Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on lemmy.world

93 replies

lemmy.world

Probably not because it's extremely useless for 99% of people lol

Does the average person know that a stalagmite is mostly calcium carbonate?

79
lagoon8622reply
sh.itjust.works

Well no, why would they remember that? They've got to remember the chemical formula for one or two quartzes

27

I need that brain space for the Windows XP activation code

14
concernedreply
sh.itjust.works

I knew both! AuDHD for the win.

Umm...what were we talking about again?

10
glimsereply
lemmy.world

Maps, I think? Or ships. Possibly trains...

7

I was thinking of Dragon's Egg by Robert L. Forward. I'll add Flux to my reading list. I enjoyed the one, so I'll probably enjoy the other.

Thanks for the suggestion

1

does that mean you could use a chunk of a stalagmite as a tums in a pinch? (I think that's what tums is maybe its a different calcium)

4
nord.pub

Maybe people do know that?

Drinking / tap water here comes from a limestone aquifer. Tap ware and shower screens and toilets develop a calcium carbonate build up that needs to be chemically removed.

I think anyone who's been in a cave and heard how stalagmites form would remember that it's calcium carbonate.

2
glimsereply
lemmy.world

I learned about it in school and have seen them in a caves but still had to look it up for the bit.

How about this...does the average person know that the transport latency of Dante audio is around 150 microseconds?

3

That's ok, I don't expect anyone outside of my industry to know that

1

Just like how their government works, or what climate change is.

Like, people aren't actually dumb, but 1% of their attention on anything that they aren't paid to do can sure give that appearance.

1
lemmy.world

No. Most people think you can throw a lit cigarette or lighter on it and it will go up instantly too because of movies. I think Die Hard 2 was the worst lol, he like threw a zippo in the puddle of her fuel and then it followed the plane in mid air to blow it up.

I don't think people know how octane level works either. I think they assume higher octane is easier to combust when it's the exact opposite.

28

And octane doesn’t grant magical horsepowers to your engine if you pour a can of octane boost in the tank.

4

Of all the media out there, action movies might be the worst for rotting brains. People can actually seperate porn or cartoons from reality.

2
lemmy.ca

I bet the average person knows it can't melt steel beams.

17
neidu4reply
piefed.social

And the average person should also know that steel doesn't need to melt to lose a lot of it's load bearing capacity. At 500-600 Celsius, only 50% of steel strength remains.

39

Even people who've never done it are vaguely aware of blacksmithing, though, right? This seems like more of a failure to apply everyday material properties to a skyscraper.

2

Which, going right back around to jet engines, is why superalloys are a thing.

They aren't stronger or even more refractory than normal steel, just more expensive, but they don't soften at all until they're about to melt.

2
bedwyrreply
piefed.ca

Plus there would be wind fanning those flames hard which could raise the temperature some.

But the other thing to consider is that the towers could have been built with substandard materials in the first place.

1

Plus all the mind control chemicals they use to make the chemtrails probably burnt really hot. /s

5
neidu4reply
piefed.social

IIRC, the materials were fine, but the spray-on fireproofing left large patches uncovered. While not a direct cause, it certainly didn't help.

WTYP has a pretty good episode on the entire thing

2
lemmy.world

This just in: scientists have determined that a more direct cause for the towers falling than defective spray-on fireproofing may exist. Rumors have begun to circulate that the WTCs collapse may be attributed to the two aircraft which collided with them. Details at 6.

(I kid, I kid)

3

Well, it would've collapsed either way, as you can see on the pictures during the fire that the metal is starting to buckle uniformly around the entire floor with the fire. But patches without insulation probably meant that it collapsed sooner than it could've.

Didn't help anyone trapped, so the net result is the same in that I fail to see how 30 minutes extra before it crumbled would've made any difference

1

Plus aluminum, which planes are made of, does burn hot enough to melt steel beams. And concrete weakens in a fire as well.

1

I would have guessed more, and I have a pilot license!

5
myyassreply
lemmy.world

So like four people in Business class cover it...

1
CanadaPlusreply
lemmy.sdf.org

Yeah, I thought it was supposed to be the main expense for airlines.

Edit: Oh, that's literally just takeoff.

1
myyassreply
lemmy.world

Yeah I can imagine the rest of business class pays for the flight and economy is just a cherry on top. I mean they keep making the seats smaller to can in more fish. Some older planes you can tell they were fitted with the modern small seats. Paid for the window view? Enjoy your wall view. Then overbooking. And the kicker, your luggage requirements keep shrinking, so they can ship things.

https://liveandletsfly.com/united-airlines-f35-parts-israel-passenger-flights/

2
CanadaPlusreply
lemmy.sdf.org

Airlines are going bankrupt all over the place, though, so it's not like they're making massive margins. Basically, people just prefer a shitty seat on a cheap flight.

1

I get that; flying is made to be such a pain now. When I flew ANA, Japan Airlines, or the Redeye; it was nice. Any US flights were torture. Being 6ft tall with back problems, it makes sleeping in cargo feel like a 5 star hotel.

2
lemmy.ca

The entire point of jet fuel is that it DOESN'T "blow up easily", though.

unlike gasoline, It actually takes quite a bit of effort to ignite avgas in it's liquid form because it's designed to be aerosolized before being ignited.

13
nednobbinsreply
lemmy.zip

I assume it's a reference to one of the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

The claim was that jet fuel doesn't burn at a high enough temperature to melt steel. Therefore a bunch of burning jet fuel alone wouldn't have been enough to collapse the towers. Therefore someone must have put something else there.

Even XKCD got in on the joke. https://xkcd.com/966/

5
lemmy.zip

You are nearly spot on: it isn't just the heat it will produce, but the lack of ignition due to the oxygen required for ignition.

1
lemmy.ml

You'd be surprised at how much things aerosolise when they hit a skyscraper at 500 mph.

1

Not at all. Seen it with my own eyes. Seriously, the effect mirrors a controlled demolition.

0

Um, another one? I am pretty sure I solidified this one.

Are you talking about Second Life, or are you promoting a new MMORPG?

-3

Avgas and jet fuel aren't the same thing. Avgas is leaded gasoline used in airplane engines. Jet fuel is specially formulated for use in turbines.

3
lemmy.ca

I can't remember the which is which. I just remember that Avgas and 100ll are the two types of aviation fuel. My brain doesn't have the ability to remember which is which. Which is probably why it's a good thing I'm not a pilot...

1

Once years ago, I used a few mL of gasoline as a solvent to clean grease from a part. To dispose of it, I put it in a can and tossed a lit match in.

The liquid gasoline extinguished the flame. Even gasoline is hard to ignite.

-1
jlai.lu

I personally didnt and now it makes me question whether it can melt steel beams

6
feddit.uk

Melt, no. Compromize the structural integrity? Absolutely.

12

Being bent out of shape further reduces the structural integrity on top of the heat.

2
glimsereply
lemmy.world

Don't need to melt steel beams to destroy a structure. Don't need the jet fuel to be providing all the heat once the structure is on fire either.

You start the barbeque with a lighter but it's the charcoal that's cooking dinner

9

Bro the average person doesn't even know you can compile software for different architectures.

They aren't gonna know about jet fuel which is almost as complex

6

The average person probably has no idea what cracking is to begin with

How many non-industry people do you know that know what a long chain hydrocarbon is?

2

Probably not. Same as movie directors don't seem to know what happens when you throw a lit cigarette in gasoline: it puts it out. Diesel doesn't ignite even with a match.

5

I knew, but only because I read a lot of cold war stories, and for war becomes hot stories. Running a jet on cooking kerosene was a plot point in one

I have since read about just engines and jet fuel

I don't work in that industry at all. I'm an IT systems analyst

4

I don't think they do. I'm a person that likes aviation and I never think about jet fuel.

4

Likely not. I thought it was highly volatile until I learned it was basically kerosene.

4

No. I wager the average person thinks its some kind of super dangerous super powered liquid explosion magic, because the average person is kind of an idiot.

I, however, did know its fancy kerosene

4
piefed.social

I’ve known it since the 7th grade and I ain’t particularly bright.

3

No. I'd guess a lot of people, who don't work with it, think diesel blows up, even.

What the basic kinds of petroleum are, and which vehicles they go in, is one of those things any reasonably educated person should know, but the majority of the population actually won't.

3

I was in school training to be an aircraft mechanic when I learned that. I remember thinking, "that's crazy"

3

Also basically the same as diesel fuel. All three are interchangeable in an emergency situation. They each have different additives and are taxed differently. Also home heating oil too.

2