Cold Feb 8, 2007
I like warm weather, so I'd like to move south one day.  But I'm sometimes scared that if I moved south, I'd lose the enjoyment of watching the seasons change.  This is about the 10th day in a row (it could be the 1st, 100th, or 1000th; it makes no difference) of single-digit temperatures in northwest Jersey, and I need to record my thoughts on cold weather so I won't forget them later.  Here are the top 10 reasons why I hate cold weather: 
  1. Having to warm up my car in the morning instead of spending the first 10 minutes of my commute in cold pain.
  2. The sound my car makes when it tries to start at 7°F.  "Ehhhhhnn ga chuuuunk"
  3. Not being able to drive with the windows down.
  4. Getting shocked every time I close my car door.
  5. Warm house » cold driveway » warm car » cold parking lot » warm office » cold something else.
  6. High heating/electric bills.
  7. Worrying about sealing windows and doors to keep cold air out.
  8. Having to keep all the doors closed to conserve heat.
  9. Taking a hot shower in an ice cold bathroom.
  10. Feeling my snots freeze when I breathe through my nose.
#science
Ray gun Jan 25, 2007
The U.S. military has a new weapon:  An "active denial system" that "shoots a beam that makes people feel as if they are about to catch fire."  That makes me smile.  This "ray gun" uses a form of microwave radiation called electromagnetic millimeter waves that are capable of penetrating a very thin layer of human skin.  The penetration heats the skin up to about 130°F, making it extremely uncomfortable but completely non-lethal and non-injurious.  God bless America.  (via Mental Floss) #science
Brainwave entrainment Jan 22, 2007
Brainwave entrainment, or brainwave synchronization, is a method of applying a periodic aural or visual stimulus in order to convince one's brainwaves to operate at a desired frequency.  This can be especially useful for tricking your brain into waking up or sleeping.  Anabubula has an example sound file that's meant to be a "coffee replacement" for waking up in the morning.  Somewhere around minute 17 or 18, my heart almost popped out of my chest. #science
Electric heat (1) Jan 10, 2007
My house is heated by electricity.  More specifically, it's heated with electric baseboard heaters.  Think of a toaster.  That's essentially how it works.  A heating element gets some electricity pumped into it.  This creates heat, which is dissipated through a series of metal fins.  Natural convection (as opposed to forced air [e.g. fan, blower]) moves warm air around the room, making it warm enough to live in. 

When we were looking at buying our house, this was a major downside.  Electric heat is known to be pretty expensive, so it was obviously frowned upon.  But we went with it anyway because we didn't have many other options.  On the plus side, there's no chance of an oil tank leak (like a house we almost bought), and there are no bills for gas or oil, just electricity. 

After living in the house for a year and a half, I'm convinced electric heat is the best way to economically heat a multi-room house.  Here's my reasoning: 
  1. Cost.  Because of various wars, natural disasters, and stupid dictatorships, oil and gas are just as expensive as electricity.
  2. Simplicity.  We only pay an electric bill.  It gets larger in the winter and smaller in the summer, but it's a single bill, making life a little simpler.
  3. Control.  Every room has its own heater and thermostat, meaning that the rooms we don't use are never heated, and the rooms we do use are heated to the exact temperature we want.
  4. Efficiency.  When we only want heat in a specific room (such as our bedroom at night), there's no need for an oil or gas burner to turn on.
#science
Self-decapitation Nov 2, 2006
Somebody asked MetaFilter (via Cynical-C): 
Do you think a super strong person could yank off his own head?

Like one of those strong-man competition guys (the ones who lift those big boulders and carry around telephone poles), or some other freakishly [strong] person, could one of them actually kill himself by ripping off his own head? Or would other physiological factors make this feat impossible?
I personally don't think it would be possible for a few reasons: 
1.  Leverage.  It would be nearly impossible to get enough leverage to yank your own head off with your own arms.  You'd basically be using your triceps and a few other arm and back muscles, and no angle would make it any easier.  If you were flexible enough to use your legs, I highly doubt it would be possible to get a tight enough grip.  It would be much easier with a pulley system or other mechanical device, but that's totally different. 

2.  Tension.  As you exert effort into performing an action, you tense up.  Try it.  The harder you pull on your own head, the tighter your own body keeps it in place. 

3.  Pain.  If you made any progress in removing your head, you'd most likely be forced to stop once you caused any amount of significant damage, such as pulled ligaments or even broken bones.  The pain you'd be in and the emotional shock you'd be experiencing would essentially disable all other body mechanics. 
#science
Age of the universe Oct 23, 2006
According to the Ussher-Lightfoot Calendar, the universe was created on October 23, 4004 BC, making today its 6009th birthday (via Kottke).  Most scientists and logical people treat this as utter stupidity because microwave measurement and other methods of dating have determined the age of the universe to be 13.7 billion years.  I'm not convinced of either estimate.  I don't like to blindly trust science just because scientists appear smarter than me.  But I also don't like to blindly trust man's interpretation of the Bible, especially when it has anything to do with time (as evidenced by the myriad of incorrect end-of-the-world predictions).  I think the universe was created on April 18, 1982, which also happens to be the date of my birth. #science
Rocket science vs. brain surgery Sep 25, 2006
This Yahoo News article talks about the controversy between rocket scientists and brain surgeons concerning which group is smarter. 
Rocket scientists, long considered the gold standard in intelligence among all professionals, are not nearly as smart as originally thought, according to a controversial new study published today by the American Association of Brain Surgeons.

The study, which appears in the organization's monthly publication, Popular Brain Surgery, is entitled "The Intelligence of Rocket Scientists: Myth Versus Reality," and suggests that rocket scientists' reputation for smartness is largely undeserved.

The article drew an immediate rebuke from a spokesperson for the American Society of Rocket Scientists, who blasted the study as "state-of-the-art pro-brain surgeon propaganda."
Yes, this is a joke.  (via Digg) #science
Cigarettes out the window (5) Jul 19, 2006
Every time I see someone flick a cigarette out their car window, I want to get out of my car, pick up the cigarette butt, and shove it down that person's throat.  I think that's a reasonable response.  If the smoker's rationale is that "cigarette butts are too small to do anything bad to the environment", then I'd like to suggest that cigarette butts are also too small to do anything bad to your gastrointestinal tract.  Once again, a reasonable response in my opinion. 

But honestly, what's the deal?  I've heard that smokers don't like to put the butts in the ashtray because it makes their car smell.  I got news for ya:  You smell.  Your hair, your clothes, your breath.  Everything.  It stinks.  And everyone knows you smoke.  Isn't it enough that you're destroying the environment by spewing out your noxious fumes?  Do you need to litter too?  Would it make you mad if I threw some trash in your bedroom?  Would you be angry if threw burning matches in your front lawn? 

I guess I just don't understand the problem.  I drive a car.  I eat and drink while driving, so I generate garbage.  But I put my garbage in a trash bag.  It's really quite simple.  When I'm done with my candy wrapper, I put it in the trash bag instead of throwing it out the window.  When I'm done drinking my coffee, I put the cup in the trash bag instead of throwing it out the window.  At what point did it become an acceptable practice to throw little pieces of trash out the window?  Where's the logic?  Where's the disconnect?  What the heck is wrong with these people? #science
Plane on a conveyor belt (41) Jun 26, 2006
The case of the plane on a conveyor belt has been extensively discussed in the online world, and still doesn't have a definite conclusion.  Or rather, there are two opposing sides which believe wholeheartedly in their explanation, and these sides will never agree.  The question is this: 
A plane is standing on a runway that can move (some sort of band conveyer). The plane moves in one direction, while the conveyer moves in the opposite direction. This conveyer has a control system that tracks the plane speed and tunes the speed of the conveyer to be exactly the same (but in the opposite direction). Can the plane take off?
I've read a thousand people's opinions about this and heard every comparison ranging from a skateboard on a treadmill to a weightless car on a sheet of paper.  Taking into account some major assumptions (a plane on a conveyor belt is actually plausible; frictionless wheels, bearings, conveyor belt; no wind; ideal/instantaneous control system), my take on it is this:  The plane won't take off [Edit:  I changed my mind].  Here's my reasoning: 

1.  In order for a plane to take off, it needs to have air passing over its wings at a certain speed.  This air can come from the plane moving down the runway, or it can come from wind.  Theoretically, a plane can take off while sitting completely still, as long as there is a significant amount of headwind.  However, since there's no wind in this example, the plane must be moving forward at a considerable velocity. 

2.  A plane's wheels are "dumb".  In other words, they're only there to reduce friction.  A plane could just as easily have no wheels and just rest on its belly on the runway.  It could still take off because its motion is produced by thrust from its engines or the movement of air from its propellers.  The wheels will spin when the plane is in motion and in contact with a surface. 

3.  As many people have pointed out, the question's wording can be confusing. 
a.  If "plane speed" means "angular velocity of the wheels with respect to a stationary/ground observer", the conveyor belt would spin at an infinitely increasing rate, which is logically impossible.  For example, if the wheels started to spin at 100 rpm, the conveyor would ramp up and spin at 100 rpm.  But this would cause the wheels to actually be spinning at 200 rpm from the point of view of a stationary observer because the ground is no longer stationary but is moving at 100 rpm in the opposite direction.  This would force the conveyor belt to spin at 200 rpm, 400 rpm, 800 rpm, etc., ad infinitum. 

b.  If "plane speed" means "angular velocity of the wheels with respect to the conveyor belt", the velocity of the conveyor belt would always equal the velocity of the wheels, no matter what.  This means that the plane wouldn't move, no matter what.  If the wheels started to spin at 100 rpm, the conveyor would ramp up and spin at 100 rpm.  From the point of view of the conveyor belt, the wheels would still be spinning at 100 rpm even though they're actually spinning at 200 rpm from the point of view of a stationary observer.  No matter what speed the wheels spun, the conveyor would always be spinning at the same speed as the wheels.  This would prevent any forward motion of the plane. 

c.  If "plane speed" means "linear/horizontal velocity of the plane with respect to a stationary/ground observer", the plane speed would always be zero because the conveyor belt would always cancel out any forward motion of the plane.  For example, if the plane started moving at 100 mph to the right (with motion derived from thrust), the conveyor belt would immediately begin moving at 100 mph to the left.  Although the wheels would be spinning at an incredibly high rate (the wheel diameter doesn't equal the conveyor belt diameter, so the conveyor belt speed of 100 mph would translate to a wheel speed of something like 100,000 rpm [total guess, but the concept is there]), the plane would not change position from the point of view of a stationary observer.  If it started at point A, it would stay at point A.  This is the same result as part b. 

d.  If "plane speed" means "linear/horizontal velocity of the plane with respect to the conveyor belt", it's the same as part a.  The conveyor belt would spin at an infinitely increasing rate. 
So in conclusion, the plane wouldn't take off because it wouldn't move from its original location. 

Part of the reason this whole thing gets me so riled up is the attitude of the people who think they're right.  Cecil Adams said, "Everything clear now?  Maybe not.  But believe this:  The plane takes off."  Thanks for your mediocre and confusing explanation, followed by an unqualified, unproven conclusion.  Michael Buffington said, "Jason's Case of the Plane and Conveyor Belt riddle is confusing very smart people, so I thought I might explain it."  Thanks, Michael.  Obviously you know everything and everybody else knows nothing.  Without you, we'd be nowhere. 

This is my explanation.  I put a lot of thought into it, and I even lost some sleep over it last night.  I sort of think I'm right, but I'd be willing to be proven wrong if somebody has a good explanation.  I'd also love to see this on MythBusters. #science
Garbage water Jun 13, 2006
Garbage water is that mysterious liquid found in the bottom of garbage bags that leaks onto the floor when you take the bag out of the can.  Where does this stuff come from?  I don't throw out entire containers of liquid!  I don't dump out cups of coffee into the trashcan!  So how does it get there?  The explanation to this mystery continues to elude scientists and researchers around the globe. 

One time when I was about 11, I was riding my bike along the side of a road (not on the sidewalk because there was none).  As a garbage truck drove past me, I felt a drop of liquid hit my face.  Then all my skin melted off and spawned new little Daves, like the movie Gremlins.  Actually, it wasn't that big of a deal except that it was really gross.  I haven't ridden a bike or touched the side of a road since. 

I used to work at a McDonald's, where garbage water was king.  I used to have to take the big bags of garbage out to the dumpster.  Those bags had so much disgusting garbage water in them, they left a 50-foot trail of mystery liquid all the way from the can to the dumpster.  Disgusting. 

So the next time you think about throwing your drink in the garbage, think of that poor jerk who has to clean up after you.  You're ruining his day, his weekend, and his entire life.  Say no to garbage water! #science