|
On October 18 2014 10:54 Orcasgt24 wrote:
Why is it when people do a mic check on a stage they all say "Check one two two two one two check"? All the band that come to my work do this
According to Google, it's either:
1. Those words have a particularly good mixture of frequencies and sounds that it makes testing for feedback and audio problems easier to do, or
2. Just because it's a common phrase and it's historically been a popular sentence to say when testing mics (i.e., no sophisticated reason why).
|
Where can I advertise my books on this web page? Or perhaps you would suggest any other pages that would be proper? Got them posted on wattpad and they are great.
|
|
|
Hey, so like, we know that stuff that's in orbit around Earth is traveling really fast and whatnot, and so when small objects going really fast collide, they do so with a lot of force. And we also know that there's a lot of space-garbage in orbit around Earth. How do we prevent our satellites from getting riddled with holes from impacts with space-garbage?
|
United Kingdom1381 Posts
On October 19 2014 07:27 Djzapz wrote:
Hey, so like, we know that stuff that's in orbit around Earth is traveling really fast and whatnot, and so when small objects going really fast collide, they do so with a lot of force. And we also know that there's a lot of space-garbage in orbit around Earth. How do we prevent our satellites from getting riddled with holes from impacts with space-garbage?
Well the International Space Station uses data from ground based radar to actively manuever away from debris.
Providing countries stop intentionally blowing stuff up in orbit most of the junk in low orbit will re-enter the earth's atmosphere in a few decades.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yNxq5d5.jpg)
Wikipedia is pretty comprehensive on this subject.
|
Thanks buddy 
|
[16:53:21] <Toad|> someone know if the XCOM extra packs are worth it? I missed the buy option in last steamsale and it's currently at -75% (5Euro) for another 24 hours
[16:53:34] <Toad|> XCOM: Complete would be 7,50
Never played the game but have been told to buy it multiple times now and was mad that I missed it the last time. Worth it to buy the complete thing or just go for the vanilla version?
|
Is the vieweramount with douyo streams buggy or does YYF really have 250k viewers?
|
On October 14 2014 23:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2014 20:00 Jisira wrote:On October 12 2014 04:02 Tephus wrote:On October 11 2014 20:26 Simberto wrote:
Popcorn might make sense if you don't like getting your fingers sticky with sugar.
Soup could work if you take enough time, and just suck the small amount of liquid that will stick to the chopsticks off them. But i doubt you will manage to not starve doing that. Heh, everyone ready to have their mind blown? In Europe popcorn is typically covered in sugar, in NA its usually covered in butter/salt. Where in Europe are you from!? In Sweden we use salt. Pls. You're obviously wrong, if some guy on TL makes broad statements about other people's experiences on a nerd forum, what can I do but believe him! Question to Europeans: do you add cheese to your popcorn?
you are disgusting.
popcorn + sugar, nothing else
do americans actually think that the orange cream they call cheese is actually cheese?
|
are the benelux countrys the only onces that eat their fries with mayonaise?
|
No. It's popular in Germany too.
|
On October 20 2014 05:08 sabas123 wrote:
are the benelux countrys the only onces that eat their fries with mayonaise?
How is this exclusive to some counries? It's much more preferences of the individual.
|
Well, here I go...
How is it scientists know the universe has been around for 6 billions years? How can they possibly know that or come to such an estimate? Also, when that ultra deep picture of the universe was taken, how exactly is it a photo of how the universe looked billions of years ago? Shouldn't it be a photo of how the universe looks now? 
|
On October 20 2014 05:36 Masheyoon wrote:Well, here I go... How is it scientists know the universe has been around for 6 billions years? How can they possibly know that or come to such an estimate? Also, when that ultra deep picture of the universe was taken, how exactly is it a photo of how the universe looked billions of years ago? Shouldn't it be a photo of how the universe looks now?
Overly simplistic explanation, but think of it like this. We know how fast light moves. If the light is from "x" distance and we know how long it takes the light to get there, we can safely assume that the light we're receiving from that area is from that many years ago.
Basically, say a star is 20 million light years away. That means that the light you're receiving from that star is from 20 million years ago. Make sense?
|
Well, first of all, its 14 billion years, not 6 billion.
The age of the universe can be estimated by observing the movement of the galaxies, which leds to Hubble's Law.
Together with the Friedman equations, one can caluclate the age of the universe with this. (one can think of it as extrapolating the expansion of the universe back in time, until it has the size 0)
The photo taken from the universe is the famous background radiation. That radiation was created shortly after the universe began to exist, it just took billions of years to reach earth.
(that should be correct, but a poster with more knowledge in kosmology should be able to give a more detailed answer)
|
Zurich15313 Posts
The hubble deep field is not of the background radiation, but essentially a long exposure shot of distant galaxies. It's also not a photo of how the universe looked billions of years ago, although some of the galaxies in the photo are billions of light years away from us, and thus we receive light that was emitted 12 billion years ago - so, in layman's term we kind of do see how those galaxies looked like back then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field
|
So are we at the center of the universe? The measurements of the cosmic background radiation seen to indicate that it is at the same distance in all directions. This seems to indicate that we're in the middle. Or are ALL galaxies approximately in the middle and there's a couple of billions of light years of nothingness surrounding us?
|
On October 20 2014 07:31 Acrofales wrote:
So are we at the center of the universe? The measurements of the cosmic background radiation seen to indicate that it is at the same distance in all directions. This seems to indicate that we're in the middle. Or are ALL galaxies approximately in the middle and there's a couple of billions of light years of nothingness surrounding us?
no, this just indicates that we haven't found the "borders" yet.
e: it's also unclear what the shape of the universe is like. it almost certainly has no borders at all, but it could be "closed" like an 4d version of earth's surface. (you can go in one direction and if you walk long enough (and don't drown  ) you come back to your origin.
the other one is that the universe simply "flattens out" and the particle density gets lower and lower towards "outside", which would result in galaxies surrounded by "nothing".
|
We are in the centre of the 'observable' universe; we can observe 13 billion light years in any direction.
|
On October 20 2014 09:12 Tephus wrote:
We are in the centre of the 'observable' universe; we can observe 13 billion light years in any direction.
Okay, fair enough, but if the observable universe is a sphere with a radius of 13billion light years, but the true dimensions of the universe are wildly different, then the density or type of stuff we can see should be different in some directions, right? For instance, if we're not in the center, then if our horizon is 13 billion light years, shouldn't the galaxies at one side be younger than the other? Unless our sphere of observable universe happens to. be in the center of the actual universe. In fact, isn't the fact that we are able to see that there seems to be nothing in any direction one of the main arguments for the age of the universe?
You can't say that the first stars formed approx 13 billion years ago, because whatever direction we happen to look in, that is the oldest star we see, and if we look further away, and thus further back in time, there is nothing, and simultaneously hold that the observable universe is not the entirety of the universe, and there is some mysterious reason X that stops us from seeing further than. 13 billion years away. Obviously the fact that everything is moving away from us at the right speed for the universe to have started 14-billion years ago can be combined to say that whatever is beyond the visible limits of the universe is not something we'd recognize as our universe; but then we're back to the originall issue: we seem to be at the center of this expanding bubble that we do recognize as our universe...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
