How do next generation game consoles work?

For two thirds of the competition they work just like the previous
generation. They are not really a new generation, just an evolution.
It would be like calling a teenager the next generation toddler. They
do the same things, but with more power.

The other third is more like works more like a paraplegic with a new
tricked out ride. Everything is the same, but the controls have
changed. This is a "next generation" much more than the others; it is
a true next generation interface, not a self proclaimed next gen box.

As described above, "next generation" game consoles work by generating
a bunch of hype. Basically this means yelling back and forth "I'm
better than you" and generally acting childish. Graphics are only so
much, interface is only so much, neither alone can create a totally
engrossing situation for game play.

That said however, I am inclined to think that this stratagem works.
I want a Wii. However, I also want to play Halo 3. Luckily my
problem is solved by not being able to afford either.

Now, if I lived in a communist state, there would be only one system,
then I would not need to choose. Said system would probably rival the
old Apple 2e for computing power and Super Nintendo for graphics, and
a rock for aesthetics. Oh, and the only game would be tetris. Guess
you can't have it all.

What is Pi good for?

Pi is good for lots of things. In fact, pi is one of the few mathematical symbols to make it out of the text book and into everyday life, just like the "Golden Ratio." The golden ratio is given as follows: a/(a+b) = a/b. It is very useful for many things. Such as the dimensions of a credit card, or the Fibonacci sequence. The main difference between the two is that the golden ratio was derived from nature, and pi is man made.

Pi has been know of for a long time, but much of the work done on it was done by Archimedes. He was Greek, that is why we use a greek letter for pi, when we arn't feeling lazy and just use "pi." Archimedes was an ancient Greek mathematician, physicist, engineer, astronomer, and philosopher. He is widely regarded as the most important scientist in antiquity (from Wikipedia). He did work with polygons and circles to estimate the correct value of pi.

Archimedes was so interested in pi because in addition to being a mathematician, physicist, engineer, astronomer, and philosopher, he was an amateur chef. A chef was not viewed as a worthy profession for men, and as such was often practiced behind closed doors, late at night. If the pope were to catch a male chef, it was death by fire (except for sushi chefs who were flayed alive).

Archimedes initial love was for cobblers and jelly dough nuts. However without a local supermarket to provide him with quality ingredients it was difficult to get consistent results. One day as he tried to cook some of the ingredients together to get a gold crust, he made a pie, with burnt edges. With the exception of the edge it was instant love.

For the next 30 years he experimented with ways to get a perfectly golden crust without burning the edges. He tried different flours, fillings, and sugar (cane vs sugar beets). Eventually he began to alter the ratio of the pie diameter to the circumference. He found that a small ratio (around 2.5 or lower) led to an increase in the burnt edges, and large ratios (over 4) led to soggy centers. After much trial and error he discovered the perfect ratio, 3.1415926... This gave pies with golden flaky crust which were perfectly baked.

Classical history says Archimedes was killed by a roman soldier during the Second Punic War after telling off the soldier for looking at his circles. The fact is that the soldier was a fall guy. Archimedes bled to death after removing 6.8584 fingers. He was preparing a brief to Rome to switch from a base 10 number system to a base pi number system.

What is Torque?

Torque, and its good pal horse power are best understood in context. So, lets take them in the context of cars.

Torque and horse power measure the performance of the engine. There are many little things you can do to increase both of them, and often an upgraded component will affect both. A poorly made generalization however would be that horse power depends on the speed the engine rotates, the "RPMs" and the torque depends on the compression ratio. This is why diesels have much more torque. And rotary engines have good horse power, but no torque.

So, what exactly do they mean for a car? First of all, it is important to understand that boys and girls view cars differently. Boys care about torque (especially low end torque) and horse power, where as girls care if it is "cute." So the following general rules apply primarily to boys.

Torque is an indication of how much the driver is "compensating." Horse Power is inversely proportional to I.Q.

So, a new Dodge Viper Roadster has 600 hp and 560 lb-ft of torque. On the compensation scale this corresponds to an 8 or a 9 depending on the rims and after market accessories (fuzzy dice would be a 9). This is a relative scale from a 1 = Yugo to 10 = Lamborghini. It is important to note that factors other than just torque affect the compensation factor. For example, it is theoretically possible to get a Yugo up to a low 5 by dropping in a new drive train, fancy paint job, spinner rims, limo tint, etc.

The I.Q. would be around 73 based on the following formula:

I.Q. = |100 * (H.P. - 100)/H.P.|

This is only a starting point for the I.Q. however. Additional factors need to be concidered, for instance any horse power gained after the car was driven of the lot counts double, so a car with 100 base HP, that now has 200 would require the value 300 be used in the formula.

How do Social Networking Sites work?

First, let me point out the obvious.  Half the world is below average in any given field.  Social Networking sites cater to the low end of the gene pool.  Dating sites cater to those of below average looks (read ugly).  MySpace caters to those with deficient self esteem (read "I need to have lots of people click on my web site and say they are my friends").  YouTube is dual function, for those with no life, and those with no understanding of basic cinematography.  Classmates.com is for people who "lost it all" after high school graduation and realized they are loosers in the real world.  Woot is for bad shoppers who can only make one decision a day (that is why "wootoffs" always are "the worst ever").  Live Journal and Blogspot are for those who are inflated in their perception of self worth (read comments zero). 

Man, that last one really hit home.  I need to go now.  Just remember, you can be a looser in more ways than one.

Why are trees green?

I assume you mean why are leaves green, right now most trees are brown, well, the deciduous trees are brown.  Evergreens stay green.  Except the blue spruce, which is more a bluish-green.  Palo-Verdes also stay green, which just shows that there are always exceptions to rules.

Well, back to the question.  Leaves are green because chloroplasts are green (leaves are full of chloroplasts).  Chloroplasts are green because chlorophyll is green.  So, the real question is what theory do you believe in, evolution, or intelligent design, or something else?

The biblical account of the creation tells us the order things were created.  First light and dark, the sun is yellow, so yellow was out for leaves as was black.  Next the earth was created removing brown for dirt, and gray due to rocks.  The combination of earth and sun makes sunsets, this removes red and orange from possibilities.  Also with the earth is the sky, which is blue.  So, in the end the only choices were green and purple.  We are left to assume that green was chosen for being more "gender neutral."  I am just glad that we humans did not get stuck with purple, that could have been ugly. 

Evolution would say that it is just due to random chance, some protein worked and nature stuck with it, making steady improvements over millions of years.  Bah.  Wheres the science? The intelligent design used the process of elimination to reach the conclusion.  I think it was the wise Sherlock Holmes who said if all the probable causes have been eliminated then the improbable must be true. 

So there you have it.  Trees are green because it was available and gender neutral.

Why is the Sky Blue?

The sky is blue because the ocean is blue. The sky reflects the color of the ocean.

The sky is reflective just like your windows at night. You can try this at home. Tonight, if it gets dark where you are, turn on all the lights in a room and try to look out the window. All you can see is your own reflection (unless you are a vampire, they you will just see the reflection of the room). This is because the reflected fraction of the light from inside the room prevents you from discerning the light from outside.

During daylight hours the sun lights up the earth (think the room in your house) brighter than space, and so all we see when we look at the sky is the reflection of the oceans, which cover 2/3 of the surface of the earth. At night, when the sun is not shining earth becomes dark, space appears brighter, we get no reflection off the sky, and we can see right through the sky and see the stars.

An interesting thing happens on overcast days. The sun can not shine on the earth bright enough to get full reflection, as a result we are able to see some of the blackness of space, leaving a blueish-gray appearance to the sky.

Are Girls Evil?

This is more of a philosophical question, not science, but I will do my best.

The answer is sometimes. I have seen on the internet the alleged "proof" that girls are evil. I will attempt to give it here.

Girls = time and money
It is known that time is money
Resulting in girls = money squared
Likewise money is the root of all evil
So, money squared = girls = evil

However, the "and" from the first line is more likely to mean addition, and not multiplication. This would lead to girls = money * 2. To get the equation to work you must multiply each side by money/2. This gives an end result of evil = Girls * Money/2 .

The end result is that girls with half your money are evil. So, girls are only evil if they get half your money.  So, the moral of the story is "don't pay for girls on dates, go dutch." 

Additional Notes:

High maintenance girls are money pits, which is the inverse of money, leaving evil = 1/2.  So, which half is evil?  I have no proof, but I think it is the half above the neck.

Also, in the case where a girl has no money evil would be zero.  This is because they can not afford to go on dates with you, seeing as how you won't pay for them (see above).  However, if you take the derivative of girls with respect to money then d evil/d money = Girls/2.  I didn't do well in calculus, but I think this means that the more money a girl gets, the more evil she becomes, at a rate of Girls/2.  Whatever that means.

What is Gene Therapy?

Doesn't anyone prof read anymore?  The correct spelling is "jean", although Levis would work also. 

To understand this concept it is important to understand the history of jeans.  In the 1850's Levi Strauss started marketing jeans to miners with rivets at seams where 3 or more pieces of fabric were sewn together.  He called his first edition 400 origionals.  He then added a fifth pocket and called them 500s.  If you look at your crotch, or just imagine you are if you are not wearing jeans, you will see that 4 pieces of cloth are joined together.  In the 400 and 500 series there was a rivet there.  However, sitting around the campfire the rivet would heat up, and the miners didn't appreciate the burns on the nearby anatomical features.  As a result the rivet was removed and Mr. Strauss called the new model 501.  I own a pair of them, they are still good jeans.

Now days it is popular to sell jeans that are "distressed" or "destroyed" depending on who is marketing them.  These jeans last for upwards of 5 wears before they become so ratty they look like they were stolen from a hobo.  With a price tag of $100 or more for some pairs I will let you decide who is robbing whom.

New jeans in this condition go against everything that the originals were designed to be, durable.  Obviously these articles of clothing are in need of therapy.  And so "Jean Therapy" was created to help these jeans learn to cope with their degraded self worth. 

Psychiatry has thus far been unable to assist these oppressed items; so real science was turned to, and renamed it "Gene Therapy," trying to be cool with the alternate spelling, like phat, or pwned.  Lets face it however, that is lame; I won't give in.

The scientists turned to viruses to treat the jeans.  The viruses deliver DNA to the denim which causes the jeans to mutate, just like Spiderman.  But the jeans do not gain any special abilities, they just learn to cope with their disappointment at being pieces of crap.  This is done by using DNA coding for "happy proteins" like serotonin. 

The use of a retroviral vector will lead to a permanent change in the genome of the denim, but can lead to cancer.  Adenoviruses are also good choices, but they don't last as long. 

Non-Viral means of jean therapy are also gaining traction.  However, these tend to be less efficient than the viruses.  This can lead to uneven levels of "happy" on the jeans.  This can lead to embarrassing situations if say only one front pocket winds up happy.

I hope this answers your question, keep the questions coming.

How big is 1 trillion?

10 bytes. Or if you prefer 80 bits. Or 60 q-tits perhaps (see the note here here ) but I am not sure how computing will work in the future.

If you are more of a visual learner do the following, take a copper penny (not the current zinc ones). Now go and get 999,999,999,999 more, and you will have 1 trillion pennies. If this won't work for you take the same copper penny and cut it in half. Take one half and cut it in half again. Continue repeating those steps until the penny has been halved 49 times. Make sure you are accurate with your cutting or this will not work correctly.

That fragment of the penny you have left contains approximately 1 trillion copper atoms.

So, there you have it. 1 trillion in like five different ways, all with one click of the mouse.

Is it possible to give 110%?

The short answer is yes, it is possible in some situations.  However, I don't know what situations you are referring to.  So, I will describe several different possible scenarios and show you how it works.

Scenario number one:  A bully asks you for 110% of your lunch money. 

This is possible.  For instance you have your lunch money, as well as other money, say money you were saving to buy your Wii.  You just give your lunch  money, as well as a 10% premium taken from your Wii money.  This is dangerous as next time the bully may ask for "all your money" leaving you pennyless, and Wiiless, just like me.  The best way for paying the extra 10% is to shake down other kids smaller than you.  In fact, if you play your cards right you could shake down enough to give up your lunch money, but still acquire enough other money to make ends meet.

Scenario number two:  Your boss asks you to give 110% effort.

This is technically impossible, but not for the reasons you think.  It is impossible thanks to statistics, and not the laws of nature.  You see, effort is a continuous variable.  A continuous variable is one for which, within the limits the variable ranges, any value is possible.  For example, 110.000001%, or 110.00005%, or any increasingly small percent.  Statistically the odds of achieving exactly 110% is impossible.  This is where the technicality comes in.  It all depends on the policy for significant digits at your place of employment.  For example, in cooking 1 cup of flour can have a margin of error.  Landing on Mars requires more precision (if this is your job however you may want to looking to possible lax policies for exchanging English and metric units). 

Scenario number three:  Your boss asks you to give more than 110%.

This is possible, and there are several approaches.  The first is the easiest.  This simply requires you to realign your baseline to 90.9% or lower, then when you perform at 100% it appears to be over 110%.  This approach works best for rare occasions and should be punctuated with signs of obvious fatigue, profuse sweating, panting, and possible sick days following completion.  The next approach is to simply work longer hours, start working 8.8 hour days, or skip lunch and breaks.  This is the least desirable option.  The third option is to get a clone.  You can alternate going into work so one can stay home and play games, or watch day time TV, or what ever.  Then when you are asked to "step up" you simply both "go to bat" and neither one of you needs to give over 60%.  The downside to this approach is the splitting of the pay check. 

So, lower your baseline and give me 90.9%.

Is the internet good for anything other than porn?

Your question implies that the internet is good for porn, it is not.

As Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, pointed out, the internet is a bunch of tubes. Despite what some of you are thinking, the tubes are too small for that.

I am reminded of the joke, how many flies does it take to screw in a light bulb? Just 2, but how do they get inside.

Even if someone did find a way to start filming porn inside the tubes, it would be disastrous.  It would take up precious bandwidth and definitely result in a slower connection for all of us. This is one fetish which is best left alone for the good of all mankind.

You see, the internet is only good for distribution of electronic goods. Goods such as spam e-mail, pirated music and movies, home web cam movies, pop-up adds, as well as viruses, worms, and Trojans.

So I am writing this open letter to all pornographers:

Dear pornographers,
Please stay out of my internets.
Sincerely yours,
BadAnswer

What are Black Holes?

Black holes are simply holes with no light at the end. In fact black is not a color at all, it is the absence of color. Black does not exist except as the lack of color. Color is made up of light.

Current theory would suggest that black holes do not let even light escape their so called "event horizon," which would imply that they are at least in part composed of light if they suck it all in all the time, yet they are black. And as already mentioned black is the absence of light.

This circular reasoning clearly proves that black holes can not exist. Someone got their facts wrong. Sorry to disappoint you. Just think of all the time that could have been saved if these so called "brilliant scientists" had come to me first.

How does Electricity work?

Electricity is made of a bunch of things called electrons. Electrons like to do things. They like to play radios, run refrigerators, and light houses. More recently they are beginning to like cars (ask a physics major for more information the new hybrid electrons).

Electrons get tired after a while and can no longer work the radio, or light bulbs. This is sometimes referred to as a voltage drop. When this happens the electrons needs to rest. Batteries don't have anywhere for electrons to rest, that is why batteries don't last forever like outlets.

Outlets allow electrons to come visit us at our house. They come in one side, and once they get tired (they experience a "voltage drop")they leave by the other side. Once they leave they go and rest at the electric company until they are ready to go out again.

Electrons never die. Some people think that power companies make power, that is wrong. No power company has ever made even a single electron. They have been selling the same electrons for hundreds of years.

The only way to get rid of an electron is to introduce it to a positron. Once they meet they get married, and become a new-trino I think. They have baby strings which can grow up to be part of 10 to 11 dimensions. Once they get old their kids send them to neutron stars, which are like rest homes for them. Sometimes the rest homes go bankrupt, and the 'trinos are left to wander the vast expanse of space. Some speculate that due to the lack of proper hygiene they collect interstellar dust and become dark matter.

Why is Snow White?

I am assuming you aren't talking about that Disney chick; because if you are your sentence needs a predicate.

First of all, lets agree that snow is ice. Now imagine that you place a yo-yo in a cup of water, and then stick it in the freezer. Once it is frozen take it out and look at it. Inside the ice you can see the bright red yo-yo, or blue yo-yo if thats all you've got. That is because ice has no color, you can see right through to what is inside, like the yo-yo.

As we agreed, snow is ice. Therefor it is clear and has no color. Snow forms in clouds, and as it freezes parts of those clouds get stuck in the snow. All we see is the white fluffy cloud inside the snow/ice, just like we saw the colored yo-yo.

As further proof, melt the snow. As the snow melts the clouds escape and all you will have left is clear water. Unless there was a yo-yo in the snow. Yo-yos don't escape the same way, except maybe for the free range yo-yos.

What is DNA?

Why do you ask it? This is a question for the internet, but just for you here you go.

Well, as we all know, DNA stands for Definitely Not Attractive. Unless you meant DnA, which stands for Do not Abbreviate; this is an online gaming clan.

So, what is definitely not attractive? I will just give three examples.

First, naked mole rats. Those are ugly, very ugly. Actually, they are ANA, absolutely not attractive. So let me try again.

First, middle aged persons living in their parents basement playing online games (see DnA above).

Second, the Chevy Aveo. Perhaps I am just biased against small cars after spending my highschool days in a Chevy Sprint. But I doubt it, it is an unattractive car.

Third, (insert body part here) preserved in a jar after having it removed. Who was it who thought that was a good idea, DnA? The only way this would be cool is if you did the surgery yourself, and have the video evidence to back up that claim. Otherwise, regardless of what it is, tonsil, appendix, tumor, you are just broadcasting that in one way or another your body is a failure and couldn't get it right. Just like the rest of you.

The following site was used as a reference: Click Here
All information was pulled on the day of posting.

I heard that red cars are faster than other cars, is that true?

This is a good question. In my experience the premise is false. I currently drive a red 2002 Chevy S10. At other points in my life I have spent time consistently driving the following vehicles: a white 1988 Buick Century, a 2003 Silver Ford Taurus, a blue 1986 Chevy Sprint, and a 1992? green Ford F150.

Sadly, the Buick had the best acceleration of all of the vehicles. The Sprint had a smaller engine than most police motorcycles. The S10 is a stock base model with an upgraded tailgate (LS baby!) replaced after getting rear ended, my only accident has been in this truck.

However, I have only received one speeding ticket, in the F150, which was green. I was also pulled over in the Taurus, but was not cited.

So clearly green vehicles are the fastest, then silver. Avoid red cars, they are accident prone.