago, superjack said:

Do people in New York have random pictures of western hailes around their flats?

 

Along similar lines Ive often wondered if places like Sunset Boulevard, Hollywood, Las Vegas etc have tanning salons called Niddrie Tan, Wester Hailes Bronze or Oxgangs Beauty on their respsctive main roads next to shops like Dollarstretcher or Alaskaland.

Edited July 24, 2019 by been here before

[peter_hmfc]

Look at this sprinkler, the water is white. But what is the white? If I cup it in a glass it would be clear, so where does the white go?

 

[superjack]

3 hours ago, peter_hmfc said:

Look at this sprinkler, the water is white. But what is the white? If I cup it in a glass it would be clear, so where does the white go?

 

That's air in the water. For the sprinkler to be able to spray over a greater distance, air is sucked into the water via a venturi. Much the same as modern kitchen taps.

[Norm]

17 hours ago, Samuel Camazzola said:

But why do a high number get rattled by it all? Witnessed a lot of it recently. 

Maybe because they get annoyed that people can be so unbelievably stupid. It's like someone arguing that the sky is tartan. It's amusing at first but after a while, it gets irritating. 

[FWJ]

It’s like these “The Earth is flat” graffiti that we’re seeing all over the place recently.  How long before we’re told we have to respect their point of view and it’s perfectly valid and worthy of intelligent debate.

 

File “Intelligent Design” into that too.

[Maple Leaf]

20 hours ago, Samuel Camazzola said:

But why do a high number get rattled by it all? Witnessed a lot of it recently. 

 

It's mostly frustration.  When one puts forward solid evidence, i.e. facts, their rebuttal is usually "That's a lie", then they counter with some random video they found on the internet. 

[Samuel Camazzola]

57 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

It's mostly frustration.  When one puts forward solid evidence, i.e. facts, their rebuttal is usually "That's a lie", then they counter with some random video they found on the internet. 

 

1 hour ago, FWJ said:

It’s like these “The Earth is flat” graffiti that we’re seeing all over the place recently.  How long before we’re told we have to respect their point of view and it’s perfectly valid and worthy of intelligent debate.

 

File “Intelligent Design” into that too.

Yeah, seems that a lot of folk choose not to ignore it and laugh it off but get wound up more than they would with other subjects. 

 

I caught an episode of Gogglebox recently which included Martin Kemp and his son discussing the moon landings. His 20 something son commented on how 'it never happened' (may have been serious or may have just been to wind up Martin who was fascinated with the subject). The online abuse the boy got from folk foaming at the mouth was equally laughable and disturbing. 

[gjcc]

4 hours ago, FWJ said:

It’s like these “The Earth is flat” graffiti that we’re seeing all over the place recently.  How long before we’re told we have to respect their point of view and it’s perfectly valid and worthy of intelligent debate.

 

File “Intelligent Design” into that too.

 

You don’t just “choose” to think the earth is flat. You’re born thinking it. 

[Maple Leaf]

4 minutes ago, gjcc said:

 

You don’t just “choose” to think the earth is flat. You’re born thinking it. 

 

To the average person, the earth seems flat and that was the commonly held belief until about 2,000 years ago, which was when a Greek astronomer named Eratosthenes proved that it was round.

 

Similarly, it seems obvious that the sun goes around the earth. We stand on, apparently, motionless earth and watch the sun arc overhead day after day.  The notion that we're standing on a spinning ball seems absurd.

[gjcc]

35 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

To the average person, the earth seems flat and that was the commonly held belief until about 2,000 years ago, which was when a Greek astronomer named Eratosthenes proved that it was round.

 

Similarly, it seems obvious that the sun goes around the earth. We stand on, apparently, motionless earth and watch the sun arc overhead day after day.  The notion that we're standing on a spinning ball seems absurd.

 

Its a topic I’m familiar with. Astounding how accurate he was given the basic tools available to him. 

Feel sorry for the poor **** he had walk hundreds of Kilometres to help with the calculation. Hopefully he was well recompensed. 

[¼½¾]

How do those flat earth boys explain why when the earth is photographed from space, you can't ever see every continent in a single photo?  Why can't the ice wall be seen in those photos?

[Taffin]

16 minutes ago, Lemongrab said:

How do those flat earth boys explain why when the earth is photographed from space, you can't ever see every continent in a single photo?  Why can't the ice wall be seen in those photos?

 

They're hardly going to release the real photos are they?

[gjcc]

47 minutes ago, Lemongrab said:

How do those flat earth boys explain why when the earth is photographed from space, you can't ever see every continent in a single photo?  Why can't the ice wall be seen in those photos?

 

Global warming?

[¼½¾]

37 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

They're hardly going to release the real photos are they?

 

Doh, of course not.

7 minutes ago, gjcc said:

 

Global warming?

Discal warming?

[Marvin]

On 24/07/2019 at 14:57, Cade said:

It's not a matter of belief. 

It's a matter of independently verified scientific fact.

Conspiracy theorists are a threat to society.

 

True, however you can't beat a good conspiracy theory.

[Justin Z]

On 24/07/2019 at 14:57, Cade said:

It's not a matter of belief. 

It's a matter of independently verified scientific fact.

Conspiracy theorists are a threat to society.

 

That they are.

 

First, they lost their children. Then the conspiracy theories started. Now, the parents of Newtown are fighting back.

 

In a time of madness — in a world in which science can be dismissed as political ploy and videos might reflect truth or fabrication — Pozner found himself having to fight to prove, over and over, that his son had lived, and his son had died.

 

Heartbreaking, disgusting, infuriating.

[Ribble]

4 hours ago, Lemongrab said:

How do those flat earth boys explain why when the earth is photographed from space, you can't ever see every continent in a single photo?  Why can't the ice wall be seen in those photos?

 

They'll simply dismiss space travel as American propaganda, all of the pictures are fake and the reason they can't prove the earth is flat is due to space travel not being possible

[Maple Leaf]

Flat-earthers ignore 2,000 years of science. You have to be pretty dumb.

 

I made the mistake of trying to have a discussion with one, once. Never again.

 

I asked him how parts of the world can be in sunlight while other parts are in darkness. His answer was something about sunlight being focused like a flashlight. I replied that people in the dark parts would still be able to see the flashlight, and he said it was like the difference between the sun and the moon!  At that point I walked away.

[The Internet]

On 25/07/2019 at 15:30, Samuel Camazzola said:

 

Yeah, seems that a lot of folk choose not to ignore it and laugh it off but get wound up more than they would with other subjects. 

 

I caught an episode of Gogglebox recently which included Martin Kemp and his son discussing the moon landings. His 20 something son commented on how 'it never happened' (may have been serious or may have just been to wind up Martin who was fascinated with the subject). The online abuse the boy got from folk foaming at the mouth was equally laughable and disturbing. 

 

That's just a symptom of the current social media disease. It doesn't mean people get more wound up by conspiracy theories than other controversial things, they probably don't get wound up at all but their comments on social media magnify their feelings 100x. Folk get horrendous abuse online for all kinds of reasons. 

[FWJ]

This was a joke entry in a “Top Tips” section of a comic but why do gulls start squawking their heads off when they find food (usually a ripped-open binbag)?  Wouldn’t it be to their advantage to keep schtum instead of alerting every other of the little b*****ds within 500 yards?

[Samuel Camazzola]

1 hour ago, Mauricio Pinilla said:

 

That's just a symptom of the current social media disease. It doesn't mean people get more wound up by conspiracy theories than other controversial things, they probably don't get wound up at all but their comments on social media magnify their feelings 100x. Folk get horrendous abuse online for all kinds of reasons. 

Yeah, include JKB in that bracket going by the tone of some messages. 😄

[Салатные палочки]

Why don't they make a white chocolate Caramel Wafer? 

[milky_26]

3 minutes ago, Salad Fingers said:

Why don't they make a white chocolate Caramel Wafer? 

they have white chocolate twix's and coco pops so maybe it will appear

[¼½¾]

Why do they make white chocolate versions of things normally made with dark chocolate, but not dark chocolate versions of white chocolate things?

[chuck berrys hairline]

Why do people claim things to be like 2000 years of science etc when they don't believe in the Bible. So why use a fictitious birthdate to present your argument if you don't actually believe in Christ it's self. Surely that rebutted the point they are trying to make. 

[hughesie27]

5 minutes ago, chuck berrys hairline said:

Why do people claim things to be like 2000 years of science etc when they don't believe in the Bible. So why use a fictitious birthdate to present your argument if you don't actually believe in Christ it's self. Surely that rebutted the point they are trying to make. 

It's pretty much widely accepted that there was a guy called Jesus Christ born 2019 years ago. It's just that this guy was likely the biggest spraff ever to walk the earth.

 

Also, I still use terms like For God's sake. Holy shit. Bloody Hell.

Edited July 27, 2019 by hughesie27

[milky_26]

46 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

It's pretty much widely accepted that there was a guy called Jesus Christ born 2019 years ago. It's just that this guy was likely the biggest spraff ever to walk the earth.

 

Also, I still use terms like For God's sake. Holy shit. Bloody Hell.

i didn't realise he posted on here

[Norm]

2 hours ago, chuck berrys hairline said:

Why do people claim things to be like 2000 years of science etc when they don't believe in the Bible. So why use a fictitious birthdate to present your argument if you don't actually believe in Christ it's self. Surely that rebutted the point they are trying to make. 

I believe that the year 2019 is now referred to as 2019 CE as opposed to 2019 AD. CE being common era. In the Western world, that was the generally accepted year used so it was easy just to carry it on but call it a different thing. 

[Justin Z]

2 hours ago, chuck berrys hairline said:

Why do people claim things to be like 2000 years of science etc when they don't believe in the Bible. So why use a fictitious birthdate to present your argument if you don't actually believe in Christ it's self. Surely that rebutted the point they are trying to make. 

 

[The Internet]

Yeah having trouble making sense of that. So if you don't believe in the bible you shouldn't be saying the year is 2019?

[gjcc]

2 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

 

Not sure what the new PM has to do with this thread tbh. 

[Scnorthedinburgh]

6 hours ago, chuck berrys hairline said:

Why do people claim things to be like 2000 years of science etc when they don't believe in the Bible. So why use a fictitious birthdate to present your argument if you don't actually believe in Christ it's self. Surely that rebutted the point they are trying to make. 

It's a correction of the Julian calender.

If you want call tomorrow day 1. Would just as well until you talked to every One else.

[Maple Leaf]

6 hours ago, chuck berrys hairline said:

Why do people claim things to be like 2000 years of science etc when they don't believe in the Bible. So why use a fictitious birthdate to present your argument if you don't actually believe in Christ it's self. Surely that rebutted the point they are trying to make. 

 

You're making the assumption that the Gregorian calendar, the one most commonly used in the West, is based on the Christian Bible. It isn't, it's based on the sun.  The most important measurement is the time it takes for the earth to orbit the sun, the solar year, and the Gregorian calendar does that best. The calendar is used by Jews, atheists, and Muslims as well, because it makes sense to have a common reference point when measuring time.

 

Year 1, the start of the Gregorian calendar, was not the year of Christ's birth.  He was born in the year 4 BCE. 

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

7 hours ago, chuck berrys hairline said:

Why do people claim things to be like 2000 years of science etc when they don't believe in the Bible. So why use a fictitious birthdate to present your argument if you don't actually believe in Christ it's self. Surely that rebutted the point they are trying to make. 

I use Common Era, don't believe in god.

[Justin Z]

23 hours ago, Mauricio Pinilla said:

Yeah having trouble making sense of that. So if you don't believe in the bible you shouldn't be saying the year is 2019?

 

Is that what he's saying?

 

Yeah to avoid secretly admitting I believe in Yahweh, I'll start saying this is the year 13,799,052,019, give or take a few million. So much easier to write too.