The New Year

Although badanswer.blogspot.com has not been online for a year, we do have a new calendar year upon us, for better or for worse, and I am hoping to make some changes around here.

First, as already mentioned I am planning to start a new competition involving scientific theories that "didn't make the cut." These theories are much like the Chicago Cubs of the science community. There were well received for a while (1907-1908) but now are just waiting to be swallowed by the maw of eternity having out lived their usefulness. The Cubs however get a new chance every year to try to be reinstated to the ranks of the "non-irrelevant," and the theories have been left to collect dust; until now.

Second, I was hoping to end my tenure as Google's redheaded step child by getting a domain name in my stocking, but alas, Santa failed me. So, all you loyal readers and one time visitors who got me nothing for Christmas (which is all of you, my brother, who's wife made me something, gets partial credit) have a chance to chip in. Domain registration is going for $10. I figure if all the regulars chip in a buck I can raid the kids penny jar to make up the difference. The other option is to just wait until the adds earn enough money to pay for the registration, based on Decembers totals that should happen sometime in May, 2075. I actually hope to be retired by then, so this may not be the best option. It would be nice to have this taken care of by February 23, 2007, the one year anniversary of the blog. A date in which two questions were answered ( http://badanswer.blogspot.com/2007_02_01_archive.html). I anticipate this would make it easier for whoever keeps getting to the blog by googling "badanswer blogspot."

Third, actually that about sums it up, but the list seemed short with just two points. So, I guess I will say I would also like to put up a list of those who do donate to the cause. Hopefully I won't be required to put down my kids names, a quick google search (which could be done from the top of this page) could show them who 'borrowed' their money. Feel free to email for more details.

Fourth, I guess I did have more to say after all. I added a poll on the page asking which post you feel is the best of the options given. This is primarily to keep you in practice for the voting, we don't want any dangling chad screwing up our results. You can vote for more than one post, but despite how deserving they all are, try to refrain from voting for them all. That would defeat the purpose.

Check back next week for the beginning of "Brackets 2: The Second Chance." Sorry for the lousy title, but the writers are still on strike.

THE FINAL

Kepler vs Newton

Evidently the date was wrong for the Archimedes vs Newton fight, but with Newton up by 9, we will let him get started in the final.

Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion:
   1. The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the sun at one of the foci. An ellipse is characterized by its two focal points. Thus, Kepler rejected the ancient Aristotelean and Ptolemaic and Copernican belief in circular motion.
   2. A line joining a planet and the sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time as the planet travels along its orbit.  This means that the planet travels faster while close to the sun and slows down when it is farther from the sun. With his law, Kepler destroyed the Aristotelean astronomical theory that planets have uniform velocity.
   3. The squares of the orbital periods of planets are directly proportional to the cubes of the semi-major axes (the "half-length" of the ellipse) of their orbits. This means not only that larger orbits have longer periods, but also that the speed of a planet in a larger orbit is lower than in a smaller orbit. His third law is based on the foundation left by Copernicus, because he uses a mathematical expression to show the correlation between T (time for one revolution) and D (distance from the sun).

Newton's Laws of Motion:
Briefly stated, the three laws are:
1. An object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by a net force.
2. Force equals mass multiplied by acceleration.
3. To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

The final starts on Monday, What's up (Next) doc?

Well, I have decided to have another cage match. But like most of these reality shows we here at badanswer are resorting to "B-list" science to throw in the cage. We are currently recruiting false or superseded theories to put in the cage. The winner will get a second chance to be widely accepted by being immortalized by me personally in a blog post. A partial list of contestants is as follows:
Geocentric Universe
Lamarckism
Classical Elements
Flat Earth and
Spontaneous Generation

If you would like to nominate something for the next event please leave your recommendation in the comments so we may all ridicule you; unless you leave an anonymous comment,chicken.

Semifinal 2

Archimedes vs Newton

Archimedes' principle, or the law of upthrust, is: "When a solid body is partially or completely immersed in water, the apparent loss in weight will be equal to the weight of the displaced liquid."
In other words, when a body is partially or completely immersed in a liquid, then it experiences an upward buoyant force which is equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by the immersed part of the body.

Newton's Laws of Motion:
Briefly stated, the three laws are:
1. An object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by a net force.
2. Force equals mass multiplied by acceleration.
3. To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Friday Updates

Unfortunately due to lots of work, regular Friday updates will no longer be regular.  However, still feel free to ask questions, I will try to get them answered in a timely manner.  Also, if you would like to be a guest contributor feel free to submit an article for review.  Please try to get any submission in by Friday morning, the day you would like it to be published.  That time is required to ensure the article will stand up to the rigorous standards we adhere to here at badanswer, both for accuracy and understandability.
Thank you for understanding.  I understand you will all be disappointed, feel free to vent in the comments.

Semifinal 1

Kepler vs. Ohm

Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion:
   1. The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the sun at one of the foci. An ellipse is characterized by its two focal points. Thus, Kepler rejected the ancient Aristotelean and Ptolemaic and Copernican belief in circular motion.
   2. A line joining a planet and the sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time as the planet travels along its orbit.  This means that the planet travels faster while close to the sun and slows down when it is farther from the sun. With his law, Kepler destroyed the Aristotelean astronomical theory that planets have uniform velocity.
   3. The squares of the orbital periods of planets are directly proportional to the cubes of the semi-major axes (the "half-length" of the ellipse) of their orbits. This means not only that larger orbits have longer periods, but also that the speed of a planet in a larger orbit is lower than in a smaller orbit. His third law is based on the foundation left by Copernicus, because he uses a mathematical expression to show the correlation between T (time for one revolution) and D (distance from the sun).

Ohm's law states that, in an electrical circuit, the current passing through a conductor between two points is proportional to the potential difference (i.e. voltage drop or voltage) across the two points, and inversely proportional to the resistance between them. In mathematical terms, this is written as: V=IR

Round 2, Fight 4

Newton vs Einstein

Newton's Laws of Motion:
Briefly stated, the three laws are:
1. An object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by a net force.
2. Force equals mass multiplied by acceleration.
3. To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

According to Einstein's general relativity, the observed gravitational attraction between masses results from those masses warping nearby space and time.

Round 2, Fight 3

Archimedes vs. Hooke

Archimedes' principle, or the law of upthrust, is: "When a solid body is partially or completely immersed in water, the apparent loss in weight will be equal to the weight of the displaced liquid."
In other words, when a body is partially or completely immersed in a liquid, then it experiences an upward buoyant force which is equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by the immersed part of the body.

 

Hooke's law of elasticity is an approximation that states that the amount by which a material body is deformed (the strain) is linearly related to the force causing the deformation (the stress). Materials for which Hooke's law is a useful approximation are known as linear-elastic or "Hookean" materials.

 

As a result of the late posting of this event, voting will be extended until noon on Tuesday, mountain time.

Vacation Time, Agains

As you might have guessed from the title, I am on vacation, again.  Due to a wedding, and a thanksgiving, the next two weeks will not see the regularly scheduled Friday updates.  The cage matches will continue as planned, but perhaps with less punctuality.
Thanks for your support and understanding.

Round 2, Fight 2

Ohm vs. Fick

Ohm's law states that, in an electrical circuit, the current passing through a conductor between two points is proportional to the potential difference (i.e. voltage drop or voltage) across the two points, and inversely proportional to the resistance between them. In mathematical terms, this is written as: V=IR

In the mid-1800's, Fick introduced two differential equations that quantified the above statement for the case of transport through thin membranes. Fick's First Law states that the flux, J, of a component of concentration, C, across a membrane of unit area, in a predefined plane, is proportional to the concentration differential across that plane.
Fick's Second Law states that the rate of change of concentration in a volume element of a membrane, within the diffusional field, is proportional to the rate of change of concentration gradient at that point in the field.

Hamilton's Rule

TommyP asks:  How does Hamilton's Rule (Br - C > 0) of altruism relate to human society?  I've heard it said that for me to give my life for a brother, it should actually require 2 brothers (or 8 cousins).  What's different about humans that allows us to cheat and give our own life for a single, unrelated life?

I believe the rule you are referring too is stated as such:  A Hamilton should never battle a Burr when life is on the line.  But I have no idea what that equation you stated has to do with it.  As far as cheating, it is unlikely that either of the contestants cheated.  But they certanly were selfish.  Pfft, getting shot at just for the sake of 'honor.'  What a waste, as you mentioned if it had been for two of his brothers, or 8 cousins, or even 4 nephews, then it may have been justified.  The rules are slightly more difficult when it comes to women folk, because as Grumpy pointed out in Snow White, they have "wiles, wicked wiles."  As a result it typically only takes one mother, or one sister to set the whole thing in motion.  As far as unrelated lifes, this typically requires money.  See, humans  are the only animals that use money, and for enough of it you can get most anyone to do most anything.  But back to the brother cousin thing, yes, it is not very worth while to go for a 1:1 exchange. 

There is quite a bit of theory behind this, and it is typically called Kin Selection.  William Donald Hamilton studied this phenomenon before contracting malaria in Africa while trying to link AIDS to oral polio vaccines, and subsequently dying.  Well, that is all for this time, hope you have a large family, just to make it worth while if you ever need to expire for the greater good. 

Round 2, Fight 1

Kepler vs. Asimov

Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion:
   1. The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the sun at one of the foci. An ellipse is characterized by its two focal points. Thus, Kepler rejected the ancient Aristotelean and Ptolemaic and Copernican belief in circular motion.
   2. A line joining a planet and the sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time as the planet travels along its orbit.  This means that the planet travels faster while close to the sun and slows down when it is farther from the sun. With his law, Kepler destroyed the Aristotelean astronomical theory that planets have uniform velocity.
   3. The squares of the orbital periods of planets are directly proportional to the cubes of the semi-major axes (the "half-length" of the ellipse) of their orbits. This means not only that larger orbits have longer periods, but also that the speed of a planet in a larger orbit is lower than in a smaller orbit. His third law is based on the foundation left by Copernicus, because he uses a mathematical expression to show the correlation between T (time for one revolution) and D (distance from the sun).

Asimov's Laws of Robotis
   1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
   2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
   3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Coulomb's Law

Back to explaining the losers; and Coulomb lost big. Coulomb's Law states: The magnitude of the electrostatic force between two points electric charges is directly proportional to the product of the magnitudes of each charge and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the charges.

Coulomb's law is very important, if you are a point charge, and there is only one other point charge around. Otherwise the math gets difficult.

For example, for a point charge and a fixed dipole is easier than for a free to rotate dipole, which is easier than for two freely rotating dipoles. Those rotating dipoles would be easier without to calculate if it weren't for entropy. Stupid entropy.

Anyway, when it all comes down to it the potential energy of these different two particle systems is inversely proportional to the distance to the sixth power, and no longer the second power. The Hamaker constant is used to sum up all of these forces, charge, dipole and induced dipole.

An important thing to note about the Hamaker constant is that it is always attractive in a vacuum. So even if nature abhors a vacuum, next time you feel like attracting a significant other it may not be a bad idea to pick one up. Just a little tip for all you guys out there.

Well we didn't really cover Coulomb, but after that shut out did he really deserve it? I hope you learned something anyway.

Round 1, Fight 8

Einstein's General Theory of Relativity vs. Moore's Law

According to general relativity, the observed gravitational attraction
between masses results from those masses warping nearby space and
time.

Moore's Law states: the number of transistors that can be
inexpensively placed on an integrated circuit is increasing
exponentially, doubling approximately every two years.

Knock out mice

Based on past trends, I should be discussing Ampere's Law. But lets face it, it was a shutout, he lost, and no tears were shed. The Nobel prize for Medicine/Physiology was recently awarded for the creation of knock out mice; we will be discussing this instead.

What are they you ask, good question. Despite the name, they have nothing to do with boxing. Knock out is used more like in the phrase here from UrbanDictionary.com "Svetlana knew how to dress to perfectly complement her tall, athletic frame. By virtue of her bright eyes, silky long hair, and a smile that could stop a revolution, people widely regard her as a knock out."

The scientists found ways to remove certain genes from the mouse embryos. This allows them to research what the genes do by observing what happens whey they are no longer expressed. The technology can be used to create mice prone to cancer, long life, immune disorders and advanced maze running abilities as well as knockout mice by removing the 'ugly genes.'

Knock out mice are used as a non lethal form of mouse population control. For example, in a cage of 10 normal male mice, 9 normal female mice, and one female knock out mouse, the male mice will strive to mate exclusively with the knock out (unless their water bottle is spiked with ethanol, at which point the ugly mice can "get lucky"). By neutering, or is it spaying, the knock out prior to release into the wild there is no subsequent generation of mice. Luckily there is also no real chance of this effect wiping out the entire mouse population, which could be bad for animals which eat mice. This is due to what is called the "King Kong Corollary." King Kong had a thing for that hot chick, and many of the animals, such as owls, have the same inclinations for the knockout mice and will selectively remove them from the breeding pool. This effect is exasperated by the fact that, in mice at least, the same genes which code for ugly also code for smarts, leaving the mice to stupid to escape from their captors and return to causing discord in the mouse colony. It is presently unknown if the traits are tied in humans as well, although anecdotal evidence from Hollywood starlets and many blonds would definately support the claim.

So, give it up for the knockout mouse, and all the genetic prowess that led to its creation.

Round 1, Fight 7

Newton's Laws of motion vs. Coulomb's Law

Newton's Laws of Motion:
Briefly stated, the three laws are:
1. An object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by a net force.
2. Force equals mass multiplied by acceleration.
3. To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Coulomb's Law states: The magnitude of the electrostatic force between two points electric charges is directly proportional to the product of the magnitudes of each charge and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the charges.

String Theory

Bernoulli's principle lost, but was well covered in the comments. So instead we will humor tommyp who said "If y'all are so good at making stuff up, you would think you could come up with something interesting for universe building blocks." This ones for you, tommyp. String Theory is complicated, but luckily I am a really smart guy, as evidenced in my many publications on this website.

Gravity owes its existence to an apple being in the right place at the right time (see Newton). String theory is here due to socks. That is right, the kind you wear on your feet. See, a bunch of physics majors, or professors, I forget which, could have been both really, but they were instructing one of their colleges on the importance of wearing matching socks to the hypothetical "date" or "going out on the town." The exact conversation, which is said to have occurred in a particularly difficult dungeon in D&D, is lost to antiquity, but at some point the conversation turned to socks disappearing in the wash (several of the participants were unable to participate as their moms still, to this very day, do their laundry for them).

Two facts were focused upon in connection to the disappearing socks. First, socks are composed of matter in the form of strings. Second, according to Einstein E=Mc^2. It was proposed that the driers were acting as a low speed particle accelerator, converting the socks to pure energy. Plugging the mass of the socks into Einstein's equation proved that this would be an unhealthy amount of energy for the drier to absorb. However, the idea did not die, instead it shifted to the theory of the socks being converted to really small strings, still mater, not engergy. Some of these strings would be open, others would be closed, others could be stretched into 'branes. I would call that "pretty interesting" tommyp.

Currently string theory is composed of at least 6 different partially conflicting partially overlapping theories, as well as the one string to rule them all; M-Theory. Theories were generated to use cool, but otherwise worthless things, such as Calabi-Yau manifolds. These theories include up to 11 different dimensions, including the possibility of a second time dimension. These additional dimensions allow for realms where nerds and/or geeks, and/or dweebs, and/or dorks, and not jocks are at the top of the high school food chain. Thus allowing the possibility of moving the hypothetical "hot date" in to the realm of reality, which would have prevented that fateful conversation from ever taking place.

For more specifics on the different theories beyond the limited scope available here search the web, there is a convenient Google tool bar on this very page, near the top. In closing I would just like to say I am grateful that the initial conversation dealt with socks and not 'unmentionables' which also disappear on more rare occasions. A sub-atomic particle named the "skid mark" would be bad for business, not that a "gluon" is a poster child.

Round 1, Fight 6

Hooke's Law vs. Ampere's Law

Hooke's law of elasticity is an approximation that states that the amount by which a material body is deformed (the strain) is linearly related to the force causing the deformation (the stress). Materials for which Hooke's law is a useful approximation are known as linear-elastic or "Hookean" materials.

In physics, Ampère's circuital law, discovered by André-Marie Ampère, relates the circulating magnetic field in a closed loop to the electric current passing through the loop. It is the magnetic equivalent of Gauss's law.

Poiseuille's law

Poiseuille just didn't come to play last week, but I'm sure his mother still loves him all the same. Poiseuille is a very important guy in the sprinkler business. Without his equations it would be next to impossible to get all of your sprinklers working properly. His law equates the flow of the system to pi * R^4 * |Delta P| divided by 8 * the viscosity * the length. In fact the only easy "solution" is to over engineer the system, like mine. See, most home use sprinklers work from 25 - perhaps 40 psi. My system (using the same previously mentioned sprinkler heads) runs at full city water pressure, about 120 psi. This gives me plenty of flow, enough to blow the tops of some of the sprinklers if I am not careful.

Enough about me, lets talk about Poiseuille and why he lost. I see two main points (not counting him being french). First, Poiseuille's law requires Newtonian fluids, which don't exist. Enough discussion has already been made in comments about the significance of this in the context here. Second, his law only works on laminar flow.

Laminar flow is when the flow if the liquid occurs in paralell streams; the layers being undisturbed by each other. Nice and predictable, even for many non-Newtonian fluids. This is typically the case for a Renoylds number below about 2100-2300. Above this turbulent flow occurs. Turbulent flow, as you may surmise from the name, is violent(read the footnote here to see why turbulence is good at propagating violence ). Some may argue that laminar flow is required for planes and helicopters to fly. To them I say "you just need more thrust."

Round 1, Fight 5

Archimedes principle vs. Bernoulli's Principle

Archimedes' principle, or the law of upthrust, is: "When a solid body is partially or completely immersed in water, the apparent loss in weight will be equal to the weight of the displaced liquid."
In other words, when a body is partially or completely immersed in a liquid, then it experiences an upward buoyant force which is equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by the immersed part of the body.

Bernoulli's Principle states that for an ideal fluid (low speed air is a good approximation), with no work being performed on the fluid, an increase in velocity occurs simultaneously with decrease in pressure or a change in the fluid's gravitational potential energy.

This principle is a simplification of Bernoulli's equation, which states that the sum of all forms of energy in a fluid flowing along an enclosed path (a streamline) is the same at any two points in that path. It is named after the Dutch/Swiss mathematician/scientist Daniel Bernoulli, though it was previously understood by Leonhard Euler and others. In fluid flow with no viscosity, and therefore, one in which a pressure difference is the only accelerating force, the principle is equivalent to Newton's laws of motion.

Gauss's Law

Carl Friedrich Gauss was a pretty smart guy. That is why he got a law named after him. There are really only two ways to get a law named after you. First, do or state something first, as did Gauss, Ohm (who recently beat Gauss as we know), Fudd, or Godwin. Second have something bad happen to you, such as Murphy, or Megan.

So what do you need to do to get a law named after you? Good ol' Carl helps us here as well. See he also worked on what is called the Gaussian distribution. That combined with Google can give us that answer. A Google search for "laws named for people" yields almost 6 million hits; half of the first page (5 of 10) seem relevant, so lets say 3 million laws. Most of these will not be commonly used, like perhaps someone makes their own law. Like you could make a "Beanholio's Law" where some arbitrary assessments are made to determine "coolness." But that will never last the test of time. So, lets be generous and say there are 600,000 valid laws named for people; just to make the math easier. With 6 billion people on the earth that leaves 0.1% of the population with a law. However, most of the laws are named for dead people, so we should take them into account as well. There are a lot of dead people so really you need to be like 1 in a million to get a law named after you.

Back to the Gaussian distribution with the x-axis going from unlucky to first. Those who are greater than 6 sigma below the average have a very high chance of having something so unfortunate happen to them that they will get a law named after them. Those six sigma above the average will most likely do/say something really cool and get a law named after them.

So, here's to you Gauss, for being one lucky SOB. Wait, actually you were on the other end of the scale, good for you all the same.

Round 1, Fight 4

Fick's Law of Diffusion vs. Poiseuille's Law

In the mid-1800's, Fick introduced two differential equations that quantified the above statement for the case of transport through thin membranes. Fick's First Law states that the flux, J, of a component of concentration, C, across a membrane of unit area, in a predefined plane, is proportional to the concentration differential across that plane. Fick's Second Law states that the rate of change of concentration in a volume element of a membrane, within the diffusional field, is proportional to the rate of change of concentration gradient at that point in the field.

Poiseuille's law is the physical law concerning the voluminal laminar stationary flow Φ of an incompressible uniform viscous liquid (so called Newtonian fluid) through a cylindrical tube with constant
circular cross-section. Poiseuille's law is also sometimes called the Hagen-Poiseuille law including reference to Gotthilf Heinrich Ludwig Hagen (1797-1884) for his experiments in 1839.

Despite the relevence of the laws in the cage the past few weeks, I would like to assure you that the parings were completely random. Assuming that Excel's random number generator was not biased, which looking back may not have been such a good assumption. Good thing this ain't for a grade.

The second looser, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.

Heisenberg was a German, and remained so his whole life; part of which included the second world war.  Being a scientist he could have left the country and joined the allies, like Albert Einstein did.  He was awarded the Nobel prize in 1932 for "the creation of Quantum Mechanics..." which when looked at in a historical context has been far less useful than auto mechanics as developed by Henry Ford.  

Heisenberg developed his uncertainty principle during his time of employment working for the Nazis.  Generally believed not to be a strong believer in the Nazi agenda, he did none the less work at developing nuclear technology for them.  However, no one is quite certain if he was really putting his back into the work.  Sometimes he thought a bomb was possible, but would require tons of material.  Other times he thought it would be impossible, and even thought that reports of the Hiroshima bomb were pure propaganda.  Claims also come up that he knew it could be done, but tried to slow the work to prevent its completion.  But it is also possible that those were just stories concocted to cover his inept abilities in comparison to the Manhattan project.  

As a result of Heisenberg's wishy-washyness (all reports indicate he never did in fact enter pollitics) he developed his uncertainty principle "which says you can't really know where anything is.*" Source

*A full discussion of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle may be found in the Appendix. Then again, it may not.

Round 1, Fight 3

Ohm's Law vs. Gauss' Law

Ohm's law states that, in an electrical circuit, the current passing through a conductor between two points is proportional to the potential difference (i.e. voltage drop or voltage) across the two
points, and inversely proportional to the resistance between them. In mathematical terms, this is written as: V=IR

Gauss Law states that the total of the electric flux out of a closed surface is equal to the charge enclosed divided by the permittivity. F=Q/Eo (pretend I used the greek letters (except for 'Q,' 'Q' can stay)).

Good luck with this one readers. Gauss has his "Gauss Canon," but an understanding of Ohm's law is crucial for developing rail guns, as well as Tasers. And there are documented cases of Tasers killing people, but I am unaware of any documented cases of gauss guns killing people.

Note: For your calculations, the human body can be modeled as a sphere with a density of about 0.98 g/ml, and an impedance of 1M Ohm for the skin, but only 100 Ohms if the probes are in contact with body fluids. (http://www.darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin1999-50.html)

What is the Significance of Boyle's Law?

Well, I am glad you asked.  Actually you didn't ask, but I can imagine.

As we learned on Monday, Boyle's Law is a looser.  Let me explain why. 

First, Boyle's law (pV=K) is contained in the ideal gas law (pV=nRT), making it a redundant law.   This would be like making a law prohibiting men from forgetting their wedding anniversary.  Yeah, you could make the law, even get your name on it perhaps, but the fact is the wives will always do a better job on this one than the gov't ever could.  Yup, they are the judge jury and executioner.  Glad my wife doesn't read this blog.  I hope...

Second, Boyle's law only works for ideal gasses, and when was the last time you had one of those laying around; I'll wager never seeing as how they don't actually exist.

Third, this one is the real kicker, but I can't recall what it was.  But rest assured, it proved the point.

Mostly all Boyle's Law is good for is calculating the final pressure or volume of a fixed quantity of gas at a given temperature after perturbing the system equilibrium.  Or in letters (please imaging the numbers are subscripts), p1V1=p2V2.

Well, Boyle, looks like the only thing you have going for you is that your law came before the ideal gas law.  Good for you, and all the millions of chemistry books that now have your name in them.  I hope you are happy.

Round 1, Fight 2

Heisenberg's uncertainty principle vs. Asimov's Laws of Robotics

This one will be good. Oh so good. But first, I was rather disappointed in the quality of the trash talking for the first fight. I felt beanholio should have replied with a comeback, something like "I'll mellow your tune" would have sufficed.

But I digress. On to the deffinitions

The Heisenberg uncertainty principle gives a lower bound on the product of the standard deviations of position and momentum for a system, implying that it is impossible to have a particle that has an arbitrarily well-defined position and momentum simultaneously.

Asimov's Laws of Robotis

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Be sure to vote, and explain your vote in the comments.

A Tie???

In the event of a tie at Noon, the polls will remain open and more than one vote per person will be allowed. Polls will close at 1pm, or 2pm in the event of a tie at 1pm, or 3pm in the event of a tie at 2pm, or 4pm in the event of a tie at 3pm. In the event of a tie at 4pm I will pull a Venezuela (although in a few months this may be renamed to 'pulling a Putin') and remove democracy by declaring whomever I voted for the winner.

EDIT:
As elegant as this design is, it has a major flaw. Once someone votes I can't alter poll to allow for a single user to cast multiple votes. So, my condolences to those who voted for Boyle. You fought a good fight, but luck was against you.

Kepler wins.

What is a geyser?

I suppose gerontology is science, howbeit a boring one. Geysers are
old people, typically male. The female counterpart is typically
referred to as a crone.

Hold on, I thought you were asking about geezers. Its been a long day.

There are actually several similarities between the two however.
Geyser is Icelandic for "to gush." Which refers to water gushing
about. In geysers this is referred to as regularity, such as in Old
Faithful, in Yellowstone. In geezers this is called incontinence, and
is far less glamorous; there is some connection between geezers,
regularity, and metamucil, but that is not for today.

Geysers work by geothermal properties such as water percolation, hot
magma, and holes in the ground. See, the water percolates through
fissures in the ground The water then reaches hot magma, boils and
hemorrhages out of a hole in the ground.

Geezers on the other hand no longer work, and from here on out the
similarities are superficial. Geezers are retired and living longer
than ever, cashing Social Security checks. See, the money percolates
from tax payers through the system. The cashed check enters their hot grubby hands and then hemorrhages out of their possession into the casino.

The cycle of a geyser is kept in motion due to gnomes, or sprites,
possibly pixies, or even natural phenomenon. The cycle of the geezer
is maintained by the one-armed bandit.

Thank you, and good night.

Brackets round 1, fight 1

A brief description of the laws in the cage this week, taken from wikipedia.

Boyle's Law: For a fixed amount of gas kept at a fixed temperature, P
and V are inversely proportional.

Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion:
1. The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the sun at one of
the foci. An ellipse is characterized by its two focal points; see
illustration. Thus, Kepler rejected the ancient Aristotelean and
Ptolemaic and Copernican belief in circular motion.
2. A line joining a planet and the sun sweeps out equal areas
during equal intervals of time as the planet travels along its orbit.
This means that the planet travels faster while close to the sun and
slows down when it is farther from the sun. With his law, Kepler
destroyed the Aristotelean astronomical theory that planets have
uniform velocity.
3. The squares of the orbital periods of planets are directly
proportional to the cubes of the semi-major axes (the "half-length" of
the ellipse) of their orbits. This means not only that larger orbits
have longer periods, but also that the speed of a planet in a larger
orbit is lower than in a smaller orbit. His third law is based on the
foundation left by Copernicus, because he uses a mathematical
expression to show the correlation between T (time for one revolution)
and D (distance from the sun).

Vote Wisely, voting ends next Monday at noon MDT, and feel free to
discuss your warped rationale in the comments.

The previous poll ended with 3 votes for "Very Yes."

New feature

Some of you, (2 at the time of this posting) had noticed the new feature on this site.  The poll.  Starting Monday you will be given the chance to vote on the best Scientific law or theory.  This is not to be based on elegance, or even benefit to mankind.  This is a no holds barred cage match.  Brackets will be coming soon. 

The proposed list of contestants was generated giving added weight to the physical sciences, as well as those named for persons, and is given as follows in alphabetical order:
Ampere's Law
Archimedes principle
Asimov's Laws of Robotics
Bernoulli's Principle
Boyle's Law
Coulomb's Law
Einstein's General Theory of Relativity
Fick's Law of Diffusion
Gauss' Law
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle
Hooke's Law
Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion
Moore's Law
Newton's Laws of motion
Ohm's Law
Poiseuille's Law

Please send your e-mails in regards to possible changes in the lineup, as well as seeding for the top 4 contestants. 

Why does corn pop?

First of all, there are different types of corn. White corn, yellow corn, sweet corn, indian corn (or maize, as they call it), and candy corn. Not all of these types of corn pop. In fact, only two types of corn pop. "Popcorn" and the newer "microwave popcorn." Long ago, people could only eat corn on the cob, from cans, or ground into flour. Modern science has added frozen corn, as well as the corn that pops.

So, why does it pop? Well, have you ever been so mad you thought you could explode? Funny how it never happens, the exploding, not the mad. That is because you do not have pyrokinetic abilities. Corn does, well, just popcorn and microwave popcorn. It is possible to trigger corn into using it's ability on itself causing them to explode. They would continue to exert their abilities, but unfortunately they die after popping, and the activity ceases. At least that is how it is suppose to happen.

Every one has seen those few final kernels of corn, which never seem to pop. It is best not to try to make them. Things happen, bad things. See, those few remaining kernels have much stronger abilities than their popped counter parts. Triggering them to pyrokinese invariably results in them burning surrounding kernels. This is most prominent in microwave popcorn and always leads to unpleasant odoriferous results.

The only thing left to discuss is the trigger to get these guys going. For popcorn it is heat. They don't like to be hot. Microwave popcorn also doesn't like to be hot, but is additionally sensitive to microwave radiation as a heat source. This type of corn despises heat due to traumatic events in it's childhood. See, soon after being forcefully ripped off the corn stalk, heat was used to dry out the kernels of corn. The subsequent application of heat, either on the stove top or in the mictowave, triggers these repressed memories, causing them to snap, er, I mean pop.

Others may claim there is some moisture in the kernel which turns to steam as a result of the heat and the expansion of the steam causes the kernel to pop. This is almost correct, but it is the intrinsic pyrokinetic ability of the corn, and not the externally applied heat which causes the conversion to steam.

Thanks, and keep the questions coming.

Who is El Nino?

There are several possible correct answers.  If you are a religious person try reading the New Testament to learn more, this is a spanish reference to the Christ child.  If you are my contact with the embassy I think I was suppose to say "you seek the man with the purple hat and yellow beard."  If you are a weather man El Nino is "a warming of the ocean surface off the western coast of South America that occurs every 4 to 12 years when upwelling of cold, nutrient-rich water does not occur. It causes die-offs of plankton and fish and affects Pacific jet stream winds, altering storm tracks and creating unusual weather patterns in various parts of the world." (Dictionary.com)

So, is El Nino good or bad.  I am going with good on this one.  For example, Christ is good.  Bad weather is bad, but it can distract us from other problems.  For example, el Nino causes drought conditions in parts of the world.  This means they do not need to worry about floods, this is good.  In other parts of the world el Nino causes Floods, they do not need to worry about lack of water for their crops and live stock.  See, el Nino is good.  It is part of nature just letting us know who is boss, that regardless of how many holes we put in the ozone, or how many species we wipe out, nature still has the power to make us complain. 

I think that mother nature just gets tired of all the complaining; "its too hot," its too cold," "its too wet," "we need more rain."  Then she lays the smack down on us.  Hehe, that will teach us.  Maybe.

How do atomic clocks work?

Atoms are curious things.  For a long time they were the smallest things out there.  But like all technology, new things are smaller, new things here being subatomic particles.  This leads to the result that atoms are old.  And just like grandpa, they have the shakes.  But unlike grandpa, these shakes are predictable and don't lead to spilled coffee, or accidents while shaving with a strait razor. 

Scientists have harnessed the predictability of the atoms movement to tell time.  Most of the atomic clocks use cesium atoms which vibrate at 9,192,631,770 Hertz.  This is a big number, which clearly shows how shaken up traditional atoms have become as a result of these renegade subatomic particles.  For comparison, most people with shakes, either palsy, or withdrawal, or a sugar buzz never exceed several hundred Hertz. 

The vibration is measured using things like lasers and microwaves.  Over all, this clock is accurate to 1 second after 20 million years.  This was tested at some point I am sure, scientists don't just spit out numbers at random.  The probably used Einsteins general relativity to do this however, and all quantum mechanics know this could lead to error.  So, as for me, I don't wear a watch. You can never be too careful. 

How does one compost?

The subtleties of the English language appear to be lost on you.  Do you wish to learn how you yourself would compost, or how to make compost out of your yard wastes. 

In reality it does not matter which you had in mind, as both processes are essentially the same.  However, it is not recommended to compost animal products for household use (reference needed, find one on Google, you can search from this page :)) <-- That is suppose to be a smiley at the end of a parenthetical comment, not a double chin smiley.

Composting works by letting worms and microbes and black magic (think Harry Potter and his evil devil worshiping friends) do their things and break down organic material into smaller pieces which can then be recycled by other plants.  After these other plants have used the material one of two things can occur.  Either the plant will die and then can be composted, or an animal will eat the plant, then die and be composted.  The second option is not preferred however, as mentioned in the missing reference above, clearly then it is better to eat animals then vegetables.

To start your own compost pile throw a bunch of organic crap (leaves, grass clippings, Lima beans) in a pile on the ground.  Every so often 'stir' the pile to ensure that oxygen can get  throughout the pile to allow the microbes to "do their thing."  After a couple of months the microbes will be done, and you will have what farmers call "brown gold."  At least I like to think that is what they would call it.

When is the end of the world?

This is a science blog, most of the questions answered are scientificly based on a real science.  Today we delve into the world of astrology, which although it sounds like a science, it is really just a bunch of crap.  For example, how can Jupiter influence your life, only through gravity.  However, assuming your doctor weights 75 kg (reasonable), and was less than 12 cm away from you when you were born (hopefully he caught you on the way out) he had a stronger gravitational pull on you than Jupiter would have at its closest distance to earth.

But on to the answer.  The world ends on December 21, 2012.

This date was not chosen at random from a hat containing only 2's and 1's and the occasional 0.  It was chosen because of a bad implementation of a calendar, just like the whole Y2K thing back at the turn of the century.  This time however the end of the world is the fault of the Mayans, and not short sighted computer geeks.

The Mayan calendar was pretty wack (that is the technical term I am told) by metric standards, but is A-OK based on the English system.  Much like the rational behind putting 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in a yard, and 5280 feet in a mile, the Mayans took liberties with their place holders for the calendar.  The first place recorded a number from 0 to 20. To the left, the second place could have a range from 0 to 17; the third from 0 to 19; the fourth from 0 to 19 and the last from 0 to 12. The numbers were written from right to left, like our system, separated by a dot. Instead of multiples of 10, the first place had a multiple of 1 (like our system); the second place a multiple of 20; the third a multiple of 360; the fourth a multiple of 7200 and the fifth a multiple of 144000.

It is assumed that we developed a base 10 system because we have 10 fingers.  This raises an interesting question about Mayan fingers which will not be addressed here. 

This calendar will run out of days on, you guessed it, December 21, 2012.  So what exactly will happen?  This is where we must turn to astrology.  It could be a pop quiz, your boy and/or girlfriend dumps you, the death of a loved one, or just a gigantic solar mass ejection event as this day coincides with solar max, and also with the solar system moving from the top of the Milky Way accretion disk to the bottom, as well as the inversion of the magnetic poles of the sun, and the last shopping weekend before Christmas. 

Personally I find it preposterous that the world will end on a Friday.  It seems more like a Tuesday or Thursday kind of thing.  Either you just made it through the worst (Monday) or it comes to get you just as you see the light at the end of the tunnel.

So, play it safe, and don't wait to buy that special someone their Christmas gift, or they might dump you, leaving you to wallow in your self pity wishing that the destroyer would come to purge the Earth, ending your unbearable emo agony. 

If only we could find some ancient Mayans to fix this mess.  I was hoping for a long retirement. 

This site here was used as a reference, as well as blatantly plagiarized without proper quote marks for the description of the Mayan Calendar.

How does gravity work?

Little is know about gravity.  Gravity is much like a mob boss.  You can see the effects around you, but it is hard to figure out exactly who or what is behind it.  Carrying the analogy further they are also both illegal.  For example, a mob boss kills people (well he just calls the hits; so lets say mob bosses commit tax evasion, that one will stick).  Gravity on the other hand is  in clear violation of the laws of thermodynamics. 

I could find no clues as to who Mr. Thermodynamic was, but I will call him Joe.  One of Joe's laws is the conservation of energy.  This law says that energy can't just come from nowhere.  Joe evidently was a democrat and realized that this law was essential to give the government the ability tax us hard working people for making use of gravity. 

After "The Law of Conservation of Energy" passed, gravity stuck it to the man and continued to give it's energy away for free.  Gravity has been using energy to accelerate mass everywhere at varying rates; at the surface of the earth the rate is about 9.81 m/s^2.  In fact gravity's energy distribution model appears to have no identifiable source, and yet it never wavers.  (I wonder what a rolling gravitational black out would look like on the 6 0'clock news, but I guess we would never know unless it somehow affected Paris Hilton.)

Anyway, based on observations there is no known other source of energy to cause this force and the earth is not loosing any mass to generate the energy needed for this gravitational acceleration.  The actual mass loss needed to fuel gravity can be calculated using Einsteins equation F=ma, or was it e=mc^2; well, odds are you would need them both to get the answer, might even need this one F=M1*M2/d^2.  Theres more if you need them, I've got plenty. 

Black holes ( if they exist) are an interesting case study for this point.  The more gravitational energy they exert, the faster they should lose weight.  Black holes can never form as a result if you are willing to fudge some numbers.  So what is the super dense thing at the center of the galaxy, my bet is its a politician, or even a bunch of them.  A galactic congress could fit...

We may never know how gravity works, but until the laws change, we assume it is working here illegally. 


Note.  Rumor has it that President G.W. Bush of the U.S.A. had plans drawn up to attack Nature so the US could claim sovereignty and rewrite the laws of nature, or at least install a democracy.  However, after failing to find it on a map, Iraq was targeted instead.  As a result the price of  gravity is the same, and gas sells for over $3.00 per gallon.  And people say the war is a bad thing, just imagine what might have happened if he had found the primary target.

Why can't I buy cashews in the shell, only as mixed nuts?

Several things first.  First, if you look hard, you should be able to find cans of just cashews.  Second, cashews aren't real nuts, same for peanuts; actually most of the 'nuts' we ear are not really nuts, such as almonds, Brazil nuts, pistachios, macadamias, and coconuts.  Third, cashews are not like water, they are bad eggs or nuts, but not real nuts; cashews are bad and they will kill you.  Well, maybe not kill you, but it could give you a mighty rash. 

You see, the cashew fruit contains a caustic phenolic resin, urushio.   This is the same irritating material found in poison oak, poison ivy, and mothers-in-law.  The seeds need to be removed carefully to avoid exposure to this vile substance.  This is referred to as habilitating the cashew.  Originally it was called rehabilitating, but the botanists decided it couldn't be rehabilitated if it had never been habilitated in the first place.

So, next time you pop open a can of mixed nuts to pick out just the cashews, give a moments pause to thank all the little people, mostly 8-12 yr. old boys and girls working 16 hour days for unlivable wages who live in India, Vietnam, or possibly Brazil who have gone through the trouble of getting that delicious cashew ready for your mouth.  Unless they are processed by machine or older people or trained monkeys or black magic, in which case I would recommend eating the whole can in one sitting behind a locked door.  Seriously, what good has sharing ever done you?

Greg M Says: "My sleeping bag is rated to 0 degrees, but it was only 30 and I froze, what gives?"

Well, Greg, in my experience it is usually best to assume that the person asking the question is an idiot, and work from there.  So, you froze because the bag was rated in degrees Celsius, and you were measuring in Fahrenheit.  See, a fahren's height is only 5/9ths as tall as a celsi, fahrens also have a baseline higher by about 32.  The math is complex but, this works out to be that you were actually 2 degrees below reported temperature (2 degrees Fahrenheit). 

However, if you are not an idiot, you deserve a longer answer.  First, it is important to understand how the ratings are achieved.  There are different organizations which provide guidelines for testing things.  Some of these are ASTM, ISO, and FEMA.  ASTM and ISO are industry standards, FEMA is a government standard and is much easier to get good marks using this benchmarking system, as long as the item is never required to actually be used, then the obvious flaws appear. 

The tests are performed in the following manner.  A bunch of people are placed in the sleeping bags and then put in a cold room (The actual number depends on which standard is being used.  If you try doing this at home 5 or more would be best to get a statistically relevant data set).  The temperature is gradually lowered until everyone dies.  From here statistics are run to determine the LT50 of the bag (Lethal Temperature 50, or the temperature at which half of the people die.  The LD50 for pharmaceuticals is calculated the same basic way.).  The ASTM and ISO standards require the company to report the temperature rating at 2 standard deviations above the LT50, which corrosponds to about a 3% death rate at that temperature.  Most of these people were anorexic, looked sickly and probably would have blown away in a stiff breeze if they had actually tried camping; so the actually user population is safe.  FEMA standards allow for the reporting of the real LT50 and actually allows for simulated testing done on paper, and even that is negotiable with proper campaign donations.

So Greg, go buy a new sleeping bag so you can then camp safely, as long as you use an RV.  One with a heater. 

Tommy P. Says: "I thought my bank loved me, but it turns out I just don't understand 'interest'."

Interest means different things to different people.  Let me give some examples.  For Charlie Brown, interest is the Little Red Head Girl.  For Lucy, it is Schroder.  For Schroder it is the piano.  For evil geniuses it is power, absolute power, the power to rule the world, or crush it like a bug.  Well... thats what, I mean, at least that is what I heard, it, uh, you know, sounds plausible.  And moving on I like cookies, not power, but cookies.  You know, I really like those pink and white Grandmothers cookies.  I can down a whole bag without even breaking a sweat.

Interest must sweat however, according to J. Ruben Clark "Interest never sleeps nor sickens nor dies; it never goes to the hospital; it works on Sundays and holidays; it never takes a vacation; it never visits nor travels; it takes no pleasure; it is never laid off work nor discharged from employment; it never works on reduced hours..."  If his statement is true however, I must not have interest in cookies, because I take pleasure in them, perhaps I just have a passing fancy or infatuation for them as opposed to real interest.  Or perhaps, ol' J. Rube was talking about a different type of interest.  I know for a fact that there are a minimum of two types, simple, and compound.  With pioneering efforts led by firms such as Tyco, and Enron we may discover yet more types of interest, one can only hope. 

Because of Interest's work ethic, it was called "the strongest force in the Universe" by none other than Al Einstein, who is generally accepted as being a rather smart guy.  I thought the strongest was the Strong Nuclear force.  However, that force only operates over short distances, Einstein may have been looking at the total area under the curve(the integral for those math buffs out there), and interest does not diminish with distance, or time (in fact most interest usually goes up (prime +17%) with time, at least on credit cards); which would give it infinite power.  Douglas Addams, another great thinker demonstrated the power of interest in his published work "The Restaurant the end of the Universe."  Here, despite high prices for everything on the menu, it is quite easy to pay.  Deposit a penny in an account and by the time your dinner arrives compound interest will have swollen it to a large sum of money, this does require time travel.  Doug forgot two things however, first, the minimum opening balance, and second, bank fees.  While the first might be avoided, the bank fees would have taken the account into the red, leaving the bank patron owing untold sums of money.  Not making out like a bandit. 

Rick J. "What can you tell me about rocks, I have a report on them to do?"

Rocks, eh.  Well most rocks are outside, like Mt. Augustus in Australia, which is the worlds biggest rock.  Rocks are also hard, rock hard to be more precise.  Different rocks have different hardnesses however, this is measured on the Mohr's scale, which ranges from 1 to 10.

1.  Talc (Baby Powder) -- soft as a baby's bottom
2.  Gypsum -- Rocks with the mental capacity of those who believe Gypsies and astrology
3.  Calcite -- Rocks found in heads in California especially Hollywood
4.  Fluorite -- Rocks found in heads of Florida voters
5.  Apatite -- Truck stop biscuits
6.  Moonstone -- Green Cheese
7.  Quartz -- Used for most watches, not hard to get at all
8.  Topaz -- this is a tough one; leave a suggestion in the comments
9.  Corundum -- between a rock and a hard place
10.  Diamond -- A girls best friend (not the dumpy one, the other one)

There are also three basic types of rocks classified by how they are made.  Sedentary, metaphoric, ignominious.

Sedentary rocks are common, they just sit there and do nothing.
Metaphoric rocks are like killing two birds with one stone.
Ignominious rocks are actually used to kill two birds.

You didn't give a page length for your report, but I help this helps.  Additional hints on writing good reports can be found here --> Click Here.

What is a geosynchronous orbit?

This is truly one of the great mysteries of the universe, well, not what it is, but rather how it works.

A geosynchronous orbit is where the satellite completes one revolution for every rotation of the body being orbited. In addition to this, they must both be moving in the same direction (counter-clockwise for the north, clockwise in the south. The reason for this has to do with the use of sun dials in the ancient world. In the north, the suns ecliptic is to the south, generally; in the south it is to the north, again generally. Near the equator people didn't care about the time, it is too hot to worry about such trivial matters. The location of the suns ecliptic caused sun dials in the north to move clockwise. In the south they also moved clockwise, but southern clockwise, which is currently referred to as counter clockwise. After the US civil war when the southerners were defeated the northern definition of clock wise was accepted as the standard). The other thing about the geosynchronous orbit is that it must be positioned over the equator. Otherwise it would be a longitudinalsynchronous orbit, and that name is just too long and hard to say.

So, how does it work? Simple, the phenomenon of "coyotus interruptus" and artificial intelligence. A comprehensive read on cartoon physics including coyotus interruptus can be found on wikipedia. The artificial intelligences make it possible for the satellites to want to be in orbit, but are designed that they are never able to realize that they should be falling. As a result they are in permanent orbit. It is rumored that China has been developing a militaristic 're-education' program for satellites under the code name "Wile E. Coyote" aimed at causing them to fall from the sky. As a result it is recommended that the equator be avoided when ever possible due to the possibility that you could be crushed by a satellite, in addition to the lack of drains working as a result of the suspension of the Coriolis effect at 0 degrees latitude.

Suzan Horn says: "Congratulations." I won the lottery!?

Yesterday I received an e-mail from one Suzan Horn suzanhorn85@live.nl). She informed me that I had won the lottery, what luck, this blog sure ain't paying the bills. I can think of several things I could do with "a lump sum pay out of US$1 m (One Million United States Dollars only)."

But then I remembered something... from my past. I remember vaguely a commercial for the Arizona Lottery stating that "You can't win if you don't play." I don't recall playing or entering "Lottery Winners International program." So, is it possible to win if I don't play? That is the question for today, thanks for the push in the right direction Suzy.

A brief web search for the company lists the company as part of a phishing scam (redundant I think, if you know of any phishing that isn't scam related please leave it in the comments below). Being part of a phishing scam does not mean it is bad, I get phishing e-mail from "e-bay." So the web search is inconclusive.

Close analysis of the e-mail gives two addresses, Suzies given above and this one: CiscoWeb@aol.nl. Both of these are based out of the Netherlands. I would expect a reputable international lottery to take place some where else, like Monocco, or Nigeria, or even Nevada.

Over all, I can't tell if I won or not. So, can you win if you don't play? The answer to your question is easy to find, on Tuesday. If there is no post, I won and retired. A post means I am still poor, and you need to work harder at making this profitable for me.

'Til next time, here's hoping.

What is Dark Matter, and why does it matter to me?

Well, first, why does it matter to you, I don't know. I am not a psychic. But I will wager a guess. You were playing cards, and dark matter cheated and stole all your money. Now you want to know how to kill the dark matter, probably using a clever line like: "My name is anonymous, you stole my money, prepare to die."

First of all I would like to say that your story of the stolen money is rather far fetched. There is no evidence to suggest that dark matter is any more intelligent than a rock. You probably got drunk and someone stole your money while you were sleeping. Then you made up this dark matter story as a cover for explaining to your wife where all the money went.

Regardless of your reason, here is your answer.

The universe is composed of both light and dark matter. Light matter is the matter which we can see, dark matter we only see through its gravitational effects on light matter. Dark matter was first noticed in 1933 by Fritz Zwicky, who gets bonus points for having a name in which the letter 'z' appears twice. Zwicky noticed that some galaxies were spinning to fast. He reported this to his local police chief, but the local police responded that it was out of their jurisdiction. When he published his results he claimed that there was non-visible matter in the universe, and that as a precaution we should never be too careful with our money at poker games. His claims were largely uncorroborated for 40 years, with exceptions in a few saloons Then in the 1960's and 70's astronomers studying galaxy rotation curves. Vera Rubin studied the curves of these galaxies and found them to be disappointingly flat, and not curved at all. As astronomers grew depressed upon realizing that galaxies weren't curvy after all, they began researching dark matter more intensely. It may be they also hope to kill the dark matter, to get them curves back.

Dark matter is difficult to study, but current theories feel that there are several different types of dark matter. These types are divided into two catagories, Baryonic and non-Baryonic dark matter. Non-Baryonic dark matter is sub classified as Hot, Cold, or Tepid.

Baryonic dark matter includes MACHOs (massively compact halo objects). These are similar to captains of your high school football team. They are dense, are not too bright, and every thing revolves around them. These may actually be brown dwarf stars, or neutron stars, or unassociated planets. But it is generally accepted that they are only a small percentage of the total dark matter in the universe.

Hot dark matter is most likely composed of neutrinos. They are briefly discussed at the end of this post here. Neutrinos are not clumpy however, and dark matter is suppose to be clumpy; this is obviously wrong, so moving on.

Cold dark matter is clumpy. It is composed of WIMPs (weakly interacting massive particles). WIMPs only interact through the weak nuclear force and gravity. They also have large masses compared to neutrons and protons (which really isn't a great benchmark to call something massive). Wimps however are purely hypothetical, so also not a good candidate for reality.

Tepid dark matter is a combination of hot and cold dark matter. Most astrophysicists don't believe it exists, but as we learned from Goldilocks; if it's not too hot, or too cold, it must be just right; I'm betting the farm on this one.


Note 1: Some reports indicate that there are dark matter beings trying to destroy our galaxy; but I have it on good authority that the good guys won .

How does e-mail work?

Well, school is out and I have had more important things to do than researching this topic, so I am warning you, I am just shooting from the hip here. But all the same, I did read something about this at one point. So here it is.

First a little history. E-mail was one of the first things on the internet. In fact the internet was developed with e-mail in mind. Of course those computer geeks working on the project referred to it as a document transfer program, that way the could get paid for working on it at work, instead being forced to work on it out of their home in their mothers basements. This was roughly 1972.

The obvious next question is why did they want e-mail in the first place. Well, it is because everyone likes to get mail. Even bills at least show that we are liked, even if we are being used for our money. But these nerds did not get mail. Living with their parents they got no bills. Their other nerdy friends were afraid to go out in the sun to walk to the mail box to send off a letter. So, they needed a forum where they could get mail with out leaving their computer. One of the most sublime hopes for this was to meet girls. These nerds were smart people and knew that statistically there must be a girl out there who would find them hot.

This can be seen in some of the early names of e-mail programs. Names like Hotmail (subtlety was not their strong point at first), NetZero (Collective number of dates they had been on in the previous 5 years), Juno (likening Alaskan weather to the cold female reception they received), or Yahoo (one of them got a date).

So now that you know the history of e-mail I can tell you how it works. E-mail is just a text file send over the network as a bunch of 1's and 0's. The computer then reads the numbers and forms words and stuff for you to read. Encrypted e-mail uses roman numerals instead of the Arabic numbers.

I hope that helps.

Note: The symbol "@" has no official name. "?!" does, it is called an interrobang. Seriously.

Note 2: Don't even get me started on why people start blogs.

How does a Uranium gas centrifuge work?

There are two main isotopes of Uranium, U-238 and U-235.  U-235 has a shorter half life, which means it will die young, well, younger than U-238.  This makes it very active, just like you would be if you found out you only have 2 weeks to live.  This increased activity makes it hard to hold down, which is what centrifuges try to do, hold you down.  Well, U-235 sticks it to the man, or rather centrifuge, and moves to the center while the more lackadaisical U-238 is complacent and allows itself to be held down.

The U-235 which has overcome the oppressive forces of the man, er, centrifuge spinning at up to 100,000 rpm, is then removed and placed in a new centrifuge.  This process is repeated numerous times.  After this cascade of purification the concentration of U-235 has increased from about 0.7 percent in unprocessed ore, to about 4% for power plant operations; or up to 90% for weapons applications. 

Those isotopes lucky enough to be chosen for the weapons of mass destruction then have the opportunity to rot away in forgotten silos and never be used, and the brochures made it sound so promising and fun.  They will never get the chance to fulfill their dream and go out with a bang; with the possible exception of Iranian U-235, those are the lucky isotopes.

What is the difference between hardwood and softwood?

This is a delicate subject, I do not wish to offend any of my 3 readers, but hardwood and softwood is related to sex.  Tree sex to be exact, hence the wood part of the question. 

Trees have flowers, on fruit trees these are easy to see.  On other trees they look less flowerish, like pine trees.  But trust me, they are there.  These flowers are composed of a pistil and a stamen.  The stamen is the boy part and makes pollen.  The pistil is the girl part and makes babies, I mean seeds.  In many instances bees are required to interact with the pistil and stamen forming a potent pollinating threesome. 

After this fraternizing some trees will surround the babies, seeds, with fruit, or an acorn, or something.  These are called angiosperms.  Others let the seeds fall to the ground with no covering; these are deadbeat dad trees, or gymnosperms.  An easy way to tell them apart is that evergreens are soft woods (deadbeats), and deciduous trees are hard woods.

So there you have it.  Straight grained fir has a hardness of about 700 on the Janka hardness scale (bigger numbers are harder) and can be used for hardwood floors, but it is really a softwood.  Balsa on the other hand, with a hardness of about 100, and used for making model airplanes because it is so soft and pliable, is a hardwood. 

So, why are the deadbeats soft woods, and trees with nuts hard woods?  I don't know, go ask your dad.

How is sea level determined?

Sea level is determined by the magic of time averaging.  If I recall correctly this is done by math.  GPS receivers and transmitters are distributed over the oceans based on surface area.  The Pacific Ocean gets 162, one for each million square kilometers, the Atlantic Ocean gets 82, Indian - 73, Southern - 20, and the Arctic - 14.  It is important to note that using the numbers based on the square kilometers, not square miles will yield the metric sea level. 

Originally the GPS devices were attached to plastic floaty things.  But these are not biodegradable, and many people complained.  As a result now days scientists have moved to biodegradable materials, namely the skinned carcases of clubbed baby seals.  Visit this link for a shirt to protest clubbing baby seals.  All the results from the seals are compiled and averaged, giving an accurate measure of sea level. 

NOTE:  The sea level seems to be rising, there are several theories.  First, it is melting ice caps due to global warming.  Second, thermal expansion of water, again due to global warming.  Third, it is all in your head caused by delusion brought on by, you guessed it, global warming.

It is also important to note that "sea" level is actually "ocean" level.  Sea's vary in their height.  For example, the Mediteranian Sea is at sea level.  The Dead Sea is 418 meters below sea level. The Caspian Sea is 28 meters below sea level.  The Aral Sea is about 170 meters above sea level.  The Sea of Tranquility is on the moon, about 385,000 kilometers above the earth, although this sea has no water, and therefore can be neglected for most calculations. 

How does Carbon-14 Dating Work?

There are many types of dating; speed dating, double dating, blind dating, group dating.  Each type of dating has its own advantages, and disadvantages.  Double dating gives you additional people to talk with, this is great for combination with blind dating, where your date may not be top notch.  Group dating gives you the chance to scope out possible future dates. 

So, how does the Carbon-14 dating work?  Like internet dating sites it relies on the fact that there are many different factors which can determine that mystical 'compatibility' factor between two people.  However, where internet sites look at many factors, Carbon Dating relies only on age, and it leaves you to do the determination of whether the age is compatible or not.  For example, not every 25 year old female will be compatible with 80 year old billionaires, some may only be interested in 85 year old billionaires, or even 90.  This is where carbon dating comes into play. 

It use to be that the only way to get the age of your date was to drive erratically on the date, get pulled over by the cops, and sneak a peek at their drivers license when the cop asks to see both of your license.  Clearly this is not ideal. 

All life on earth that we know of is composed of carbon, mostly carbon-12, which doesn't date well, lack of proper etiquette I am told.  What makes carbon-14 so good at dating is that it can change.  Girls are always trying to change boys, get them to wear nicer cloths, stop farting in public, and put the toilet seat down.  Carbon-14 can become Nitrogen-14 with a little effort.  This change is not without its drawbacks however.  The carbon must get rid of one electron and one anti-neutrino.  This is not a decision to be take lightly, once gone, they are gone forever.  Or at least until the new improved nitrogen-14 gets an extra neutron.  It can then become carbon-14, but must also get rid of a proton. 

For the carbon dating all you need is a piece of the person you want to date, or already are dating.  This can then be broken down into its constituent atoms and analyzed to see what percentage of the person is composed of the changeable carbon-14.  I have heard it said in relation to marriage that "women marry a man because of who he can become hoping he will change.  A man marries a woman hoping she will always be the same.  Both are disappointed."

So, guys, go for the girls with low C-14, girls go for guys with high C-14.  However, some of the values are distorted here in the atomic age, so for those born roughly after 1945 this type of date has been unreliable, and the drivers license method is preferred. 

It is also important to note that C-14 levels tend to drop with age.  In fact, someone 5568 years old would have only half of the C-14 that was present in their younger years.  It is also worth noting that this type of dating only works on dead things, although some evidence exists to it working with the un-dead as well, if the right tissue sample is taken.

Mr. X asks: How are magnets made?

Bill, if this is you, I swear, I had nothing to do with that escapade.  I told them all that the magnet was too big to use to manually write the file to the hard drive; and I definitely did not approve of the message.  So get off my back Bill.  It is not my fault you can now stick your laptop to the side of your fridge. 

Now then, lets get to the answer.

There are natural magnets, and man-made magnets.  Natural magnets can only be made by God, or natural consequences of complex processes, based on personal preferences.  The man-made magnets can be permanent, or induced, like electromagnets, but all man-made magnets are made by man.

The earliest magnets were stars.  The convective flow of charged plasma creates currents which cause the entire star to produce a magnetic field, resembling a huge electromagnet (seriously, stars are big).  As the stars went about their daily business (eonly business?) they formed Fe(iron), Li(lithium), Un(unobtainium), Kr(kryptonite), NaCl(table salt), Ba(bacon), and etc(other elements).  Iron is the key here, it is present in all naturally occurring magnets, and almost all refrigerator magnets, like Bills computer. 

To create a magnet you need to expose a piece of iron, or iron containing alloy such as compass needles, to a magnetic field.  MRI machines are great places to find magnetic fields, but they are not good for laptops.  Or, um, so I hear.

It works by making all of the individual magnetic elements in the material work together.  Team work is what it is all about.  About team work, remember there is no 'I' in team, but you can spell 'me.'  That, however, has nothing to do with magnets. 

There are several ways to make a magnet useless.  First, hit it with a hammer, this will break it into small pieces which are magnetic, but to small to be useful, this would be like taking apart a car, all the pieces are there, but it isn't good for anything.  Except recycling.  Or throwing at people.  Second, expose it to an opposite magnetic field, this is like trying to get teenage boys to do any meaningful work when there are girls around.  Third, heat it above its Curie point.  This physical property was discovered by Pierre Curie, but he died in 1906, and I don't know how he has been able to keep that property in his name.  Typically when you die your properties go to your next of kin, unless otherwise stated in your will.  I will refer to  this temperature as the Unmagnetizability Temperature.

So, by reverse logic, in addition to making magnets by by exposure to a magnetic field, they can also be made by unhitting a bunch of small magnets with a hammer; unexposing a nonmagnetic material to an opposite magnetic field, or lowering the material below the unmagnetizability temperature.

Hope that helps, <condescending voice>Bill</condescending voice>.

Note about magnetism:   The strength of a magnet is measured in either Gauss or Tesla.  Gauss is the preferred unit when dealing with weapons, while Tesla is more appropriate for applications generating power.  The important thing to remember is that a Tesla is bigger.  If given the option between a 100 Gauss canon and a 0.1 Tesla canon, I will pick the Tesla any day of the week.  Twice on weekends. 

I heard that ancient clams had teeth, is that true?

Information on the subject is scant.  This is because most clams when they died did not become dinosaur bones, like the dinosaurs.  They became limestone.  That is not to say that all dinosaurs became bones, some became oil, which was then turned into bags, which can be used when buying model dinosaur skeletons at gift shops, thus completing the circle of life.  Limestone is made of calcium (calcium carbonate), and teeth are made of calcium (calcium phosphate), so it is obvious that clams are completely capable of having teeth.  Heck, they basically half teeth all ready (calcium for you slower folks)!

On a side note, be sure that you are getting enough calcium in your diet, or your normal eating if you are satisfied with your current weight.  Dairy is a great source of calcium.  That is why baby teeth are sometimes referred to as "milk teeth."

I did some research on the subject of clams and discovered the following; one poem ( here), and one brief reference in a letter to the Smithsonian (here).  The page being referenced has it labeled as an urban legend, and as being false.  Clearly they did not do enough research, or they would have found the poem, which corroborates the story of the clams having teeth.  It is well known that poems never lie. 

For example "The fog came in on little cat feet." It is true, but it is a big cat for such little feet.  Or "There once was a man from Nantucket..."  Well, probably shouldn't bring him up here.  So, moving on with the examples "Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, and sorry I could not travel both, and be one traveler..."  Well, this may in fact prove to be erroneous with the continuing work on entwined elementary particles, but needless to say, the afternoon stroll that Robby Frost was on at the time would hardly be the time to be carrying around the necessary equipment to perform such actions.  Not to mention that the ramifications of such an act would be huge.  Currently stem cells are controversial, imagine that research.  It would be like better than a clone, because the entwining would cause each clone to experience the same things.  Of course, there are down sides, like if one of you dies...  More research also needs to be done to see if each entity could move apart without an external force.  It seems logical that each would be required to step at the same time, trip at the same time, etc.  I wonder what would happen to the one of them if the other were to be eaten by a ravenous man eating clam, with big teeth.  Note to self, think more on this later, much later, it gives me a headache.)

Well, I hope that proves it.  Clams had teeth.  The mystery is why would they give up such an evolutionary advantage.  It would also be a good time to be thankful that they never grew legs, otherwise we may still be on their diet, except those of us with high cholesterol, we would be safe, we would clog their arteries.

How does selling out work?

This really depends on what side of the equation you are on.  Are you the one selling, or buying. 

Your question seems to be coming from the selling side, so I will discuss it here.  I would like to point out that either way, selling out, or buying, it can be a rewarding experience for both parties. 

First, to sell out, you must have something of perceived value.  This is typically not a tangible item, like a car, or my new Nintendo Wii, except that the Wii is sold out everywhere... perhaps that is a bad example.  So, not like my car, or my theoretical PS3.  This is typically either fame and principles, or the like. 

The next step is often the most difficult.  It is fueled by greed, but there is a catch.  In most cases once people have enough prestige to sell out, they also have the money to not need to.  It is somewhat of a catch 22.  Those who you want to buy out, can afford not to sell.  Those you can afford, aren't worth buying. 

Typically selling out is doing anything against your nature for money alone.  In most cases selling out involves washed up actors or sports stars who blew their millions on who knows what already and need to get some cash fast.  They appear on infomercials, or regular commercials.  Or perhaps they put advertisements on their web log.  It may start small, just referral button for firefox, which the person honestly believes in and uses exclusively (almost).  But it grows, soon adwords appear, then a search bar.   Step by step they have whored themselves out to Google; stupid sell outs.

You may be thinking that I am a sell out.  I assure you it is not the case. 

First, I am not famous, and have zero exposure in the public sphere.  It's true, only 3 people read my blog, and 2 of them are me (my doctor says its OK). 

Second, it is not against my nature to look for innovative ways to make a buck, so selling out for money, is not selling out, it is sticking to my guns.  Doing it for, say, pizza, that could be construed as selling out.

Third, I like donuts. 

The last thing about sell outs is that they all deny selling out, most will even prepare a flimsy list of three reasons why they are not sell outs.  But in truth, we can all see right through them.

Kit B. Asks: How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

I think we need to realize that this is a myth.  Just because they don't chuck wood, does not mean that they can't chuck wood.  You see, woodchucks, or Marmota monax, as I like to call them, are rodents, just like beavers.  Beavers chuck wood, so a marmota monax should be able to as well.

Your question is also lacking a clear definition of chuck.  It has several.  Seriously, you should look it up in a dictionary.  I think that the most obvious definition would be a short throw, however, it could also mean to get rid of, or also to vomit, such as "up chuck."

If you did indeed intend for it to mean vomit, then your question has merit.  Many rodents, such as mice and rats, lack the ability to vomit, the woodchuck may fall into this catagory as well, wikipedia did not mention it one way or the other.  But in this case, the answer is none.  You see, woodchucks don't eat wood.  They eat grass, berries, gardens, and sometimes insects; no wood.  Termites are about the only creature that can digest wood.  So, to summarize, woodchucks probably can't chuck period, and even if they did, they couldn't chuck what they wouldn't eat.  However, they probably have about 6 oz. stomach. 

On the other hand, if you intended for it to mean throw, there is much more variability.  A beaver for example does not really chuck wood, he drags it.  Now don't get me wrong, I can't chew down a tree with a 10 inch diameter overnight, but I could throw it farther than a beaver.  I mean throw the tree farther than the beaver could, not that I could throw the tree farther than a beaver.  Although, it may be hard to hold the beaver, I bet he would get kind of squirilly, beavery? as I heaved him around in circles over my head, and if he were to bite my hand and not let go...  The beaver will be our reference all the same.  A beaver can be 40 pounds, marmota monax, gets to be about 10.  You may think that this would mean that a woodchuck could chuck 1/4 of what a beaver does chuck.  But it is more complex.  Woodchucks burro in the ground, this gives them strong front limbs compared to the swimmer legs of the beaver, I bet they never have trouble getting the lids of jars of pickles or spaghetti sauce, but at the same time they have a highly curved back like a mole, which may make it difficult to "put their backs into it."  Woodchucks however tend to be aggressive, and you know how sometimes in an emergency you get like super human strength, well, I bet the woodchuck could harness that rage to chuck more wood then a beaver. 

On the other hand, woodchucks live in clearings, with little wood around them, and are rarely far from their holes in the ground.  This would make it difficult to find wood to chuck even if they had that insatiable desire deep in their cute little monax souls. 

So, on an wood chucking scale from 1 to beaver, we take beaver divided by 4 due to size, plus three for the strong upper body, minus 1 for the bad back, a 1.5 pissed off multiplier, last, minus 2 for no wood.  If I got the math right the answer is:

As much wood as a woodchuck could chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

No beavers were harmed in the writing of this answer.  At least that I know of.

How do ghosts work?

Ghosts don't work.  That is what gives them so much time to go around scaring people.  If they had a day job they would be to exhausted to walk around the attic dragging chains.  Some do seem to have jobs however.  For example, Ebenezer Scrooge was visited by three ghosts; the ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future.  However,  it seems that this is only seasonal employment for the unholy specters. 

Part of the difficulty comes from trying to employ a ghost.  They can only type with extreme difficulty, and are entirely unsuited for manual labor.  They would be ideal for checking for corrosion in pipes, but how would they hold the flashlight.  It should also be noted that ghosts don't have much need for money.  They don't eat, they don't need a mortgage to move into a new house, they can't operate cars. 

Ghosts are the disembodied spirits of the dead, and no one  is sure exactly what they are composed of.  Ghost busters claims they are ectoplasm, but fails to describe what ectoplasm is.  Ghost busters is also hardly an authoritative documentary on the subject. 

Many other documentaries on ghosts, such as "Sixth Sense," "Ghost," and "Heart and Souls" suggest that ghosts just hang around waiting for closure.  Just like that ex who just won't go away.

It has also been reported that it is just all in your head.   People want to believe, so they project ghosts into all the noises and oddities that occur in their lives.  Often this type of person is referred to as 'paranoid.'  But remember, just because your paranoid, it doesn't mean you are wrong. 

How do Light bulbs work?

I assume you are referring to inclandestine bulbs and not fluorescent; because they are boring.

Fluorescent bulbs use an electrical current to excite mercury atoms, which then emit UV photons, which interact with the phosphorous coating on the bulb giving off white light.  If you were asking about those, you can now stop reading.

Inclandestine bulbs also use electricity, but use it differently.  The boring bulbs used the energy to make photons directly, thereby being more efficient.  The other bulbs, the ones being discussed here, use the energy like our bodies use caffeine, especially the bodies of young kids.  What happens is that the caffeine makes them hyper, they start running around yelling, knocking into things, breaking things, and by the end of the evening they are hot and sweaty sitting in a corner with a lampshade on their head. 

It is remarkable how similar the light bulbs are.  You run a current through the bulb, specifically the tungsten filament.  This infusion of electrons gets the tungsten hyper.  The atoms start to get all riled up knocking into their neighbors.  This bumping causes the atoms to loose photons, which are then used to light the room.  Tungsten has white photons, which allow us to see everything in the world.  The white photons tend to become colorful when they run into things.  Different things make them differently colorful.

Clandestine bulbs work in the same manner, but instead of tungsten, a proprietary material is used which has black photons.  This is typically called a black light. 

Why do stars go super nova?

First of all lets get this strait; humans are very biased and unimaginative.  While looking for life on others planets, moons, etc.  We all assume that life will be like us, made of organic compounds (proteins, DNA), and confined to a planet/moon/comet/etc.  So short sighted.

See, stars are actually alive.  It would be interesting to know what they think of us, confined to a planet instead of roaming the vast cosmos, only live about 80 years as opposed to billions of years.  But people and stars are more alike then people give them credit for.  Both maintain thermal homeostasis.  People can be big or little, stars can be big or little.  People can be white, black, brown, yellow, red and possibly others, stars can be white dwarfs, red dwarfs, brown dwarfs, red (super)giants, blue (super)giants, our star is yellow, Krypton had a red one, and there are also black holes.

Stars are actually very social creatures.  But in space no one can hear you scream, or talk, or even whisper; or so they would have you believe.  While this may be true for humans, stars don't communicate via sound waves, which can not propagate in vacuum.  They use gravity waves.  Gravity waves can and do propagate in vacuum.   Gravity waves are like yelling, best for public announcements.  Personal communication is typically carried out by radio waves, or other forms of electromagnetic radiation.  Some stars, like pulsars, almost exclusively use radio waves but this is easily intercepted and not a secure form of communication.  (Some think these are crys for help.)  On earth we have even received these messages, but have yet to figure out what they are saying.  Stars like ours use solar flares to communicate directionally and comets for private communications.  Comets are the interstellar couriers. 

Stars also have geopolitical boundaries, just like we have countries.  Our star is part of the so called "Milky Way."  I don't know why it got named after a candy bar so don't ask.  I mean, stars don't even like sugar, they prefer hydrogen and its isotopes. 

Stars also have celebrities, just like us.  Polaris is currently one of the most famous.  Some stars are famously bright, others are great broadcasters, others are known for stupid antics, some are all three.  Also like us, many stars feel it is better to burnout then to fade away.  This type of star burns out by going nova.  A recent example on earth would be Brittany Spears.  Basically these stars just get real big, and waste their youth on trivial pursuits; getting old before their time.  Once this happens people get the chills just looking at them.  They are burned out before they even get to the good part of life, by which time no one even cares.

On earth most washed up stars become spokesmen/women for infomercials.   Stars on the other hand become nebulas. 

The alternative for a star would be to slowly fade away into a dark spot that no one ever sees again and no one cares about.  Left all alone, growing cold.  But after going nova you have the chance to become a black hole, dragging all those around you down also.  But at least there is a lasting impression of you in the world, even if it does help destroy the fabric of your society.

My water has an expiration date, does it go bad?

Yes. Yes it does, sometimes.

In fact, in 2003 water killed an average of 9 people per day (edit: in the USA alone). I should also point out that 2/3 of these murders were committed against males, watch your backs brothers. This is the second largest killer of otherwise healthy people aged 0-14 years old (the first is parental nagging, or car accidents, take your pick).

No one is quite sure why it goes bad, I guess it sometimes just flips out and kills people for no reason at all, ask a Ninja if you don't believe me. But there are some theories. First of all, there is very little "pure water," the oceans are salty, public water is often chlorinated, well water often has a high mineral content. Distilled water is typically considered to be pure; mineral water typically has added minerals, if you can follow that logic.

So, why does it go bad? First, chlorine is negative in its ionized state. Over time this negative exposure can lead to a warped perspective on life. Even the "pure" distilled water is getting 'dis'sed. I understand tilling, farmers do it all the time, but 'dis'tilling, I just don't get it. In addition to this most water is forced to move by external forces, particularly gravity. It always flows downhill, which is great for indoor plumbing, but it gets old for the water. Imagine how life for you would be if you had so little control over your life. Among humans this typically leads to revolution.

I think that is what is slowly happening today. Water is tired of putting up with all our crap. Just think of how vulnerable we are to water. We can die by drowning, dehydration, water intoxification, ice falling off airplane wings landing on our heads, these are just the direct causes. Water also causes floods and droughts, both of which are bad for us humans.

Both creationists and evolutionists recognize the power of water. Evolution states that all life began in the primordial sea, which is in Africa near the Congo. This would lead to the conclusion that water knows our weaknesses and could take us out, just like it did the dinosaurs (I couldn't find references, but imagine how much urine a 35 ton dinosaur makes, that would piss off the water for sure). Creationists have the story of Noah, where every thing was killed except for Noah and his family and their private zoo. Although God promised never to flood the earth again, his wording clearly leaves regional flooding in the equation. How sweet would it be to flood all of (insert country/state/province here) and get rid of all them (insert group here). He could pick several continents and still be within the bounds of the agreement.

After billions of months, why isn't all the water bad. Well, water goes through what is called the perspiration cycle. It is almost just like sweating in reverse. When the surface of water gets hot, it gets dry. This water doesn't just disappear, it becomes clouds through evaporation. When clouds get cold they start to sweat and rain falls. In the clouds the water enjoys the sunlight and is placated.

Water at the bottom of the ocean only rarely evaporates, due to the statistical improbability of a single undisturbed water molecule diffusing through 2 miles of water as a result of Brownian motion with any regularity. As a result water gets pissed and crushes things. Not all things, there are fish who live there, but we humans would be crushed. The fish don't get crushed because they are miserable looking fish and misery loves company; the water likes having them around.

So, how does the water company pick the date the water goes bad? First, it is not an exact science. They have ways of determining the probability that the water will go bad based on minerals in the water, how much pressure is in the bottle, and others. Drinking water past its expiration date will most likely not kill you; but your chances of getting pneumonia do increase, or so I heard from an anomalously source. Mostly however it is just random, they pick something far enough away to make it easy to sell it all before it goes bad, and close enough so you think it must be fresh.

So remember, water has been around for billions of years, and we need to give it respect, and never turn our backs. Ever.