Ask A Science Question!

Chat about anything and everything
User avatar
Lyah
Owner of the Raven
Owner of the Raven
Posts: 3645
Joined: 03/08/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Lyah » 07/14/14

Scrappers wrote:I find it interesting that the physics changes a bit when you shrink it small enough.
Microscopic, sub-microscopic, atomic, sub-atomic.... every change in the order of magnitude of... smallness, introduces net sets of physical processes that may not be applicable at larger scales, offering new advantages, and disadvantages. Already our microcircuit chip designs are getting so small that sub-atomic artifacts are become an issue where they never were 10 years ago. It's fascinating just how much a scale change can impact technology.

User avatar
Tregarde
Practically Staff
Practically Staff
Posts: 7810
Joined: 08/14/06

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Tregarde » 07/27/14

Why do chickens and turkeys have white meat and dark meat?

This is a question I've often wondered about, but didn't think to actually ask. But someone did ask, and here's the answer!

phpBB [media]

User avatar
Cyla
Honored Resident
Honored Resident
Posts: 683
Joined: 03/03/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Cyla » 08/14/14

How long after cooking is it really safe to eat refrigerated cooked meat?

User avatar
Kirath
Honored Resident
Honored Resident
Posts: 1743
Joined: 03/04/05

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Kirath » 08/14/14

Cyla wrote:How long after cooking is it really safe to eat refrigerated cooked meat?
While I can't speak to the exact scientific answer to that question, I do know the guidelines put forth by the FDA food code from my food safety courses. They say this (Roughly paraphrased):

Cooked food can be refrigerated at 40 degrees F or below for up to one week, after which it should be discarded (Realistically this tends to be less about bacteria and more about mold growth). (Frozen is different and can be held significantly longer.)

Cooked food should be kept out of the food temperature 'Danger Zone' (That is between 40 and 140 degrees Farenheit) for no more than 4 *cumulative* hours. So that clock is ticking every time you heat it up or refrigerate it, and after 4 hours it should be discarded.

Cooked food held in a 'hot food' situation (Steam table, chafing dish) can be held indefinitely as long as the coldest portion of the dish remains above 140 degrees F continuously. The only limiting factor is that eventually evaporation or the effects of heat over time will render the food unappetizing or inedible. (Even in this case, the food code advises discarding after 8 hours of hot holding but it's not completely necessary.)

User avatar
Pax
Visitor
Posts: 12
Joined: 04/22/14

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Pax » 12/17/14

Is this not as big a deal as it seems like?
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/s ... hanespike/

Cause it seems like kind of a big deal.

User avatar
Lyah
Owner of the Raven
Owner of the Raven
Posts: 3645
Joined: 03/08/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Lyah » 02/02/15

phpBB [media]

User avatar
Scrappers
Resident
Resident
Posts: 483
Joined: 12/20/12

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Scrappers » 02/05/15

This one goes along with your post Lyah, though it pisses me off even more. A lot of people genuinely believe this tripe, enough to part with vast sums of money just because they want to improve the world! But some evil bastard just has to use their Altruistic motives to their advantage and fleece them! Seriously, this makes the Nigeria scams look benign!

http://www.fixtheworldproject.net/what-is-the-qeg-.html

The QEG, or quantum energy generator. It's basically a generator with a tank circuit attached that is somehow supposed to produce over unity energy. Yet, in every video I have ever seen, they NEVER unplug the damned thing from the generator they use to start it up!

phpBB [media]


Here's a schematic I dug up someone else drew of this contraption.

Image

They benevolently give away the plans to make this crap-tacular device for free! (How kind of them!) but charge $300 per hour for a skype call to consult with the inventor or "Hope Girl" for a consult about business-y stuff, and $5 per minute over that! Seriously, a 1-900 phone sex number is cheaper than that! And at least if you're a guy it won't take a damned hour for you to finish! (Unless you're really good at it, or really really bad at it! :P )

But wait, there's more!

Home
About
Projects
Contact
Quantum Energy Generator



.

ftw qeg consulting

Do you need help with your QEG plans? FTW will be offering consulting services to assist with QEG and CICU start ups. James Robitaille, the QEG inventor will be available for technical consulting and Hope Girl will be available for business operations related consulting.


Consultation via skype: For any questions related to the QEG that can be answered over phone or email.
Cost: $300 for up to one hour, $5 per minute over one hour. Payment due at time of booking.

You can sign up for the entire online training course for $200 utilizing Zoom Video, or $35 per class as they become available.

On-site consulting for one week:On-site, hands-on training of engineers and business operators involved in local QEG production given by the Engineering Artist James Robitaille and HopeGirl. Learn how to assemble your QEGs to ensure that they work properly, and learn how to effectively sell them, distribute them, install them, and service them. Also, learn how to create sponsorship programs and crowdfunding campaigns to make them more affordable to members of your community.
Cost: Please contact us for a quote including travel expenses. Must be booked 3 months in advance to ensure proper lead time for materials.
In other words, the cost depends on how much you have set aside for retirement, life savings, etc...

At least the user manual is free... (Open Source)
https://hopegirl2012.files.wordpress.co ... -25-14.pdf

Oh and this was one of my favorite lines from the manual:
- How long will the QEG run?
Indefinitely (or until parts wear out)
Lyah, correct me if I'm wrong, but unless the laws of physics have changed since the last time I rubbed one surface against another vigorously, wear means friction which generates heat; heat is a type of energy that will radiate, thus the machine will loose energy that way, and thus any time you have moving parts rubbing against each other, you can NEVER achieve 100% efficiency! Therefore, unity is not possible, let alone OVER unity!


After looking at this contraption, and their claims about Nikola Tesla, I couldn't shake the feeling that I had seen this thing somewhere, back in high school when I took Electronics 1 & 2. Then... WHAM! It hit me! When I finished my assignments early, my teacher would let me read older text books they no longer used, but he still kept copies of. In one of them, they had an entire chapter about Mr. Tesla, including copies of ALL of his patents.

Specifically this one!
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tes ... ic-machine

Some of the pictures they used in the manual are from some of Mr. Tesla's patents, but for the most part, they took electronics and physics words, twisted them into a bunch of BS nonsense, smeared them in a pile of dog shit, burried it all under moist, soft, moldy peat for a few years, dug it up, and served it up on silver plates to innocent people who mean well but are in way over their heads.

:x That's why I'm pissed!

User avatar
Lyah
Owner of the Raven
Owner of the Raven
Posts: 3645
Joined: 03/08/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Lyah » 02/05/15

There has been so much bullshit attributed to Tesla is pretty much defies description. Good rant, well said.

User avatar
Lyah
Owner of the Raven
Owner of the Raven
Posts: 3645
Joined: 03/08/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Lyah » 02/06/15

Debunking the paleo diet

https://www.scientificamerican.com/medi ... aked_3.jpg

phpBB [media]

User avatar
Scrappers
Resident
Resident
Posts: 483
Joined: 12/20/12

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Scrappers » 02/08/15

I know most of the things I post about in this thread are about computers, electronics, or electricity, but considering where I work, all three combine every day.

With that said, I thought I would share two of my favorite youtube vlogs.

From what I can tell, this guy works on high voltage stuff, probably city utility. He likes to apply high voltage to things, and he does take requests. (And by high voltage, I'm talkin' 20kV - 30kV range and up.) It's one of those, "Let's see how much voltage takes to make it pop! For science of course..." :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/user/Photonvids/videos

And for the more serious side of things, this guy is an electronics engineer, though some of his vids are pretty funny, like when he ran a marathon with an oscilloscope, multi-meter, and a go-pro strapped to himself, in a clean-room suit, with the Doc Brown radiation symbol on the back to raise money for a cancer charity! Good times! (In a later vid he performs an autopsy on that oscilloscope. I believe Lyah already posted one of his videos earlier, debunking a free-energy scam.) I'm a regular viewer of his channel, always learning something new, and / or new ways of looking at old problems.

https://www.youtube.com/user/EEVblog/videos

If any of you have more personal favorites of science-y type stuff, I'd love to take a look! (esp. electrical / electronics ones)

User avatar
Lyah
Owner of the Raven
Owner of the Raven
Posts: 3645
Joined: 03/08/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Lyah » 02/11/15

Oh, I love this quy!

User avatar
Lyah
Owner of the Raven
Owner of the Raven
Posts: 3645
Joined: 03/08/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Lyah » 03/09/15

phpBB [media]

User avatar
TashMonster
Honored Resident
Honored Resident
Posts: 956
Joined: 07/07/05

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by TashMonster » 03/09/15

Later this year, the New Horizons space probe will be making its historic flyby of Pluto on its way to study the Kuiper Belt. When the mission was launched in 2006, Pluto was still classified as a planet, but has since been reclassified as a "Dwarf Planet".

So here is my question...

How much more massive would Pluto have to be in order to be regain its status as a full-fledged planet? Is Pluto still gaining mass as it travels along its orbit by accretion of small meteorites and other Kuiper Belt Objects? If so, how long will it take to reach the planetary threshhold?

User avatar
Lyah
Owner of the Raven
Owner of the Raven
Posts: 3645
Joined: 03/08/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Lyah » 03/14/15

TashMonster wrote:How much more massive would Pluto have to be in order to be regain its status as a full-fledged planet? Is Pluto still gaining mass as it travels along its orbit by accretion of small meteorites and other Kuiper Belt Objects? If so, how long will it take to reach the planetary threshhold?
This is an awesome question because it illustrates the difference between two kinds of descriptions in science, absolute, and relative.

Let's start with electric charge. Electric charge is the physical property of matter that causes it to experience a force when placed in an electromagnetic field. There are two types of electric charges: positive and negative. Anything with a charge is one or the other, there's no inbetweens. This is an observable thing that's not open to interpretation.

Then you have more relative descriptions. What's the difference between a storm and a hurricane? A dust devil and a tornado? Honestly... nothing. A hurricane is just a storm of a certain size. A tornado is a cyclone of a certain size. What determines that size is a a human judgement call. Someone set some arbitrary parameters and declared than when a weather phenomena is of X size, it's a hurricane, or a tornado. But the physics of storms is essentially the same no matter what size the storm is. It's just that when a storm is big enough, or destructive enough, we have special names. Same thing with planets.

For almost 50 years Pluto was thought to be larger than Mercury, but with the discovery in 1978 of Pluto's moon Charon, it became possible to measure Pluto's mass accurately and to determine that it was much smaller than in initial estimates. In the 1990s, astronomers began to find objects in the same region of space as Pluto (now known as the Kuiper belt), and some even farther away. So many, in fact, that current estimates are that we could have up to 10,000 Pluto-sized or smaller objects in the Kuiper belt.

A dwarf planet is, at its most basic, a body in orbit around our sun that has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a nearly round shape but is NOT big enough to have cleared the neighborhood around its orbit of other debris.

Currently, we have five bodies that we have confirmed fit this description: Ceres, Pluto, Haumea, Makemake, and Eris. There's six or so more named bodies we're close to adding to that category, and once you go beyond the orbit of Pluto, we could get to the level of hundreds or thousands!

So, part of the problem with calling Pluto a planet is that if you're going to call it one, you have to say we have not nine, but 13 planets. In a few years that number would be up to 19, then possibly 200, and after that, 10,000, and all of a sudden what is a planet loses all meaning.

Naw, as for size... let's test make it easy on ourselves and use the concept of comparing sizes of bodies in the solar system by "Earth Masses". IE, the Earth-Mass of Earth is 1, Jupiter is 317 Earth masses, Uranus is 14, Venus is .8, and Mercury is a tiny 0.055.

By comparison, Pluto is a paltry 0.0022. The mass Mercury is 25 times larger than Pluto, which is 18 times smaller than Earth is. So, Earth is 450 times the size of Pluto, and Earth itself is minuscule compared to the Jovian planets.

At some point, if you don't set a standard, then something loses all meaning. If Pluto gets to be a planet, then so should all of the dwarf planets. At the very least Eris should, which is actually a little bit bigger than Pluto. So, if we must have planet #9, than we must have planet #10. And we can expect that count to go up, even if we limit the masses of a potential new planet to "Pluto-sized" and above." And pretty soon we're back to having so many planets that there's no distinction.

So, while I am personally sorry to see Pluto struck from the list of planets, it does start to make sense when you look at the relative sizes of things. Still, when you come down to it, it's no more or less than the decision that some storms are hurricanes, and some are not. We used to think Pluto was bigger than it is, and when we found we were wrong, its classification was changed. And I think that's something that should be celebrated. Why?

Because it highlights the great power of science. Science is self-correcting. It adjusts its views based on what is observed, not based on what we WANT to be true, but on what is known to be true. We now know that Pluto is just way too small to qualify as a planet for any reason other than pure nostalgia. But if we start doing that, definitions start to lose meaning, and everything gets all muddy. I suppose in the end I prefer the accuracy and the loss of a planet, over inaccuracy, and 10,000 planets!

As to the other questions, yes, I am sure Pluto, like Earth, gains some minuscule amount of mass from the accretion of cosmic dust and the like, but it the universe itself will probably come to an end long before Pluto gains enough mass to qualify as a planet.

User avatar
TashMonster
Honored Resident
Honored Resident
Posts: 956
Joined: 07/07/05

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by TashMonster » 03/14/15

As to the other questions, yes, I am sure Pluto, like Earth, gains some minuscule amount of mass from the accretion of cosmic dust and the like, but it the universe itself will probably come to an end long before Pluto gains enough mass to qualify as a planet.
What this means, clearly, is that we need a way to artificially increase the mass of an object.

I'm sure that given enough time, energy, and patience, objects in the Kuiper Belt could be nudged about by standard rockets and other methods so that they join with Pluto and increase its mass at an accelerated rate, possibly within a few hundred years or so.

However, another possible solution springs to mind.

The discovery of the electron and its properties afforded us a way to manipulate them, paving the way for advances in materials and the growth of the electronics field and all of the lovely computers and other electrical devices that we use every day.

Recently, the Higgs Field, which explains why fundamental particles have mass, was discovered at CERN. Can a proper understanding of the Higgs Field and its particle, the Higgs boson, possibly lead to technologies that allow for the manipulation of the mass of an object? That would, in theory, allow us to increase the mass of Pluto at will and help it to reach planetary status!

User avatar
Lyah
Owner of the Raven
Owner of the Raven
Posts: 3645
Joined: 03/08/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Lyah » 03/14/15

TashMonster wrote:Can a proper understanding of the Higgs Field and its particle, the Higgs boson, possibly lead to technologies that allow for the manipulation of the mass of an object? That would, in theory, allow us to increase the mass of Pluto at will and help it to reach planetary status!
To make a standing "Higgs wave" to manipulate mass on the scale you're talking about, you would need billions of Higgs bosons. Since the energies to do that are so high we can't even think about it, it has taken us 50 years to create and measure them at all. Even if you could make billions of them, the energy density would be so great that the normal matter of Pluto would probably just fall apart under the strain of it all!

User avatar
Scrappers
Resident
Resident
Posts: 483
Joined: 12/20/12

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Scrappers » 03/24/15

It would be a lot easier to just add pluto as an exception to the planet size rule. Cheaper too! :P

User avatar
Tregarde
Practically Staff
Practically Staff
Posts: 7810
Joined: 08/14/06

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Tregarde » 03/25/15

Would we be able to detect a ship traveling at near light speed? Turns out there's at least one way we could (besides looking for engine exhaust). But there's also significant risk to the ship in traveling so fast, which could mean that such speeds are simply not going to happen.
https://io9.com/we-should-be-able-to-de ... 1693540956

User avatar
Tregarde
Practically Staff
Practically Staff
Posts: 7810
Joined: 08/14/06

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Tregarde » 03/28/15

Image

Why Do Our Fingers and Toes Wrinkle During a Bath?

The short answer: It actually has nothing to do with absorbing the water, and everything to do with improving our grip on things underwater. Think of it like the treads in a tire giving a much better grip in slippery conditions.

You can read a fuller explanation here: https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... ng-a-bath/

Raclette
Regular
Regular
Posts: 69
Joined: 05/25/13

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Raclette » 04/29/15

It's ant season around our house. They come inside looking for food, and I have to work daily to remind everyone of "ant discipline" -- no food left out, clean up your work area so there are not even crumbs left to find, and pick up any piece of kibble you see on the floor. (Ants *love* cat food.)

I don't like spraying insecticide near my food prep area, no matter the smell. (They have lemon and pine scents these days.) I wasn't all that fond of Camicide, which is supposed to be safe to use, but warfare in the African nation(s) that grow the flower -- a marigold relation, I think -- that yields the active ingredient in Camicide, have stopped all production worldwide.

At one time several years ago, I picked up a spray bottle of cleaner -- Simple Green, I think it was -- and doused a column of ants, and they all stopped moving; it seemed permanent. I've used other types of cleaner since then, but the ones with "green"/herbal ingredients seem to work better than ordinary soap. Why/how does soap stop ants?

User avatar
Lyah
Owner of the Raven
Owner of the Raven
Posts: 3645
Joined: 03/08/10

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Lyah » 04/30/15

Raclette wrote:At one time several years ago, I picked up a spray bottle of cleaner -- Simple Green, I think it was -- and doused a column of ants, and they all stopped moving; it seemed permanent. I've used other types of cleaner since then, but the ones with "green"/herbal ingredients seem to work better than ordinary soap. Why/how does soap stop ants?
The green ones that kill on contact are nice, but probably do not linger long. the advantage of a pesticide is that it is much longer lasting when sprayed. I think the easiest way to sum up an answer is that things that are fatal to ants are not always fatal to us, or are fatal in different dosages. So something in the soap is there that we can take easily, but is very toxic to ants. However, soap dissolves in moisture, which is why it doesn't linger long, and is therefor not an effective long-term solution.

User avatar
Tregarde
Practically Staff
Practically Staff
Posts: 7810
Joined: 08/14/06

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Tregarde » 05/25/15

Ever wonder exactly how a tattoo stays, even though your body is constantly shedding skin cells, up to a million a day?
phpBB [media]

User avatar
Brighthawk
Terminus Developer
Terminus Developer
Posts: 1281
Joined: 04/01/09

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Brighthawk » 05/31/15

Who's cooler? Pythagoras, Kepler, or Tesla?

User avatar
Panic
Dream Warden
Dream Warden
Posts: 36
Joined: 12/26/14

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Panic » 05/31/15

Magnets how do they work?

User avatar
Tregarde
Practically Staff
Practically Staff
Posts: 7810
Joined: 08/14/06

Re: Ask A Science Question!

Post by Tregarde » 06/06/15

Image

Post Reply