Science facts that amaze you?

take everything

The universe can be finite and boundless.
Also, non-simultaneity blows my mind.

Maximus Alexander

take everything wrote: »

The universe can be finite and boundless.

Like the surface of a football?

steddyeddy

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

We no longer rely on micro organisms. The Harber process consumes about 1% of global energy. But it fixes as much nitrogen as nature.

The temperature is more about reaction time than anything else. If time wasn't an issue you could use lower temperatures. If you had the engineering you could use use higher pressures, but compressing gas takes energy.

This is at high temperature but low pressure.
Electrolytic Ammonia Synthesis Directly from Various
Hydrogen Sources under Atmospheric Pressure Early days yet, current and voltage efficiency are very low compared to the what's predicted. So lots of work needed to be done on this.

Hey Cap I should have explained that better. I mean we rely on microorganisms to fix ammonia because we lack the enzyme nitrogenase ourselves. I was talking about ammonia in relation to its incorporation into amino acids in life and not the industrial applications of ammonia. I discussed the Harber process to describe how trick the reaction is to catalyse.

The Diabolical Monocle

strobe wrote: »

The Mallard duck is the only animal ever to have been observed engaging in homosexual necrophiliac rape.

that study was conducted by quacks.

That the sun is 400 times as big as the moon, and 400 times as far away so they look the same size.

The Diabolical Monocle

Wossack wrote: »

might be wolves (all canines? I dunno). The end of their pecker swells up after penetration, and the lady wolf clamps down, so the fella cant run off half way

good ole youtube..!

beeb blocking ur video in Ireland.

so...available here.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=835_1323742504

(when will these geo-blocky folks ever learn)

Dont call me Shirley

Audi drivers have 40 different words for 'superior'.

An almost perfect negative correlation exists between the frequency at which an individual posts on facebook and their likelihood of achieving anything meaningful in life.

75% of Americans make up three quarters of the population.

ScumLord

Deleted User wrote: »

That the sun is 400 times as big as the moon, and 400 times as far away so they look the same size.

I like that one too. Especially when you combine it with the fact the moon is slowly moving away from earth, it's been much closer in the past and will be further away in the future so it just so happens that humans, the only animal that can appreciate the spectacle of an eclipse, is around to see it at it's best.

_Tombstone_

Marie Curie’s Research Papers Are Still Radioactive 100+ Years Later

Dave0301

_Tombstone_ wrote: »

Marie Curie’s Research Papers Are Still Radioactive 100+ Years Later

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRL7o2kPqw0

So is the chair at her old desk!

_Tombstone_

Great vid that!

Dave0301

_Tombstone_ wrote: »

Great vid that!

Their channel on YouTube is well worth following, they have some great stuff on it. I teach Physics, comes in very handy!

Cienciano

Wasn't expecting that at the end! Great video

Maths always amazes me and messes with my mind. One of my favorites comes from my love of parties. And someone demonstrated to me mathematically that to have a 50:50 chance that two people at any one of my house parties might share a birthday (date not year) all I would need is 23 random people.

I now understand the maths of this but it STILL messes with my head even when I understand it. There is 365-6 days in a year. But it is 50:50 that someone shares a birthday with someone else in my house party if I only have 23 people there.

_Tombstone_

The first Atomic Bomb blew 70 years ago....yesterday.

HamsterFace

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Maths always amazes me and messes with my mind. One of my favorites comes from my love of parties. And someone demonstrated to me mathematically that to have a 50:50 chance that two people at any one of my house parties might share a birthday (date not year) all I would need is 23 random people.

I now understand the maths of this but it STILL messes with my head even when I understand it. There is 365-6 days in a year. But it is 50:50 that someone shares a birthday with someone else in my house party if I only have 23 people there.

I remember reading the maths behind it but it still makes no sense!

NachoBusiness

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aaddWJtRoQ

Samaris

Oh, I love this thread! The world is full of such amazing things.

Most of the planets have natural moons that formed around them out of agglomerating material. The spin around them in the same direction as the planets spin around the Sun. But Neptune is a strange exception, with one large alien satellite that did not form in the same way. It's theorised that it was sucked into Neptune's gravitational field and smashed into its own natural moons, destroying them as it spun retrograde around it.

Billy86

With all this searching for life in Mars in recent years, it's strange that it is rarely ever mentioned that WE might actually be from Mars ourselves!

steddyeddy

Billy86 wrote: »

With all this searching for life in Mars in recent years, it's strange that it is rarely ever mentioned that WE might actually be from Mars ourselves!

Well there's a few theories about that alright. By that I mean the origin of complex molecules like deoxyribonucliec acid and amino acids which form proteins. Scientists (some of them) think RNA preceded DNA which would be strange because the mantra of biology is DNA gets read by an enzyme called RNA polymerase generating the messenger molecule RNA, this goes into a molecular machine called the ribosome which translates the DNA code into an amino acid code. I.E a sequence of amino acids. Amino acids are a small molecule that can bind to each other via a strong chemical bond called the peptide bond. Each amino acid (over 20 known) has a the same basic structure nitrogen-carbon and oxygen but each one has their own different side chain.

Each side chain has different properties so if you link a chain of these amino acids you make a unique protein each time.

FISMA.

You can easily hold 10^23 particles in your hand. Even a penny has on the order of 10^23 protons, neutrons, and electrons.

However, there aren't 10^100 particles in the [observable] Universe!

steddyeddy

FISMA. wrote: »

You can easily hold 10^23 particles in your hand. Even a penny has on the order of 10^23 protons, neutrons, and electrons.

However, there aren't 10^100 particles in the [observable] Universe!

Are you talking about Advogadro's number which is equal to 6.23 x 10^23 particles in a mole?

Kazooie

Cats are the biggest pr*cks in the animal kingdom according to recent studies.

steddyeddy

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

There's no such thing as science, it's just a collection of experimental results and hypotheses conducted over a long period of time and a wide geographical area. Your mind just perceives it as one large, thematically related body of work.

The body of work shouldn't be referred to as science IMHO. The process by which this body of work is built is called science.

GLaDOS

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well there's a few theories about that alright. By that I mean the origin of complex molecules like deoxyribonucliec acid and amino acids which form proteins. Scientists (some of them) think RNA preceded DNA which would be strange because the mantra of biology is DNA gets read by an enzyme called RNA polymerase generating the messenger molecule RNA, this goes into a molecular machine called the ribosome which translates the DNA code into an amino acid code. I.E a sequence of amino acids. Amino acids are a small molecule that can bind to each other via a strong chemical bond called the peptide bond. Each amino acid (over 20 known) has a the same basic structure nitrogen-carbon and oxygen but each one has their own different side chain.

Each side chain has different properties so if you link a chain of these amino acids you make a unique protein each time.

What I find difficult to imagine about RNA preceding DNA, is RNA is so bloody fragile.It's hard to imagine it surviving for long by itself. DNA is very robust in contrast.

I know fúck all about abiogenesis in fairness though.

steddyeddy

ScienceNerd wrote: »

What I find difficult to imagine about RNA preceding DNA, is RNA is so bloody fragile.It's hard to imagine it surviving for long by itself. DNA is very robust in contrast.

I know fúck all about abiogenesis in fairness though.

Yes that's the beauty of RNA. It's meant to be fragile. You don't want the message getting read over and over again.

The_Captain

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well there's a few theories about that alright. By that I mean the origin of complex molecules like deoxyribonucliec acid and amino acids which form proteins. Scientists (some of them) think RNA preceded DNA which would be strange because the mantra of biology is DNA gets read by an enzyme called RNA polymerase generating the messenger molecule RNA, this goes into a molecular machine called the ribosome which translates the DNA code into an amino acid code. I.E a sequence of amino acids. Amino acids are a small molecule that can bind to each other via a strong chemical bond called the peptide bond. Each amino acid (over 20 known) has a the same basic structure nitrogen-carbon and oxygen but each one has their own different side chain.

Each side chain has different properties so if you link a chain of these amino acids you make a unique protein each time.

It's one of those things where there's no proof of it, but by induction and a knowledge of how evolution and hereditary genetics works, it's pretty much accepted that RNA came first.

It's unlikely that an incredibly complex double stranded nucleotide chain developed first and simplere single stranded RNA came later.
RNA contains genetic material, but it can also catalyse proteins, so it could have existed independently of DNA, replicating itself constantly and mutating itself rapidly due to the weakness/fragility of its bonds, with new strands and mutations developing all the time because of the amount of breaking down and rebuilding going on.

Although it gets quite hypothetical, it's assumed that RNA chains acted as a form of proto-life, with the same ecological drivers we have. They would have competed with other RNA strands to grow and replicate themselves, becoming more and more complex as time went on.

RNA chains would then (randomly) synthesise proteins that would improve their fitness compared to other RNA strands, and it's thought that these ribozymes eventually developed into DNA.

(Alternatively, RNA may have developed into DNA before forming the first cells/proto-cells. There's arguments to support it and no one is quite sure how RNA 'upgraded' itself into DNA within the constraints of natural evolution.)




There's quite a long tangent here if people are interested in the theory behind science. All science is based on a combination of deductive and inductive reasoning.
If you place your hand on a hot hob and burn it, deduction is working out that the hob burned your hand, while induction is working out that you will burn your hand if you touch hot oven hobs.

Induction essentially is using past experiences, or known outcomes, to make predictions about the future (although with RNA/DNA here we're using present day observances to make predictions about events billions of years in the past, but I'm sure you get what I mean).
We know the hob is hot, you know people have burned their hands on ovens in the past, but we're assuming we'll burn our hand if we put it on that hob based on past experience.

Bertrand Russell wrote about the problem of induction and how our faith in science may be misplaced.
He took a chicken as an example. The chicken is on a farm, with walls around it to keep predators out, the farmer feeds it, houses it, keeps it free from environmental hazards and anything that might cause that chicken harm. This little chicken scientist here might come up with a hypothesis "the farmer is a benevolent protector" and would test it. She'll try to put himself in harms way, but the farmer will keep her safe. She could intentionally break her own wing, but the farmer with fix him up. She could try to let predators in, and the farmer will shoot them before they can hurt the chicken.
Logically, the farmer is a great guy, doing everything he can to improve that chickens life. The chicken scientist could run trial after trial until he develops The Theory of Man: "Farmers protect chickens". All the observable evidence supports it, and it could go on like that for a year, with the chicken becoming more and more definite in it's beliefs as time goes on, it's had 365 days of evidence supporting its view and there's never been a shred of evidence that the farmer intends any harm towards that chicken.
On the 366th day, the farmer wrings it's neck and cooks it.

We may be in no better a position than the chicken which unexpectedly has its neck wrung.

With regards to abiogenesis, we're basing our hypotheses on the behaviour of present day RNA and DNA, and extrapolating that behaviour into what we think are the most likely conditions of Earth 4 billion years ago. There's a chance that there may have been an RNA precursor. RNA only exists today because it still has uses and advantages over DNA. If it didn't, it would have been completely replaced by DNA and we'd never know RNA existed.
There could have been all manner of proteins, pre-proteins and simple nucleic compounds in the early days of life but if they don't exist today, we'll never know about them

Muahahaha

As someone from a non-science background I'm loving this thread, theres some astoinishing information in it.

But then just to take the edge off the seriousness we have Barely There piping up every now and again with jems like this

Barely There wrote: »

Researchers at the University of Stockholm recently conducted a series of tests which established that platonic friendship was possible between men and women, but only if the woman was really ugly.

Barely There wrote: »

If you put a small dog and a pigeon into an airtight room and leave them for 48 hours, when the room is re-opened the pigeon will have disappeared, but the dog will be able to fly.

Barely There wrote: »

Peel and core an apple, and leave it in a basin of water overnight.

If you take a bite of it the next day, it will still taste exactly like an apple.

Barely There wrote: »

If you take any number and subtract it from itself, the answer will always be '0'.

No matter how large the number you initially chose - try it.

LOL:D

thelad95 wrote: »

There's been a lot of trolls and stupid threads on After Hours in recent times but this thread is fantastic.

Agreed

368100

davemc180 wrote: »

I always thought the sky was blue because of the reflection of the sea...

only seen on discovery its because of the ozone and basically could be any colour of the rainbow except for the angle the light rays hit us...

like a washing up liquid bubble has hints of green purple etc

What's a blue sky?

valoren

Blackholes.

The fact that they're invisible.
You simply can't see the photons of lights because they can't pass the event horizon.

Planet earth could be a blackhole if it's mass was condensed to the size of a peanut. It would weigh the same but it's escape velocity would be just a few inches beyond the speed of light thus defining it as a blackhole.

topper75

Kazooie wrote: »

Cats are the biggest pr*cks in the animal kingdom according to recent studies.

Yes when I was going around the lab with my clipboard I noticed the bastards had destroyed the back of an armchair with their claws.

Well, it was more a living room than a lab but the science was sound and stands up to peer review.

topper75

The Éirosphere reflects back all light frequencies except miserable grey.

volchitsa

368100 wrote: »

What's a blue sky?

It's the color of the sky when you get that big yellow ball appearing in it. If you've never gone abroad on holidays you may not know what I'm talking about though.

ScumLord

valoren wrote: »

Blackholes.

The fact that they're invisible.
You simply can't see the photons of lights because they can't pass the event horizon.

I think black holes have now become some of the brightest things in the galaxy. Well, the black hole itself is black but you can't actually see it past the light that's being created this side of the event horizon. Particles are getting compressed and shot off at incredible speeds causing the area surrounding the around the black hole to be very hot and bright.

So technically a black hole is black, but in reality it's very bright to look at.

Dave0301

ScumLord wrote: »

I think black holes have now become some of the brightest things in the galaxy. Well, the black hole itself is black but you can't actually see it past the light that's being created this side of the event horizon. Particles are getting compressed and shot off at incredible speeds causing the area surrounding the around the black hole to be very hot and bright.

So technically a black hole is black, but in reality it's very bright to look at.

Sounds like you are thinking of quasars. The light given out is due to the accretion of matter by a supermassive black hole.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasar

_Tombstone_

Alien life forms might be living right under our noses, but how can we find them if we don’t know what we’re looking for?

http://aeon.co/magazine/science/does-earth-have-a-shadow-biosphere/

Maximus Alexander

steddyeddy wrote: »

The body of work shouldn't be referred to as science IMHO. The process by which this body of work is built is called science.

Yeah I was being facetious originally because there were so many posts claiming things didn't exist, but this is a good point.

Cheese Wagstaff

Not sure if it's strictly science, but I think this is a cool bit of information nonetheless:

Genghis Khan was so sexually prolific during his reign of terror, that the probability of any single person on the planet being a descendant of him is 0.005.

Jesus Wept

HamsterFace wrote: »

I remember reading the maths behind it but it still makes no sense!

all the dates can possibly match with all the other dates, not great at maths but didn't amaze me. Glad it amazed you.

jungleman

Jet fuel can't melt steel beams.

Captain Chaos

jungleman wrote: »

Jet fuel can't melt steel beams.

Of course it can't otherwise how could it be stored in aircraft fuel tanks.:pac:

ScumLord

jungleman wrote: »

Jet fuel can't melt steel beams.

Not many things can melt steel. But there are plenty of things that can weaken it to the point is easily manipulated. Just like a metal forge doesn't melt steel but allows you to turn a useless lump of steel into something more useful.

TheQuietFella

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Black holes

Sheer awesome space terror

I've been there....oh! I see what you mean now!

Cheese Wagstaff

Cheese Wagstaff wrote: »

Not sure if it's strictly science, but I think this is a cool bit of information nonetheless:

Genghis Khan was so sexually prolific during his reign of terror, that the probability of any single person on the planet being a descendant of him is 0.005.

and the chances that he had a few STD's 100%

_Tombstone_

Deleted User wrote: »

and the chances that he had a few STD's 100%

Were they around back then?

jungleman

_Tombstone_ wrote: »

Were they around back then?

I've always wondered when/how they started actually. Who was the first person to get crabs or chlamydia? How??

_Tombstone_

_Tombstone_ wrote: »

Were they around back then?

viruses & bacteria go all the way back to the beginning of evolution.

_Tombstone_

jungleman wrote: »

I've always wondered when/how they started actually. Who was the first person to get crabs or chlamydia? How??

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/origin-of-sexually-transmitted-diseases.325770/

Sounds good.


78 Little Known Facts About . . .
STIs/STDs

Historians believe syphilis originated in the New World among the Native Americans in the Caribbean, and that Christopher Columbus may have been responsible for spreading syphilis to Europe.a

During the first outbreak of syphilis in Europe, in the late fifteenth century, nearly 10 million Europeans died.a

Gonorrhea got its name in the year A.D. 131 from Galen, one of the greatest Greek physicians. Its name literally means “flow of seed” because Galen mistakenly thought the penile discharge was “seed” flowing out against its will.i

GLaDOS

Every single organism, right down to bacteria, has a virus that infects it.

Whether viruses are truly organisms themselves is a matter of debate.

ScumLord

ScienceNerd wrote: »

Every single organism, right down to bacteria, has a virus that infects it.

Whether viruses are truly organisms themselves is a matter of debate.

I'm deeply offended on behalf of virus life, typical of you multicell organisms to think other types of life don't count just because we don't spew feces out into the universe.