Expanding ones knowledge [Archive] - Kay Tastrophe's Military School

Ergeheilalt

08-23-2007, 10:37 AM

Everyone know that parabolic dish will reflect energy to a single point in space.

But what about the inside of a spherical dish? It reflects energy in a dispersed pattern called a caustic, with a logarithmic profile that is revolved around the y-axis. While such a reflection profile is completely useless in astronomy, it has been used with some success in Sterling Engines, which usually have a larger opening for energy input.

:cool:

Harry

08-23-2007, 10:38 AM

The quickest and easiest way to send Russ Freeman into an amusing frothing rage is to address him as Mr. Ritenour.

Use at will.

Limper

08-23-2007, 10:43 AM

The quickest and easiest way to send Russ Freeman into an amusing frothing rage is to address him as Mr. Ritenour.

Use at will.

Quick clairification... who the hell is that?

Harry

08-23-2007, 10:51 AM

Quick clairification... who the hell is that?

The owner and operator of The Rippingtons franchise.

Limper

08-23-2007, 10:54 AM

The owner and operator of The Rippingtons franchise.

And that would be?

Harry

08-23-2007, 10:56 AM

Oh, to heck with it...

That date on the jug of milk? It's a sell by date, not a use by date.

Varaj

08-23-2007, 11:01 AM

Oh, to heck with it...

That date on the jug of milk? It's a sell by date, not a use by date.

That's not common knowledge? :confused:

FeatsofClay

08-23-2007, 11:03 AM

The european pursuit of porcelain production is seen by many to mark the movement form alchemy to scientific method.

Brynja

08-23-2007, 11:06 AM

The first president was not G. Washington rather it was John Hansen under the AoC

mollygrue

08-23-2007, 11:40 AM

1. dolphins sometimes use tuna to pleasure themselves.
2. yaks give pinkish milk
3. despite appearances, penguins have knees.

Maddman

08-23-2007, 01:08 PM

The US once planned to build what is pretty much a doomsday device called Project Pluto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto). It was a nuclear ramjet - air was sucked into an intake then greatly heated by a nuclear reactor. The expansion from this heat provided thrust. The missile would carry a payload of nuclear weapons, but that wasn't the main threat.

It would travel about treetop level at Mach 3. Because of the need for low weight the reactor would not have any shielding. Combine the radiation with the shockwave and this thing would leave a path of death wherever it went. Further, because it ran on a nuclear reactor it could go for months if not years before exhausting itself. Some contemplated that they wouldn't need a payload at all, just launch the thing and have it fly back and forth over Russia.

The advent of ICBMs pretty much ended the research.

Limper

08-23-2007, 01:16 PM

The US once planned to build a harbor in Alaska (lack of a sea port being a huge Alaskan economic hinderance) by nuking one into existance.

It was called Operation Plowshare.

They also upon noticing that the Panama canal was getting kind of small for the bigger boats that were being used tried to convince various South American countries to allow the to build a Panatmic Canal through them.

TiQuinn

08-23-2007, 01:17 PM

I am not wearing any underwear today.

strawberry

08-23-2007, 01:31 PM

Labradoodles are not, in fact, "hypoallergenic."

Limper

08-23-2007, 01:34 PM

Labradoodles are not, in fact, "hypoallergenic."

What the hell is a Labradoodle? Is that some form of transexual?

strawberry

08-23-2007, 01:35 PM

What the hell is a Labradoodle? Is that some form of transexual?

It's a cross between a labrador retriever and a poodle. They are rumored to be hypoallergenic.

There is also a goldendoodle with is a cross between a golden retriever and a poodle. And probably more doodles than I'm even aware of, they were all the rage last year although the doodle puppy explosion seems to have died down a bit.

Limper

08-23-2007, 01:37 PM

It's a cross between a labrador retriever and a poodle. They are rumored to be hypoallergenic.

There is also a goldendoodle with is a cross between a golden retriever and a poodle. And probably more doodles than I'm even aware of, they were all the rage last year although the doodle puppy explosion seems to have died down a bit.

Dander is the alergen and that is formed by spit... are there any dogs that don't lick themselves?

strawberry

08-23-2007, 01:40 PM

Dander is the alergen and that is formed by spit... are there any dogs that don't lick themselves?

Well dander comes from the skin, but it's my understanding that people can be allergic to either the dander or saliva. There are some breeds that are alleged to trigger less of an allergic response in people. I don't know if it's supposed to be because they don't shed as much or the dander doesn't stick to the hair as much or what. I've never felt that it was true, anyway, but some people swear by certain breeds.

mollygrue

08-23-2007, 01:42 PM

bichon frisee (sp?) are less allergenic. doodles and the like were real popular around here last year too---to the point where people were just making up random doodle names in the "free to good home" dog adds.

Droid101

08-23-2007, 01:44 PM

There are no magnetic monopoles.

Bones

08-23-2007, 02:06 PM

I am not wearing any underwear today.

I am wearing TiQuinn's underwear today.

GreyOne

08-23-2007, 04:05 PM

It's a cross between a labrador retriever and a poodle.

So in Limper's world, good shootin'.

Merganser

08-23-2007, 05:18 PM

The first president was not G. Washington rather it was John Hansen under the AoC

I hate to disagree, but Washington was certainly the first President of the United States of America. John Hanson was a President of the United States in Congress Assembled (an office very different in character), but not the first - rather, the third. He was the first to serve a full term, though. There were also Presidents of the Continental Congress before him. Peyton Randolph was the first President of the Continental Congress, back in 1774.

There's lots more information on the wikipedia, of course:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_Continental_Congress
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hanson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hanson_%28myths%29

Brynja

08-23-2007, 06:03 PM

I hate to disagree, but Washington was certainly the first President of the United States of America. John Hanson was a President of the United States in Congress Assembled (an office very different in character), but not the first - rather, the third. He was the first to serve a full term, though. There were also Presidents of the Continental Congress before him. Peyton Randolph was the first President of the Continental Congress, back in 1774.

There's lots more information on the wikipedia, of course:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_Continental_Congress
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hanson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hanson_%28myths%29

I said under the AoC.

I stand by my statement.

If you wish to split hairs we can do that. Hanson was the first to serve a full term, and is recognized as the first.

Wikipedia be damned.

And in the spirit of links:

http://www.marshallhall.org/hanson.html

Merganser

08-23-2007, 06:08 PM

I said under the AoC.

I stand by my statement.

If you wish to split hairs we can do that. Hanson was the first to serve a full term, and is recognized as the first.

Wikipedia be damned.

Huh, so... presidents who don't serve full terms are .. not presidents? That's crap. Hanson was demonstrably not the first President of the US in Congress Assembled. He was certainly the most famous of the pre-Constutition presidents, sure. Recognizing him at the first is just popularism.

Oh hey, I read your website you posted. It's more popularism. It ignores Hanson's two predecessors and is therefore garbage anyhow, when it claims he was the first. They have the date correct, March 1, 1781 - but ignore Huntington & McKean entirely. Hanson didn't take office until November, and they pretend he took office in March. Oh wait, I missed this the first time - toward the end of the article, they do fess up that there were other nameless men in office before him, and they do admit he took office in November. The first 2/3rds of the article are quite misleading on that score. They even have the number of officeholders wrong.

Brynja

08-23-2007, 06:21 PM

Whirligig

08-23-2007, 07:05 PM

Here's some entertainment trivia.

Shirley Temple had exactly 52 ringlet curls on her head in every movie.

shabois

08-23-2007, 07:27 PM

All of your cited sources require additional references and citation as per Wikipedia.

I rarely trust Wiki unless I can find it elsewhere.

I agree! Quoting or referencing directly from Wiki is like direct quotes from the bible, they can be dangerous in the wrong hands. Plus you are never sure who the writer is..:cool:

Atropine Mama

08-23-2007, 08:54 PM

Every one of my kids has a big dimple right smack on the top of their butt crack that identifies them as mine. We even checked as we left the hospital when they were born to make sure we got the kid with the butt dimple.

Betcha didn't know that. :D

TiQuinn

08-23-2007, 09:08 PM

All of your cited sources require additional references and citation as per Wikipedia.

I rarely trust Wiki unless I can find it elsewhere.

I have yet to find anything in my readings that refutes Hanson as 1st president. This is not to say such work doesnt exist- but if we are going to pick at sources- yours are also suspect.

Huh, so... presidents who don't serve full terms are .. not presidents? That's crap. Hanson was demonstrably not the first President of the US in Congress Assembled. He was certainly the most famous of the pre-Constutition presidents, sure. Recognizing him at the first is just popularism.

Oh hey, I read your website you posted. It's more popularism. It ignores Hanson's two predecessors and is therefore garbage anyhow, when it claims he was the first. They have the date correct, March 1, 1781 - but ignore Huntington & McKean entirely. Hanson didn't take office until November, and they pretend he took office in March. Oh wait, I missed this the first time - toward the end of the article, they do fess up that there were other nameless men in office before him, and they do admit he took office in November. The first 2/3rds of the article are quite misleading on that score. They even have the number of officeholders wrong.

You're both wrong!

It was Peyton Randolph!

Here's my non-Wikipedia link: http://home.comcast.net/~sharonday7/Presidents/AP060201.htm

I win! :D

Merganser

08-23-2007, 09:23 PM

You're both wrong!

It was Peyton Randolph!

Here's my non-Wikipedia link: http://home.comcast.net/~sharonday7/Presidents/AP060201.htm

I win! :D

I mentioned Peyton Randolph in my first post.

Brynja - you certainly have a point. I shall see what I can do about better sources later, though. The internet is quick, but decent sources can be hard to find and I have a test a-comin'. Sadly, it's about the principles of commercial insurance, rather than colonial history.

TiQuinn

08-23-2007, 09:38 PM

I mentioned Peyton Randolph in my first post.

:puzzled: You expect me to actually read before I post?

Merganser

08-23-2007, 11:20 PM

:puzzled: You expect me to actually read before I post?

No, TiQuinn. Alas, no I don't.

Alright, so I tore myself away from drop-down coverage and self insured retentions. Hard to believe, I know.

According to the U.S. Congress website (http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=H000998), Samuel Huntington served as President of Congress from Sept 28, 1779 to July 6, 1781

Tom Baughn (http://www.umuc.edu/fyionline/february_04/fyionline6.html) at the University of Maryland has a buncha stuff to say about this stuff, but he concurs that Huntington was President when the Articles of Confederation came into effect. Tom even brings up the Stamp Act Congress, which I'd completely forgotten about. Actually, Tom's article is pretty good reading.

Some guy named Stanley Klos wrote a book called President Who? Forgotten Founders (http://thedeclarationofindependence.org/SamuelHuntington.net/), but I have no idea how reputable he is. He agrees with me about Huntington, though, so clearly he must be a paragon of virtue.

Archontology.org (http://www.archontology.org/nations/us/us1/01_congress.php) has a nice list, but this is the first I've heard of the study of ahem, archontology. Study of rulers, I guess. Odd. I included this because the website itself uses a new -ology term that I've never heard, which was no doubt chosen in accordance with strict nameological principles.

Maddman

08-24-2007, 08:50 AM

Brynja

08-24-2007, 08:56 AM

The best way to win in a fight is hit first, faster and harder.

Words of wisdom from Brynja's dad.

Janos

08-24-2007, 10:46 AM

The boiling point of Asphalt is 173 degrees.

Mules can actually reproduce, but it is exceedingly rare.

Hannibal once routed an entire Roman Legion in the foothills of northern Italy with fewer than 100 of his men. To do so, he stole all the cattle and steer from several herds in the next valley over, waited till nightfall, tied burning branches to the horns of steer and had men strategically placed with bugles throughout the herd. The burning branches caused the cattle to panic and stampede into the valley of the Romans in the middle of the night, with smoke and loud noise pouring out of them.

The Legion fled thinking that a horde of demons had descended upon them.

Kyllikki

08-26-2007, 02:14 PM

Taking High School science classes doesn't actually help your grades in those same classes in college. Taking High School math, however, does (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/07/science_and_math_in_the_high_s.php).

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/upload/2007/07/college_grade_diff.gif

Okay, yes, this is a study, and therefore is not a "fact". It is a set of data and a hypothesis. Which leads me to knowledge bit #2:

Correlation does NOT equal causation.

But i don't have strong opinions on that matter either :D