|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 11, 2019 6:43:09 GMT
I read a study a while back that the most visible color during daylight is that greenish fluorescent yellow, for everything except fire trucks. Candy Apple red is still the most visible color for them. A greenish yellow sign with a reflective film so that it is visable at night is the best combo for road signs. I have a blue ski parka with reflective patches. It is as visible at night as the yellow or green version. All come down to the reflective material's ability to deflect your headlights. "fire engine yellow" is the most visible color, period. fire engine red is still used because color recognition is actually as important in perception as visibility. another factor that hasn't been mentioned yet is that if someone is behind you with too-bright lights, you are then casting shadows in front of you, and when you are in motion that puts those shadows into motion. if there are mirrors, you also have the light hitting the mirrors and reflecting into your face. so yes, bright lights from behind you can be a nuisance. |
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Sept 11, 2019 12:26:35 GMT
"fire engine yellow" is the most visible color, period. fire engine red is still used because color recognition is actually as important in perception as visibility. That was the conclusion of the study. For the brain to see something, process what it is, and then react as needed, color does play a part in it. Yellow may be more visible, but people are SOOOO used to seeing red fire trucks, that when they see a yellow fire truck, it may catch the eye faster, but it takes longer for the brain to process that it is a fire truck than it does if it was red. Funny how the brain works. Here's a interesting take. We established that it would be better to leave your bike headlights off, using them as little as possible. The reason that clothing is visible at night is due to the reflective materail. Without headlights, the is little light to reflect back to the viewer, so that is not as effective. In low light situations, the human eye will see in black and white. So yellow or green will not matter, you can't see the color. What color is most visable when you can't see color? Green vs yellow would come down to how light they each are. I would venture to say that white is probably your best bet. A white shirt with some reflective strips to make it visible when there area light sources being a combo of the two. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 11, 2019 13:42:57 GMT
"fire engine yellow" is the most visible color, period. fire engine red is still used because color recognition is actually as important in perception as visibility. That was the conclusion of the study. For the brain to see something, process what it is, and then react as needed, color does play a part in it. Yellow may be more visible, but people are SOOOO used to seeing red fire trucks, that when they see a yellow fire truck, it may catch the eye faster, but it takes longer for the brain to process that it is a fire truck than it does if it was red. Funny how the brain works. Here's a interesting take. We established that it would be better to leave your bike headlights off, using them as little as possible. The reason that clothing is visible at night is due to the reflective materail. Without headlights, the is little light to reflect back to the viewer, so that is not as effective. In low light situations, the human eye will see in black and white. So yellow or green will not matter, you can't see the color. What color is most visable when you can't see color? Green vs yellow would come down to how light they each are. I would venture to say that white is probably your best bet. A white shirt with some reflective strips to make it visible when there area light sources being a combo of the two. when I'm doing high visibility markings on something, I try to pick colors that contrast with the background. that's one of the reasons for "high vis yellow" and "high vis orange" - because they are shades that aren't common in nature. at night, particularly with retroreflective striping, the yellow gives a good backup. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 17, 2019 20:28:41 GMT
to step back upthread a bit - having spent time in London watching people whizzing by on folding bikes, it occurs to me they tend to have shorter wheelbases, smaller wheels, and less rake to the front forks. that leaves me questioning whether a folding bike would be easier or harder for a beginner to learn to ride than a "standard" bicycle.
my thinking is that the short wheelbase would tend to make the bike tend to turn sharper, and the small wheels would make it more sensitive to bumps. - but would the long seat and handlebar rise increase the "inverted pendulum" effect to compensate? of course, the psychological effect is difficult to quantify.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Sept 18, 2019 12:16:47 GMT
What I remember is that seat position and handlebar height are basically the same from the hub of the wheels You are limited by the normal human body dimensions. If anything, because of the folding bikes having smaller tires, they are lower to the ground than a traditional bike is. This would lower the inverted pendulum effect.
The smaller tires will make it harder to climb over bumps and obstacles. It would also not be as easy to get higher speeds. Assuming the same standards gear setups, the smaller wheels will make fore better acceleration, but lower top speed. That being said, most people I know barely use bike gears, if at all. Then they look at me strange, saying I shift gears like a car.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 18, 2019 14:13:51 GMT
I use the gears when I bike, but not like a car. I’ll pick the appropriate gear for the terrain I am covering and stick with that unless the terrain changes, such as climbing a hill. One thing I have noticed, as I am getting older, I am using the lower gears a whole lot more than I used to.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 18, 2019 20:48:49 GMT
What I remember is that seat position and handlebar height are basically the same from the hub of the wheels You are limited by the normal human body dimensions. If anything, because of the folding bikes having smaller tires, they are lower to the ground than a traditional bike is. This would lower the inverted pendulum effect. The smaller tires will make it harder to climb over bumps and obstacles. It would also not be as easy to get higher speeds. Assuming the same standards gear setups, the smaller wheels will make fore better acceleration, but lower top speed. That being said, most people I know barely use bike gears, if at all. Then they look at me strange, saying I shift gears like a car. It's too late to look at them, now, but I think folding bikes tend to have the crank higher than the hubs whereas "standards" usually have it lower - but you're right that the overall height is often lower. |
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Oct 29, 2019 15:32:36 GMT
"Flying Witch", episode 2 Premise: the title character is Makoto, a teenage girl whose parents send her to live with some non-magical country cousins for a year so that she can learn how to live among those who don't have or use magic. Just as she has to learn how to live in society (for example, she's bad at land navigation), her cousins have to learn how to live with her world. Episode: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petasites_japonicusIn the second half of the episode, Makoto is walking home with her older cousin Kei and Kei's female friend Nao. The trio note that Spring is on its way, and to punctuate this Kei stops everyone because he sees fuki shoots growing wild by the side of the road. As the show notes, fuki shoots can be fried like tempura and taken with light salt, making them a common local eat. But because they're somewhat bitter, it's hit or miss as to whether people like them. When Kei learns that Makoto has never had fuki shoots, he and Makoto stop to pick some. During this, Kei tells Makoto not to pick the shoots that are growing by lamp posts or any other such thing by the side of the road as they're likely contaminated by dog urine or other such nasties. My question, though, is: how safe would it be to be picking *anything* by the side of the road like that, regardless of where it is next to anything? |
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Oct 29, 2019 15:41:33 GMT
The biggest hazard is determining exactly what plant it is. There are many plants out there that may look fine but are in fact poisonous.
As far as dog urine, dog urine is the least of your concerns. There are all sorts of chemicals, both natural andartifical all over all plants. That's why they always say to wash you fresh foods well before cooking with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 29, 2019 16:39:15 GMT
beyond that, if the road has automobile traffic, there will be particulates from the engine exhaust deposited on the plants, as well as soil contaminants drawn up by the roots.
but keep in mind the most common pre-chemical fertilizer was animal manure.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Dec 20, 2019 14:59:09 GMT
"Flying Witch", episode 10
Kei, Makoto, and Nao are in some type of home economics or life skills class together, and the day's class requires them to cook a series of (by Japanese standards) simple dishes.
Nao panics and sinks into despair, and as she notes it's because of an incident that happened as a child. She tried to help her parents cook, but confused vinegar (if I heard it right) and cooking oil, leading to a near-disaster that resulted in her parents rather discouraging her from cooking again. Kei and Makoto have to talk her through it, leaving everyone so distracted that no one remembers to make one of the assigned food items. Oops.
Myths:
1. What would happen if someone uses something *other* than cooking oil or a fat in their frying pan (et al)?
2. Kei is shown briefly microwaving the onion he has to chop, claiming that doing so will keep a person from crying when cutting it. Can this actually work, and if so how will it affect the taste and ability to cut?
3. Given that one of the recipes is for cookies, Makoto decides to go one better and make a cookie that's popular among witches... the twist being that they're filled cookies meant to look as much like a real human finger as possible (complete with an almond sliver for the nail). How close can a cookie come to looking like a human finger and still be edible, both due to ingredients used and due to psychological factors?
|
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Dec 20, 2019 15:30:09 GMT
1. When frying, Oil is used as both a lubricant to keep food from sticking to the pan and also for heat conduction because it has a high boiling point. Heat from the pan is transfer more evenly so you on't have burn spots. Water or vinegar will both work, but because of the much lower boiling point, they burn off much faster. Depending on what you are making, sometimes that's a good thing, some times bad. depends on the dish.
One potential issue is that vinegar will result in a different flavor to the food. it will be a more acidic taste instead of the normal mild oil taste.
2. I've heard multiple accounts on this. It works for some, not for others. However, depending on what you are making, pre-cooking your onion like this could ruin the recipe.
3. If they are skilled enough, yes. You can do google searches and find all sorts of food items that look like real humans, animals, or other objects. AS far as physiological factors, that is purely up to the eater.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Dec 20, 2019 15:30:25 GMT
1. Would depend on what the “something other“ is. I think you need to be a little more specific.
2. Easy enough to try, just about everyone has access to a microwave and an onion.
3. I’m sure a creative baker could make a cookie to look like any body part you would like (or not like). As to the psychological effect, I think that would be dependent on the individual.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 20, 2019 15:42:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Jul 14, 2020 15:23:27 GMT
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gate_(novel_series)This one is an "in general" thing from the "Gate" multi-media franchise. The premise of the franchise is that a sword & sorcery - type fantasy world opens a gateway to modern-day Japan, at which point the largest kingdom in the area promptly tries to use the gateway to invade us... and promptly discovers the concept of "instant regret" once the JSDF gets involved. In response to this invasion, the JSDF secures the other end of the gate and the forces on that side try to force a peace with the kingdom. It's routinely shown that weapons such as pistols, assault rifles, and light machine guns have no trouble punching clean through whatever kind of metal armor the kingdom's soldiers have, with entire shield walls being cut down on at least two occasions. In contrast, it's explicitly shown and stated that .50 has no effect on a dragon unless shooting for its eyes, with episode 8 of the anime noting that the scales recovered from a dragon the JSDF faced is comparable to a type of metal alloy I never quite caught. 1. Could modern-day munitions from modern-day firearms punch through period-accurate plate armor and metal shields? 2. What is the least it takes to stop a normal .50 round?
|
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Jul 14, 2020 19:53:19 GMT
I read some thing a while back that the advent of the match lock musket was the death nail for plate armor. The relatively low speed of a matchlock ball was still enough to easily punch through plate armor of the day. At that point, as common as matchlock fire arms were, there was no point to armor and it quickly fell out of use. For modern rounds? I have personally shot though sheet metal with a .22LR. So modern rounds against midevil armor would be easy.
As far as stopping a .50, First question is what type of bullet are we talking about? You have everything from .50 AE that is used in handguns like the Desert Eagle to the .50BMG that comes in all sorts of variations like ball, armor piercing, incendiary, high explosive, etc. Protection requirements will vary accordingly. For a .50BMG< what I am seeing is saying that 1.0-1.5 inches is the minimum of high strength steel needed to survive a .50 BMG AP round. Mild Steel will be thicker, and Armor grade steel would be slightly less. However, that could still fail with repeated hits. Minimum thickness for reliably taking multiple rounds is 2-3 inches of high strength steel.
There are some ceramic composite armors that can provide the same level of protection in a thinner, lighter setup, but you won't save much weight.
The shear weight of the armor for an animal that can take a .50b,,g would be staggering and it makes you wonder how it don't collapse under it's own weight, let alone fly. Not to mention, what would be the evolutionary advantage to that?
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Jul 14, 2020 20:07:14 GMT
I read some thing a while back that the advent of the match lock musket was the death nail for plate armor. The relatively low speed of a matchlock ball was still enough to easily punch through plate armor of the day. At that point, as common as matchlock fire arms were, there was no point to armor and it quickly fell out of use. For modern rounds? I have personally shot though sheet metal with a .22LR. So modern rounds against midevil armor would be easy. As far as stopping a .50, First question is what type of bullet are we talking about? You have everything from .50 AE that is used in handguns like the Desert Eagle to the .50BMG that comes in all sorts of variations like ball, armor piercing, incendiary, high explosive, etc. Protection requirements will vary accordingly. For a .50BMG< what I am seeing is saying that 1.0-1.5 inches is the minimum of high strength steel needed to survive a .50 BMG AP round. Mild Steel will be thicker, and Armor grade steel would be slightly less. However, that could still fail with repeated hits. Minimum thickness for reliably taking multiple rounds is 2-3 inches of high strength steel. There are some ceramic composite armors that can provide the same level of protection in a thinner, lighter setup, but you won't save much weight. The shear weight of the armor for an animal that can take a .50b,,g would be staggering and it makes you wonder how it don't collapse under it's own weight, let alone fly. Not to mention, what would be the evolutionary advantage to that? It's the .50 off of a Humvee, if that narrows it down. In the series, fire dragons are the top of the food chain as far as dragons go, such that in this instance it took a direct hit from an RPG just to take an arm off. Lower species of dragons, such as wyverns, all fell to machine gun and anti-aircraft fire, indicating a weaker form of armor. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 15, 2020 3:56:32 GMT
go to the tank museum youtube channel, and look at how thick the armor was on the WWI tanks. - that was made to resist .30 caliber machine gun fire.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Oct 5, 2020 17:12:46 GMT
"Spy X Family"
Premise ->
Twilight, a spy for the West German government, is under deep cover in East Germany as a psychiatrist. In order to get closer to a key politician, Twilight has adopted a six-year-old girl and engaged in a paper marriage with Yao, a local woman who was single for so long she was beginning to draw suspicion. He's so busy trying to focus on maintaining his cover that he doesn't realize the girl can read minds or that Yao is an assassin-for-hire.
Chapter ->
Another West German agent, Nightfall, is in love with Twilight. She's furious that she was on a different assignment when Twilight was given his orders, as she wants to be his wife for real. To this end, she's been trying to break up his faux marriage so that she can have herself inserted into the mix.
In chapter 34 of the manga, Nightfall - who is obsessed with tennis - challenges Yao, who has little experience with the game, to a match.
Yao's first swing, an attempt at a downward serve, hits the tennis ball so hard that the strings on her racket dice the ball into pieces.
Yao's second swing, a straight shot at Nightfall, hits Nightfall's racquet with enough force to destroy it.
Nightfall has a psychotic break, Twilight is forced to cover for her, and Yao remains blissfully unaware of what was really going on.
Myth ->
1. Could the strings on a tennis racquet, either 1980s or modern-day, slice through the ball itself? If not, what would it take?
2. How much force would need to be behind a serve for the ball to destroy the opposing player's racquet, either in whole or in part?
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 5, 2020 17:24:48 GMT
"Spy X Family"Premise -> Twilight, a spy for the West German government, is under deep cover in East Germany as a psychiatrist. In order to get closer to a key politician, Twilight has adopted a six-year-old girl and engaged in a paper marriage with Yao, a local woman who was single for so long she was beginning to draw suspicion. He's so busy trying to focus on maintaining his cover that he doesn't realize the girl can read minds or that Yao is an assassin-for-hire. Chapter -> Another West German agent, Nightfall, is in love with Twilight. She's furious that she was on a different assignment when Twilight was given his orders, as she wants to be his wife for real. To this end, she's been trying to break up his faux marriage so that she can have herself inserted into the mix. In chapter 34 of the manga, Nightfall - who is obsessed with tennis - challenges Yao, who has little experience with the game, to a match. Yao's first swing, an attempt at a downward serve, hits the tennis ball so hard that the strings on her racket dice the ball into pieces. Yao's second swing, a straight shot at Nightfall, hits Nightfall's racquet with enough force to destroy it. Nightfall has a psychotic break, Twilight is forced to cover for her, and Yao remains blissfully unaware of what was really going on. Myth ->1. Could the strings on a tennis racquet, either 1980s or modern-day, slice through the ball itself? If not, what would it take? 2. How much force would need to be behind a serve for the ball to destroy the opposing player's racquet, either in whole or in part? having broken both strings and a racquet, the first is highly unlikely, the second would require the racquet to already be compromised. |
|
