1

Technology / Re: Why are Some Fridges Hard To Open Again Once Just Closed?

« on: 05/03/2019 08:41:59 »

Im gonna go for condensation of water

Warm air condensate in the fridge creating a vacuum, drill a hole through the door.

 It  is more likely though it is on the on the seal and frame as it would probably take longer for air to fill the void. It could just be a slow release suction on the seal or it could be a bit of condensation too. Water condenses from warm air onto cold surface when the door is opened. Upon closing of the door the seal is formed. The water continues to condensate out around the seal creating a vacuum  until it works air around it to compensate.

I believe manufacturers already have thought of the condensing water air trick for the box, i think there is a pressure release tube, yours may be blocked .

2

General Science / Re: Our brains are anatomically the same, so why do our personalities differ?

« on: 06/02/2019 11:02:24 »

We do not differ very much at all, but this is not governed by brain similarities. If you think about pain laughter fear sex emotional hurt happiness they all rule us. We are very very similar. If you look microscopically for the differences you will find them, but that is because you are looking for them.Its wrong  to think that your brain makes your personality, if someone is born in a war zone they develop an outlook and a personality as such, conversely if they are born into the monied side of the world the personality is one that fits that. But on the grand scheme of things the human psyche is most very very similar and governed by biological alterations, such as testosterone in agression, men have more risk taking confrontational personalities that is wholly governed by a hormone !

3

Just Chat! / Re: Was it really necessary to drop an atomic bomb on Japan, twice?

« on: 11/11/2018 00:41:12 »

The argument was japan would never surrender, The allies would not accept this. The argument is that compared with okinawa or the tokyo firestorm  the two atom bombs saved millions of lives compared a conventional military campaign.

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

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

4

New Theories / Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?

« on: 02/03/2018 03:05:19 »

OK, back onto the Tsar Bomb. Earth is already not a perfect sphere, the kinetic energy released by the disruption of the tectonic plates would not take the planet out of it's original?
 I mean the earth orbit the sun where it is because it's center, if you disrupt the outside layers and flow of magma, wouldn't the center be re-centered somewhere else for some time?

Not really alter the orbit because as one load of mass is forced one way an equal and opposit3 mappent the other way, but if you re arrange the mass you alter the gravitational centre. It will alter the length of the day though i think by countering the rotation of the earth some how

5

Just Chat! / Re: APOLOGIES FOR THE RECENT DISRUPTION

« on: 01/03/2018 02:04:55 »

Yep but having to go into the different forums and out again gets a bit tiresome,

That's a nice suggestion about drop-downs, but quite a hefty job to implement; I might put that on my list for a longer-term project...

But, just to flag - and you may know this already - you can see what's new in several ways:

1) Click on "RECENT TOPICS" at the top - or https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?action=recenttopics

2) Use the "POSTS" dropdown option at the top and select either "Unread Replies" for an amalgamated list of all the new replies in threads in which you have participated (indicating which board), or "Unread Posts", which is a list of ALL the new posts made in any board, forum-wide, that you've not reviewed yet.

Hopefully that's helpful.

That is massivley helpfu, maybe im computer useless thats all.

Another suggestion, or hopeful ask maybe

If in a thread lots of people post arguments and quote each other repeatedly  a thread can get a bit diluted and cumbesome see this one i started

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=71332.100

Half the posts and 3/4 of the content is just junk, is there any way to mark posts as inconsequential or irrelevant, perhaps a sub thread that collapses ?

Good work and much apreciation again chris

6

New Theories / Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?

« on: 14/02/2018 23:01:32 »

The detonation of a Tsar Bomb at the Mariana's trench, at the bottom of the pacific ocean would surely move the planet out of its current position...

I'm guessing you watched that video from Ridddle too, huh? It's a load of bunk. Tsar Bomba could do nothing to significantly change Earth's orbit, regardless of how you partition the energy. Keep in mind that the asteroid that left the Chicxulub crater released about two million times more energy than Tsar Bomba yet even that didn't push Earth significantly.

Seems wierd that to me, perhaps a contender for dark 3nergy or dark matter.

Apparently the collision of the primeval earth at an angle with another planetoid did not alter its orbital plane either.

7

New Theories / Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?

« on: 14/02/2018 22:58:38 »

The detonation of a Tsar Bomb at the Mariana's trench, at the bottom of the pacific ocean would surely move the planet out of its current position...

No
We are on a rock flying through space. We can only alter that path if we have something to push against and , since nothing arising from such a detonation would leave the earth, it can't push us.
That's pretty basic physics, formally referred to as the conservation of momentum.

We are not flying through space, there is no air, we do not have wings. The earth could be stationary, and as there is no up down left or right i cannot see how we have motion and cannot see any reason to necessitate flight,  or any means to instigate it, as we have nothing to push against.

8

New Theories / Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?

« on: 14/02/2018 22:44:40 »

"If by mans activity during the hours of daylight (point of the earth facing the sun) applies force to the surface of the earth, whilst by the hours of darkness he is static, would this activity have an effect (however small)  to permanently alter the distance of the earth from the sun"

No.
The laws of momentum conservation make this impossible.
Essentially, nothing on earth can change the earth's orbit, because it would have nothing to push against.

The detonation of a Tsar Bomb at the Mariana's trench, at the bottom of the pacific ocean would surely move the planet out of its current position...
Needless to say, gigantic tsunamis would kill most of humans on the process witch given the facts is not entirely a bad thing...

I would say yes and then it would return to normal, as everything settled back to its position.

If you roled earth up into a cone it would still orbit around the path it is now.

I believe the earthquakes shortened the length of days by a few fractions of q second, maybe a Tzar bomb would do that?

That is if none of the mass escaped into space

9

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is the dark matter problem solved?

« on: 19/01/2018 12:55:43 »

BBC iPlayer only works in the UK. Sorry, it’s due to rights issues.


I couldn't play the video but could read the short article. Dark natter and dark energy are interesting topics. Thanks for the link.

Try bbc world and search "sky at night". It iss not an expensive production, and is educational and informative so there is a strong possibility that it is avaliable. We have rights issues with the bbc here, i cannot watch bbc world service news channel, yet im in the british part of bbc !

That is unless your in china or iran.

10

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is the dark matter problem solved?

« on: 18/01/2018 02:02:05 »

According to the sky at night programme, its at a tipping point of being solved or disproven  in its current wimpy form

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09mj749/the-sky-at-night-the-invisible-universe

11

Just Chat! / Re: The Clitoris Moves

« on: 05/01/2018 12:27:02 »

Forget that it moves, youve found it ? I thought it was like big foot and the lock ness monster.

12

Physiology & Medicine / Re: Does the brain have more than one centre of consciousness?

« on: 13/09/2017 04:31:11 »

... a large enough computer should be able to support many AI, at the same time ... could the brain do the same thing?

Multiple personality disorder ? ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissociative_identity_disorder

That would be personality, not conciousness.

As could the brain support multiple centres, you have to define what you mean by brain and centre of conciousness.

We are self aware sentient beings with free will (well i am anyway, im pretty sure that some people are not, and others are quite aware that they are not concious anyway) . If one self aware entity is defined as a brain, or a brain  is the support structure of a singular self aware entity then no, by definition. 2 conciousness 2 brains. The  brain generates the means for the concious to exist. Brains are not signifiers of conciousness,  insects are little more than robots. I would say the conciousness is a byproduct of a big brain, and only 1 conciousness per brain due to one brain.

Its quite a question and science does not hold the answers to the brain just yet.

If by centre of  conciousness , you mean persona, either adopted or created  by the brain, mood, relationship, time, memory, ego feelings, subconcious, fear or other primal urge , etc then yes, but it would be the same conciousness acting a different way.

All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first, the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse’s arms.
Then the whining schoolboy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress’ eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honor, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon’s mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part.

Problem being if this is true when you subtract all the pieces what is left is something outside mans own perception of himself. And well i5 should as its wholly unnatural. And that i would say is conciousness

As for the computer, a computer is not satisfied (or dissatisfied) it always seeks further,  it is always trying to work out the next move rather than understand the present one. If an ai was self aware it would have mastery of its brain, or the thing that had mastery of it would be the self aware piece  and brain would total the whole ? Would they just be seperate computers? Or they would not be concious ? So if the cociousness is the brain how could 1 brain be 2 ? If the internet is all connected, would an ai have to exist as one piece, or as any piece, could there be only one AI? is the internet god ?

That is of course if you believe you are conscious 

13

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can we use the moon as a launch platform for spacecraft?

« on: 05/09/2017 16:56:04 »

Thread drift alert!

Back in the 70s, I recall reading a prediction that by the end of the century we should be able to see the lights of colonies on the moon, with the naked eye.  I think it may have been in Adrian Berry's "The Next Ten Thousand Years".  I apologise if I wrongly tag him as a false prophet. 

You musnt have your robot butler either then.

To get to the moon you would have to shift all the fuel and equipment there at present and  theres no atmosphere to aid construction of spacecraft  so theres no real benefit. To make the moon worth while a huge construction pod with atmosphere would be needed to allow construction unhindered.

There was much exitement about water being found there allowing for fuel production from a nuke source.

We could launch spacecraft, but to make it worthwhile we would need somewhere to go, and current propulsion is not fast so we have nowhere to go. We could manage mars just.

So basically a white elephant at present.

Why we havnt a base there i do not know, it would be surely cheaper than the space stations that have been built, and we could get a superb telescope built there, larger cheaper and better than hubble and its decendants. It would not be open to space debris collisions.  Maintainence andd upgrades would be easy. You would not even need to land the transit vehicles.

And the other reason for a monbase is james cameron of alien films wanting  to mine asteroids by landing them upon the moon .

Moon bases now !