Jump to content

Shower thoughts


p1t1o

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, adsii1970 said:

Most people do not know this, but I love to cook. In the past ten years, I've been a little braver in the kitchen and have been creating my own recipes for certain classic favorites. This morning, I thought about bringing the flavors of a Reece's Peanut Butter Cup into a pancake. As a side note, I make my pancakes from "scratch" meaning there's no pre-mixed powder out of a box. Here's the various ways I could accomplish the Reece's pancake:

  • Make the pancake into a chocolate base using dark baker's chocolate and add Reece's Pieces to the batter.
  • Make the pancake into a chocolate base using dark baker's chocolate and adding peanut butter chips.
  • Make the pancake batter have a hint of peanut butter and add dark chocolate chips.
  • Make the pancake batter the traditional buttermilk batter and add peanut butter chips and chocolate chips.
  • Make the pancake batter the traditional buttermilk batter and add the miniature Reece's peanut butter cups.

So, for you Reece's lovers, which do you think I should try first?

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here. Putting two different flavors into the pancake during the cooking process like that, something is going to go south. So my suggestion: Put a little peanut butter into the pancake batter to make peanut pancakes, then serve them with chocolate syrup.

Edited by TheSaint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TheSaint said:

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here. Putting two different flavors into the pancake during the cooking process like that, something is going to go south. So my suggestion: Put a little peanut butter into the pancake batter to make peanut pancakes, then serve them with chocolate syrup.

Oh, I never thought of that option... Very interesting, indeed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The modern passenger airplanes have about ten seats per row.

Spoiler

bc8511d9d1993fcdf3b9ea0ec3d1d726.jpg

Only two of this ten can watch out of windows, others are just sitting and reading or watching displays.

So, ~75% of passengers get nothing from those windows but light.
And the happy 25% of window sitters can see nothing but clouds.

So.
If remove all these useless holes, the hull would be stronger, cheaper, and nobody would even notice the difference.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

So.

If remove all these useless holes, the hull would be stronger, cheaper, and nobody would even notice the difference.

You'd think if a solution for viable weight reduction were that simple it would have already been implemented. Well, it hasn't and it isn't a solution because no matter how rationally you can explain it, passengers don't feel comfortable in an aircraft with no windows (claustrophobia, for example, is a variable you've ommited), and no matter how light your aircraft is, if passengers aren't willing to fly in it then even the heaviest of airplanes will be a better choice

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Aperture Science said:

You'd think if a solution for weight reduction were that simple it would have already been implemented.

Not weight reduction, but structural integrity. The holes and gaps are weakened places.

5 minutes ago, Aperture Science said:

passengers don't feel comfortable in an aircraft with no windows (claustrophobia is an example)

Let's make the floor transparent. They will ask for claustrophobia themselves.

***

An on-wall display system could ensure them that they're on a cruise ship.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Not weight reduction, but structural integrity. The holes and gaps are weakened places.

Let's make the floor transparent. They will ask for claustrophobia themselves.

***

An on-wall display system could ensure them that they're on a cruise ship.

Totally viable... god, how come the hundreds of engineers in the aeronautical industry haven't thought of this? /s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/27/2020 at 10:54 AM, Aperture Science said:

Totally viable... god, how come the hundreds of engineers in the aeronautical industry haven't thought of this? /s

Probably have. But it would add excess weight the the craft. Excess weight adds to the cost. And adds additional components to the craft which could break down... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/27/2020 at 11:37 AM, kerbiloid said:

Not weight reduction, but structural integrity. The holes and gaps are weakened places.

I will admit to not following the industry, but I don't really hear much about planes falling apart due to lack of structural integrity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

I will admit to not following the industry, but I don't really hear much about planes falling apart due to lack of structural integrity.

They could be thinner and lighter.

2 hours ago, adsii1970 said:

But it would add excess weight the the craft.

The rolled metal could be taken thinner. And no heavy glass stacks.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:

Passenger windows are not glass.

This doesn't matter. They are heavier than the layered aluminium, and as you have to use same sheet thickness, the holes make you to take a thicker metal sheet. Because the weakest place defines the lowest possible thickness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

I will admit to not following the industry, but I don't really hear much about planes falling apart due to lack of structural integrity.

Well, not after the de Havilland Comet painfully gave demonstration back around 1952 that the increases in aircraft speeds and stresses were creating greater strains that could lead in short order to hull failures.

Lessons were learned from that and better airframe testing including up to destruction.  Windows were made with rounded corners and other design changes improved fatigue lifetime.  Inspection schedules caught problems before failure and given a design there was better knowledge when to check and later retire an aircraft.

And you can totally make a structure stronger in some cases by changing it including putting the correct holes in it.  There are a lot of loads on a structure, including the weight of the structure itself.  If in some ways it's more than strong enough, taking out some of the material lightens the load.  The simplest case for this is using hollow tubes instead of solid ones, which happens in some bird's bones.  Another possibility is using dimples to remove material.  More discussion of this here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ancient Egyptian picture always mentioned as a sample of polio in the ancient world.

"A priest with the leg deformed by polio."

Spoiler

An-Egyptian-stele-thought-to-represent-a

How could one see here a deformed leg when it's just standing on toes, bended in knee?
How could a person with a leg deformed by childhood illness, become a chief priest?

It's not a priest with curved leg, it's an artist with curved hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shpaget said:

It's fairly unusual in Egyptian wall paintings and carvings for upright people to be depicted with anything but both feet firmly on the ground.

As well it's very unusual to depict somebody's actual body conditions rather than standard iconic bodies.

And I can't believe if such person could become a high priest (as he's first to the altar) when the Egyptian ones were shaving heads and painting faces, and the Bible depicts their selection like for a spacemen team, so hard constraints were applied to their health state and well-looking.

Probably the artist was either trying to say something or show at something, or there were more details on the picture.
Say, the arm, the thigh, and the wand are parallel, so maybe it's some visual axis pointing at something.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

And that their jaws and antennas are actually legs, and that every pair of their legs is in some sense an individual personality.

On the other hand, it's weird:
to chew with gills (the origin of jaws),
to warm the skin with sensory fibers,
to wear another animal's skin to warm yourself with its sensory fibers,
to feed the cubs with suint from two or more bunches of sweat glands on the chest,
to realize that that cub has four raws of teeth under skin, from right under the eyes to exactly the edge of chin (so, actually the face fully tiled with teeth below the eyes),
to have the eyes turned inside out,
to see with the back of the head,
to permanently produce powerful necrotoxin and use it to destroy the food in the stomach,
to keep that stomach not dissolved in turn just by producing the inhibitory slime,
to internally produce 40 kg of monopropellant (ATP) out of any edible organics, i.e. produce one-half of the body mass as the monopropellant daily, having total tank capacity 0.25 kg,
to have a tentacle growing from the throat,
to use that tentacle not just to push the food but also to make sounds,
to communicate with digestive and respiratory systems (instead of just clicking with limbs),
to realize that since you start communicating with key clicking/tapping, you actually communicate like the insects, i.e. by clicking with limbs.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...