Showing posts with label size. Show all posts
Showing posts with label size. Show all posts

Saturday, January 24, 2026

Why is Russia so doggone BIG? (video)


Why is Russia so darn BIG?
(Johnny Harris) March 24, 2021: The story of moving east and just...not stopping.

Korea in Asia is beautiful and close by

Ways to support: Patreon (johnnyharris). Custom presets and LUTs: https://store.dftba.com/products/john... Where to find JH: Instagram (johnny.harris), Tiktok (johnny.harris), Facebook (johnnyharrisvox). Iz's (Johnny’s wife’s) channel (iz-harris). How Johnny makes videos: Tom Fox makes his music. Work with him here: https://tfbeats.com/. He makes maps using this AE Plugin: aescripts.com/geolayers/?aff=77. All the gear he uses: izharris.com/gear-guide. His courses: Learn a language (brighttrip.com/course/language). Visual storytelling: https://www.brighttrip.com/courses/vi...

SPONSOR: The first 1,000 people to use this link will get a free trial of Skillshare premium membership: skl.sh/johnnyharris03211

ABOUT: Johnny Harris is a filmmaker and journalist. He is currently based in Washington, DC, reporting on interesting trends and stories domestically and around the world. His visual style blends motion graphics with cinematic videography to create content that explains complex issues in relatable ways. He holds a B.A. in international relations from Brigham Young University and an M.A. in international peace and conflict resolution from American University. Press: NYTimes: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/09/op... NYTimes: https://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion... Vox Borders: • Inside Hong Kong’s cage homes Finding Founders: https://findingfounders.co/episodes/j... NPR Planet Money: https://www.npr.org/transcripts/10721...

Soviet Union, empire, Russia, Central Asia, Far East, Vlad Putin, Czar, communist regime, capitalism, European, country, size, largest, Canada, Moscow, Mongols, Turkey, Korea, China

Wednesday, September 25, 2024

The science of breast size (Mythbusters)

They've done nothing for me. I mean, not that I know of.
I'm not going to buy more fruit just because she's pretty and in a skimpy top though, you know, I may make conversation and, come to think of it, I do need more oranges.

Reverse true for males: flatter=better?
Let's get one thing straight. Breast size doesn't matter at all, not a bit. They affect nothing, certainly not attention, stares, tips, comments, date requests, marriage proposals, catcalls, jeers, backaches, or popularity. There is no Boobie Industrial Complex (fashions, bikinis, braziers, stuffing, silicone cups, tape, wires, pulleys, wonder pills, creams, exercises, surgical augmentations, lingerie sales, saline implants, Erin Brockovich rentals...) supporting them. It's only a myth! Discovery's Mythbusters conducted a scientific test.

Bigger tips breasts equal bigger tips?
Yet again, science confirms that life imitates art just as consumers imitate mainstream media.
I'm not jealous or envious. I'm just curious. How can she stand being such an attention whooer?
.
SCIENCE: busting the myth of bust size

(MythBustersDiscovery) Kari Byron and crew put the "bigger boobs better tips" hypothesis through a rigorous scientific social science experimentation with silicone mammalian augmentations that will ascertain the consumer capitalist engagement of a subset of the population of restaurant diners where tipping is obligatory. The conclusion has a twist that may come as a surprise to viewers. Who's actually doing the covert leering and paying for the privilege?


This anecdotal test attempts to see how long viewers will watch without understanding a word of what's going on simply because the fruit-buying influencer hired a bouncy sidekick to play along.

Subscribe to Discovery. Watch full episodes: bit.ly/MythBustersFullEpsFacebook: facebook.com. Discovery on Twitter: discovery #MythBusters#MythBusters
  • Mythbusters, Discovery, Sept. 4, 2014; Ananda (Dharma Buddhist Meditation), Ashley Wells, CC Liu, Seth Auberon (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

Saturday, August 17, 2024

Why is future Prez Trump so stupid?


Will national embarrassment DJ win for once (or be selected again)? That's what the psychic on the right-wing paranormal radio show said. The Disruptor in Chief might be a good idea compared to teh same old same old Hock Tuah candidate telling us they not like us. Oy vey.

Trump's off-the-rails economy speech; Federal labor charges against Trump and Musk: A Closer Look
(Late Night with Seth Meyers) Aug. 15, 2024: Seth Meyers takes a closer look at Trump going off the rails during an economic speech in North Carolina and getting hit with federal labor charges by one of the country's most influential unions. Late Night with Seth Meyers. Stream now on Peacock: bit.ly/3erP2gX Subscribe to Late Night: bit.ly/LateNightSeth Watch Late Night with Seth Meyers Weeknights 12:35ET/11:35c on NBC. Get more Late Night with Seth Meyers: nbc.com/late-night-with-se...

Trump can't get over Genocide Joe, Project 2025 videos leak, and Trump glitches bad with Elon | The Daily Show
(The Daily Show) Aug. 17, 2024: Kamala Devi Harris's campaign is crushing it, and DJ Trump is spinning out of control. Jon Stewart and Desi Lydic cover DJ's week of flops, including his continued fixation on G-Joe, denial that he has anything to do with the Republican's Orwellian plan known as "Project 2025" (even though Republican's leaked training videos feature every person he's ever met), a glitch-filled Twitter interview with Elon Musk, and his off-the-rails "intellectual" economy speech flop about Tic Tacs. #DailyShow #Trump #BidenIsDead #ElonMusk

Thursday, June 13, 2024

Universe 46 BLY wide but only 13.8 b-y-o?


How can the visible universe be 46 billion light-years in radius when the universe is only 13.8 billion years old? How can the visible universe be 46 billion light-years (BLY) in radius when the universe is only 13.8 billion years old?

And how can we detect light 46 billion light-years away when the universe has been in existence for only a fraction of that time?

Astronomers widely accept that the universe formed in a Big Bang [with no precedent, everything blowing up into existence out of nothing, with scientists claiming to be superior to religieux IF they be given just this one miracle to explain how everything began] approximately 13.8 billion years ago.

It has been expanding ever since [which it has not but how else to explain the Doppler effect redshift than to say everything is moving apart when it is not].

This expansion explains how a 13.8-billion-year-old universe can be so much larger than 13.8 billion light-years across.

First of all, [scientists] should explain that the light-speed limit that relativity imposes on objects within the universe does not apply to the universe itself.
  • [Why? God doesn't follow His own rules imposed on everyone else like "thou shalt not kill" because as God and the model, He kills everyone he wants like the Demiurge of which the Gnostics speak.]
UFO or capsule debris on the surface of Mars
In fact, we can't refer to an absolute expansion speed of the universe because we can't measure it in reference to anything external.

We can only gauge the "speeds" of distant galaxies that are receding from us relative to our own position.

Apart from those that are gravitationally bound (such as, say, the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies), all galaxies appear to be moving away from each other as the "space-time" in which they're embedded expands.

The more distant the galaxy, the faster its recession velocity, as noted by the Hubble Law. As a consequence of this expansion, a galaxy's location changes considerably during the period of time that its light requires to travel to us. More
  • Southworth Planetarium Director Edward Herrick-Gleason, University of Southern Maine, Portland, Maine, Astronomy Magazine staff (MSN.comHow can the visible universe be..., June 12, 2024; Sheldon S., Seth Auberon (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

Thursday, April 25, 2024

Infinite size of Multiverse infinitely bigger


Physicists think the infinite size of the multiverse could be infinitely bigger
When another universe begins: samsara
(ScienceAlert) Not only does God play dice, that great big casino of quantum physics could have far more rooms than we ever imagined -- an infinite number more, in fact.

Physicists from the University of California at Davis (UCD), the Los Alamos National Laboratory in the US, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne have redrawn the map of fundamental reality to demonstrate the way we relate objects in physics could be holding us back from seeing a bigger picture.

For about a century, our understanding of reality has been complicated by the theories and observations that fall under the banner of quantum mechanics.

Gone are the days when objects had absolute measures like velocity and position. To understand the fabric from which the Universe is made, we need mathematics that breaks down games of chance into likely measures.

This is far from an intuitive view of the Universe. In what has come to be known as the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum physics, it seems there are waves of possibility until there isn't.

Quantum computing and Schrödinger’s Cat – Michael Sandberg's data visualization
.
Even now, it's not at all clear what ultimately decides the fate of Schrödinger's cat. [Is it dead, alive, or both?] That hasn't stopped physicists from considering the options.

American physicist Hugh Everett suggested in the 1950s that all possible measures constituted their own reality. What makes this one special is merely the fact you happen to be observing it.
  • Related video: What if the Universe were just an illusion? (What If)
Universes are like bubbles; beings mostly stay put
Everett's "many worlds" model isn't quite a theory so much as a way of grounding the absolute weirdness of quantum mechanics in something tangible.

We start with an impression of the infinite multiverse of maybes, or what physicists might refer to as the sum of all energies and positions known as a global Hamiltonian, and then zoom in on what interests us, constraining the infinite within a finite and far more manageable Hamiltonian subsystem.
Yet as a means of comprehending the infinite, could this "zooming in" be holding us back? Or as the researchers behind this latest exercise frame it, is it "too provincial an approach, born out of our familiarity with certain macroscopic objects?"

Schrodinger’s vet | Fuffernutter (mitrafarmand)
To put it another way, we might readily ask whether Schrödinger's cat is alive or dead inside its box but not consider whether the table beneath is warm or cold or if the box is starting to smell.

In an effort to determine whether our tendency to keep our focus on what's inside the box even matters, the researchers developed an algorithm to consider whether some quantum possibilities known as pointer states might be a little more stubbornly set than others, making some critical properties less likely to entangle.

If so, the box describing Schrödinger's cat is to some degree incomplete unless we're considering a long list of factors that may potentially stretch far across the Universe.

"You can have part of the Earth and the Andromeda galaxy in one subsystem, that's a perfectly legitimate subsystem," UCD physicist Arsalan Adil explained to Karmela Padavic-Callaghan at New Scientist.

Countless worlds in at least 31 categories
In theory, there is no limit to the way subsystems could be defined, adding long lists of states near and far that could fence off a reality in subtly different ways.

Starting with Everett's "many worlds" the team have come up with what they refer to as a "many more worlds" interpretation – taking an infinite set of possibilities and multiplying it with an infinite range of realities that we might not normally consider.

Much as with the original interpretation, this novel take is less a comment on how the Universe behaves but more about our attempts to study it one bite at a time.

The researchers emphasize they haven't attached a lot of conceptual significance to their algorithm but do wonder if it might have applications in developing better ways of probing quantum systems, such as those inside computers.

No doubt in some other reality, they already have their answer. This research is yet to be peer-reviewed and is available on arXiv. More:
  • Physicists think the infinite size of the multiverse could be infinitely bigger (ScienceAlert)
  • The best explanation for this world, which means this universe, was given by an American who went to the Andes to a doorway (portal) carved in stone, near Lake Titicaca. A shaman told him its secrets and taught him the utterances needed to enter. He did it and regretted it. What he found was the beginning of this world. There in a lab along the way, he saw "scientists" trying to control the size of our expanding world so that it did not overtake theirs. Ours started by accident. It's organic and a natural process, not uncommon. Once it gets going, it's inhabited by beings who circle the round of samsara without end. A buddha awakens, discovers the way out. Do we listen?
Multiverse?

O, Buddha, tell me the truth so I can do the math
(Richard Milner/Grunge) So we all know about the multiverse, right? One day a physicist somewhere thought, "Man, I wish I'd played in the NBA instead of sitting around doing math all day," and bam: instant childhood fantasy fulfillment meets theoretical physics

If Einstein asked, the B knew it
Then there's that Marvel movie, that other Marvel movie, and the DC one, and the one with like three Spidermen that was actually pretty solid and better than expected, especially Andrew Garfield.

And somewhere in there, drowning in the morass of fictional portrayals, evidence-less reality, the religious zeal of multiversal proponents, and grounded reservations of skeptics rests the truth of the multiverse: It's not a thing.

Okay, it could be a thing, but only in the way that "God" is a thing because its existence can't be disproven -- yet. But how to gather data on the multiverse? Behold the conundrum:
  • 1) The universe, by definition, is that which contains everything that is and
  • 2) to test for another universe we would have to test outside of all that is; therefore,
  • 3) science = impossible.
Yet, some researchers point to the oldest light in the universe -- cosmic background radiation (CBR) -- as holding multiversal clues, per a collaborative paper at Cornell University. More: Is the multiverse actually scientifically possible?

Saturday, April 13, 2024

New photos of original Woodstock 1969


Photos from Woodstock not be seen before
Black Woodstock: Harlem
Cultural Festival 1969 (free)
(Prime Discovery) March 30, 2024: The summer of 1969's Woodstock Music and Art Festival was legendary. With an epic lineup that included everyone from Jimi Hendrix to the Grateful Dead, the festival has gone down in history as one of the most iconic events of 1960's youth counterculture. It set a precedent for epic music festivals that is still unrivalled today. Coachella is one of the largest at a max of 150,000 each weekend. Woodstock had 500,000. But who knew there were photos from Woodstock that have never been revealed? Well, let’s look at them. New photos of iconic Woodstock with stories to match? What can be seen that stands out and unveils another side of this historic festival? Let’s take a journey back in time.











Thursday, May 20, 2010

How Big is the Ocean? (Animal Talk)

A Swedish warship, left, escorts a merchant ship, on Tuesday, May 11 ,2010, in the Indian Ocean. (AP Photo/Tim Freccia)Scientists calculate how big the ocean is

Using measurements from satellites, researchers determine its volume and depth. Octopus mystery solved - Dire ocean fish warning - Deep sea creatures - Dive the Marianas Trench

While fascinating, some topics of conversation are not helpful for gaining enlightenment. And without enlightenment, there is no final liberation from suffering. What sort of talk is not helpful? "Animal talk" not dealing with the Dharma, including speculative talk of the sea.

ANIMAL TALK
Animal talk is worldly discussion of rulers, robbers, ministers (politics); armies, calamities, and battles; food and drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, and scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women and heroes; the gossip of the street and the well; tales of the dead; philosophical discussions of the past and future (what the Sub-commentary explains as 'tales of diversity'), the creation of the world and of the sea, and talk of whether things exist or not."

The Sub-commentary also notes that to discuss any of these topics in a way that fosters an understanding of the Dharma — for example, discussing the impermanence of worldly power or how the size of the ocean relates to rebirth — may be considered edifying.

SAMSARA
So here's an attempt to relate the size of the sea to Samsara — the "continued wandering on" of beings through births, deaths, rebirths, and redeaths ad nauseum. It is said in the Grouped Discourses (Samyutta Nikaya, Anatamagga-samyutta, S ii 178; CDB i 651) that the beginnings of Samsara are unimaginable. That is, how long we have wandered incessantly undergoing rebirth (past lives) in various planes, both blissful and horrific, with no end in sight in future lives, is unimaginable.



To illustrate this the Buddha once asked, "Which is greater, the tears you have shed while wandering through rebirths...or the water in the four great oceans?" (In the same way he also asks, "Which is greater, the blood you have shed in your long journey in Samsara, or the water in the four great oceans?")

While in the ancient city of
Savatthi, the Buddha said: "It is not possible to construe a beginning to this wandering on. No first point is evident or a time before when beings were not hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving in this long cyclical journey. What do you think: Which is greater, the tears you have shed while wandering and running on — crying about being joined with what is displeasing and weeping over being separated from what is pleasing — or the water in the four great oceans?"

"As we understand the Dharma taught to us by the Blessed One, greater are the tears we have shed wandering on...not the water in the four great oceans."

"Excellent, disciples, excellent! It is excellent that you have understood the Dharma taught by me in this way. Indeed, the tears you have shed while wandering along are greater than the water in the four great oceans.

"Long have you (repeatedly) experienced the death of a mother. The tears you have shed over the death of a mother...crying and weeping...greater than the water in the four great oceans.

"Long have you (repeatedly) experienced the death of a father... brother... sister... son... daughter... loss with regard to relatives... wealth... disease. The tears you have shed over loss with regard to [these] while wandering along — crying and weeping — are greater than the water in the four great oceans.

"Now why is that? A first beginning to this wandering cannot be construed. A beginning point is not evident, nor a time before when beings were not hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving running and wandering on. Long have you thus experienced suffering [mental], experienced pain [physical], experienced loss, swelling up the cemeteries — it is enough to become disenchanted with all compounded things, enough to become dispassionate, enough to be released." (See also: SN 15.13).

More on the Sea of Samsara

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Brains do not shrink as we age: study

Rachael Rettner (LiveScience.com)
As we get older, our brains get smaller -- or at least that's what many scientists believe. But a new study contradicts this assumption. The conclu-sion is that when older brains are "healthy," there is little brain deterioration. Only when people experience cognitive decline do their brains show significant signs of shrinking.

The results suggest that many previous studies may have overestimated how much our brains shrink as we age. This is possibly because they failed to exclude people, who were starting to develop brain diseases such as dementia, which would lead to brain decay or atrophy.

"The main issue is that maybe healthy people do not have as much atrophy as we always thought they had," said Saartje Burgmans, the lead author of the study and a Ph.D. candidate at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. More>>

Friday, May 22, 2009

Dissecting Einstein's Brain


(LINK)

Dissecting the Genius of Einstein's Brain
When it comes to brilliance, do exceptional brains exist? To find out if there is a link between brain structure and genius, scientists look to the gray matter of renowned physicist Albert Einstein. WSJ's science columnist Robert Lee Hotz reports.