I bet you didnt know that

Just learned today that the Mona Lisa receives so many love letters that it has it's own mail box at the Louvre.

And that because of the difference in the speed of sound and the speed of electomagnetic waves - it is possible to hear Big Ben chime on the radio before you hear it standing at the base of the tower.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Can you imagine sending a love letter to a painting.

Poor lonely people.

begbysback

On a windows operating system it is impossible to put the recycle bin into the recycle bin

Capt'n Midnight

begbysback wrote: »

On a windows operating system it is impossible to put the recycle bin into the recycle bin

It's not impossible just tricky
C:\$Recycle.Bin

On early version of Windows 95 you could even delete the Start Button from the Taskbar.

Senna

Senna

In the US there was a murder trial in 2011, the defendent Casey Anthony was found not guilty. After the trial her lawyer told media that the prosecution searched her PC history for anything relevant but they only searched her internet Explorer history, she used Firefox and they had missed all that history, if that had of been found before the trial, she would have been found guilty.

So a killer got away with it because the computer forensic team didn't know what Firefox was and this was 2011.

cantdecide

Lindsey Buckingham (the dude singing) does both the male and female 'grunts' in Big Love.

Go on and press play, shur it's been ages since yis heard it and it's good as ever :cool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF6xU70O73c

FanadMan

cantdecide wrote: »

Lindsey Buckingham (the dude singing) does both the male and female 'grunts' in Big Love.

Go on and press play, shur it's been ages since yis heard it and it's good as ever :cool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF6xU70O73c

Never knew that. But with a girly name like Lindsey, sure he'd be able to hit those high "urghs" easily enough

Really want one of his Turner Model One guitars - beautiful pieces of work!

sbsquarepants

New Home wrote: »

In a 1993 episode of Seinfeld, Elaine was dating a guy who shared a named with serial killer Joel Rifkin. She suggested to him that he change his name to O.J. like the football player. The following year O.J. was charged with double murder.

OJ was once considered for Arnies role in the original terminator film, but producers rejected him because they thought with him being the loveable cuddly superstar that he was, nobody would take him seriously as a relentless killer!

Captain_Crash

sbsquarepants wrote: »

OJ was once considered for Arnies role in the original terminator film, but producers rejected him because they thought with him being the loveable cuddly superstar that he was, nobody would take him seriously as a relentless killer!

On the topic of OJ, in the recent series American Crime Story, Evan Handler, who plays attorney Alan M. Dershowitz in season one has a real life connection to the O.J. Simpson case.

Shortly before the murders, Handler landed a role in the pilot for a project entitled Frogmen. The star of the show was to be O.J. Simpson. Frogmen itself became a footnote in the trial, as for the proposed series, Simpson was to play the leader of a group of former special forces operatives turned mercenaries, and it was rumored that in preparation for the role he had received special training in the use of knives.

New Home

Still on the topic of O.J. Simpson, I've always wondered whether the naming of Homer J. Simpson was a coincidence or whether it was done on purpose.

Shpudnik

OJ has a parole hearing today.

Earlier today someone texted me the question "Is hell endothermic or exothermic?"

A question no one can answer you'd think, but a quick google shows an urban myth circulating for decades about a question on a chemistry paper, that uses passages from the bible to plot out the physical temperature of both Heaven and Hell - with Heaven coming out as toastier than Hell:

Isaiah 30:26 reads:

Moreover, the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold as the light of seven days.

Thus, heaven receives from the moon as much radiation as the earth does from the sun, and in addition seven times seven (forty nine) times as much as the earth does from the sun, or fifty times in all. The light we receive from the moon is one ten-thousandth of the light we receive from the sun, so we can ignore that. With these data we can compute the temperature of heaven: The radiation falling on heaven will heat it to the point where the heat lost by radiation is just equal to the heat received by radiation. In other words, heaven loses fifty times as much heat as the earth by radiation. Using the Stefan-Boltzmann fourth power law for radiation:

(H/E)4 = 50where E is the absolute temperature of the earth, 300°K (273+27). This gives H the absolute temperature of heaven, as 798° absolute (525°C).

The exact temperature of hell cannot be computed but it must be less than 444.6°C, the temperature at which brimstone or sulfur changes from a liquid to a gas. Revelations 21:8: But the fearful and unbelieving … shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone.” A lake of molten brimstone [sulfur] means that its temperature must be at or below the boiling point, which is 444.6°C. (Above that point, it would be a vapor, not a lake.)

We have then, temperature of heaven, 525°C. Temperature of hell, less than 445°C.

So according to the bible, it's hotter than hell in heaven.

Shortly after the above was published a tongue in cheek refutation was offered but since Hell is likely to be where the most interesting people are, I like to think it's the coolest too.

Big Nasty

Shpudnik wrote: »

OJ has a parole hearing today.

OJ is 70! :eek:

Being released in October too.

jimmycrackcorm

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

When I first moved to America I was living in a town that recently had roundabouts put in, and I can confirm they don't know how to use them. Many people treat them like a four way stop, and nobody knows how to indicate on them. In Texas now and there's none of them, but they would really benefit, the traffic build up at lights is chronic at busy times.

Studies have shown that converting a signalized intersection to a roundabout reduces severe crashes by 78 percent and overall crashes by 48 percent.

New Home

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Studies have shown that converting a signalized intersection to a roundabout reduces severe crashes by 78 percent and overall crashes by 48 percent.

...as long as people follow the rules of the road.

sunny2004

New Home wrote: »

...as long as people follow the rules of the road.

if they followed the rules of the road the CRASH rate would be 0% ?

Capt'n Midnight

Candie wrote: »

Earlier today someone texted me the question "Is hell endothermic or exothermic?"

Obligatory "welcome to Hell" from Cyanide & Happiness
http://explosm.net/comics/3891/





BTW:
Neither word describes temperature.

We can't either because our skin can't determine temperature . All we feel is rate of heat taken in or given out.

A reaction that takes in heat is endothermic and feels cold. Like Freeze spray or dissolving Ammonium Nitrate in water.

Exothermic is what happens when said solution of Ammonium Nitrate (and another ingredient) detonates.

Capt'n Midnight

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Studies have shown that converting a signalized intersection to a roundabout reduces severe crashes by 78 percent and overall crashes by 48 percent.

I've heard many different descriptions of insurance on a certain roundabout in France. From the "you aren't covered" to the most recent one of "50:50" where insurance companies don't bother and just split the blame and losses 50:50

it is of course the roundabout at the Arc De Triomphe In Paris
12 roads and no road markings.

New Home

sunny2004 wrote: »

if they followed the rules of the road the CRASH rate would be 0% ?

Not necessarily, accidents do happen for other reasons, too, but if we take into account the amount of people that don't indicate/don't indicate correctly, don't give right of way when it's due, overtake approaching roundabouts, use their mobile phone, generally drive like lunatic road hogs, etc, you can see how that crash rate could be much different in real life.

CalamariFritti

But wouldn't you think they used actual real life tests and not some formulas or something?

Grayson

Candie wrote: »

Earlier today someone texted me the question "Is hell endothermic or exothermic?"

A question no one can answer you'd think, but a quick google shows an urban myth circulating for decades about a question on a chemistry paper, that uses passages from the bible to plot out the physical temperature of both Heaven and Hell - with Heaven coming out as toastier than Hell:



So according to the bible, it's hotter than hell in heaven.

Shortly after the above was published a tongue in cheek refutation was offered but since Hell is likely to be where the most interesting people are, I like to think it's the coolest too.

This is the version I heard

The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington engineering mid term. The answer was so profound that the Professor shared it with colleagues, which is why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.

Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or Endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law, (gas cools off when it expands and heats up when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following:

"First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate that souls are moving into Hell and the rate they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially.

Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand as souls are added. This gives two possibilities:

If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.
Of course, if Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.
So which is it? If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa Banyan during my Freshman year, "...that it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you." and take into account the fact that I still have not succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then, #2 cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and will not freeze."

This student received the only A.

https://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/susan/joke/exoendo.htm

Ipso

Thank god I don't receive those kind of emails any more. if the main body of the email weren't bad enough, the final sentences usually screwed the pooch.

New Home

CalamariFritti wrote: »

But wouldn't you think they used actual real life tests and not some formulas or something?

The way I see it (and I'm not saying I'm necessarily right), if they are tests they're not real life anyway; even if they tested a specific roundabout for a specific length of time and they compared the results to the number of crashes in the same area before the roundabout was put in, at the time a normal junction was still there, I'd say the results wouldn't be too reliable either, as the amount of traffic, the number of cars, the type of cars and drivers, and probably even more factors wouldn't be the same, so it'd be like comparing apple and oranges. The results would probably be more reliable if they had indeed used formulas to calculate those figures, but then again I'd be interested in seeing the differences from country to country - e.g. Russia and Switzerland, for instance.

Capt'n Midnight

CalamariFritti wrote: »

But wouldn't you think they used actual real life tests and not some formulas or something?

This is how you work out the load limit on a bridge. - Calvin and Hobbes.

http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1986/11/26

Realt Dearg Sec

Ipso wrote: »

Thank god I don't receive those kind of emails any more. if the main body of the email weren't bad enough, the final sentences usually screwed the pooch.

That pooch's name?

Albert Einstein.

jimmycrackcorm

New Home wrote: »

...as long as people follow the rules of the road.

Becuase nobody drives through red lights.... ever....

Those studies actually show the reduction being achieved due to the nature of driving at angles on a roundabout which produces glancing or near miss collisions as well as slower approaches. This design actually compensates somewhat for people who don't follow the rules of the road - hence the significance of the statistics regardless.

Dramatik

A child's s got more bones than a grown-ups got

stimpson

Dramatik wrote: »

A child's s got more bones than a grown-ups got

We all know that because of:

a) the milk ad from the 80's
and
b) this post from 3 weeks ago

Dramatik

stimpson wrote: »

We all know that because of:

a) the milk ad from the 80's
and
b) this post from 3 weeks ago

I'll go get my coat so...