• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Today I learned...

GrownupGirl said:
That according to Reddit, an immigrant can spend eight whole years living in Canada not knowing that you can flush used toilet paper down the toilet, as long as you don't use so much that it clogs it up.
Click to expand...
www.expatinsurance.com

Throwing Away Your Used Toilet Paper in Mexico: Why Mexicans Don't Flush Their TP

There is a curious social convention in Mexico where used toilet paper is thrown into the wastebasket instead of flushed down the toilet, as it would be in the United States. It seems this has sparked a series of threads—some which got quite heated—over why Mexicans don’t flush their toilet...
www.expatinsurance.com www.expatinsurance.com
 
I was on TV Tropes and it said that one of the possible reasons people are racist or anti-autistic is because of "unintentional uncanny valley". It still doesn't make it okay, though.
 
Crawling was once seen as something very wrong and unnatural to do, even when babies did it. It was seen as something people did because were insane, or even like an animal! In the mid-19th century crawling was finally seen as a normal, healthy stage of human development.

But I can't figure it out, did people try to stop their babies from crawling? I know babies have to be watched constantly and you have to keep everything out of their reach once they start crawling on the floor, but back then babies must have had to learn to walk awfully fast.
 
There is parasite called the hair worm, where the larvae infect certain insects such as crickets, grasshoppers and praying mantises. When the worms have matured, they brainwash the bugs, forcing them to go into water and drown themselves so that the worms can crawl out of their butt and into the water they originally came from.

I learned about them after seeing a video on Reddit where the worms came out of a praying mantis's butt after someone dunked it into a glass of water, the mantis still alive afterwards and even trying to eat the worms. It was disturbing.:fearscream:

I read that there have been some cases of hair worms infecting dogs or even humans. Don't know if the worms brainwashed them into drowning themselves, though.
 
GrownupGirl said:
There is parasite called the hair worm, where the larvae infect certain insects such as crickets, grasshoppers and praying mantises. When the worms have matured, they brainwash the bugs, forcing them to go into water and drown themselves so that the worms can crawl out of their butt and into the water they originally came from.

I learned about them after seeing a video on Reddit where the worms came out of a praying mantis's butt after someone dunked it into a glass of water, the mantis still alive afterwards and even trying to eat the worms. It was disturbing.:fearscream:

I read that there have been some cases of hair worms infecting dogs or even humans. Don't know if the worms brainwashed them into drowning themselves, though.
Click to expand...

That reminds me of the Leucochloridium Paradoxum, a parasite that turns snails into zombies. One of the freakiest things I have seen. :fearscream:
 
In 2008, scientists on the Norwegian island of Svalbard sent a Doritos commercial into space towards Ursa Major, 42 light years away.

Maybe in 68 years time, we can expect a whole bunch of little green men appearing, all wanting to know where they can get Doritos :)
 
TIL:
In Sims 3 you can play Chess against Death in exchange for another Sims' life back. If a Sim's Logic skill is high enough and somebody in a Lot dies, and you're quick enough to click on Death when he arrives, they may have the option to play a chess match against him, and if they win, they will bring the dead Sim back from the dead!!

Pizza rolls taste amazing with Chick Fil A Polynesian sauce.
 
Sometimes I worry that parasites will soon start brainwash and control the minds of humans, but then I remember that it's most humans we're talking about, and that you have to have brain and a mind first.

Or social media has already done it.
 
Progster said:
In 2008, scientists on the Norwegian island of Svalbard sent a Doritos commercial into space towards Ursa Major, 42 light years away.
Click to expand...

I have been to Svalbard, they have no sun there during winter and no night during summer. Polar nights and midnight sun. That can be very confusing over time and make people do crazy things like sending Doritos commercials into space. They were probably drunk too. ;)
 
Japanese people seldom smile in photos, so they do the "V" sign with their fingers to show that they are happy or having a good time. Sounds like something a lot of us in western culture would like to do.
 
The pineapple is related to neither the pine nor the apple. Instead, it is a dense cluster of berries grown into one large, pulpy mass.
 
An object with mass striking another such object at 3 km/sec ("kips") delivers kinetic energy roughly equal to its mass in TNT.

In other words there are 4,500,000 joules in one kilogram of TNT (3,0002m/s * 0.5 = 4.5 x 10^6). This means a stupid bolder traveling at 2,000 km/sec relative has about 400 kilo-Ricks of damage (i.e., each ton of rock will do the damage equivalent of 2 x 10^2 / 4.5 x 10^6 = 400 kilotons of TNT or about 20 Hiroshima bombs combined).

Ricks = (0.5 * V^2) / 4.5 x 10^6

where:
  • V = velocity of projectile relative to target (m/s)
  • Ricks = kilograms of TNT worth of kinetic energy per kilogram of projectile
So a projectile moving at 200 km/sec (20,000 m/s) would have about 4,000 Ricks (4 kilo-Ricks) of damage, approximately the same as a standard one-kiloton-yield nuclear weapon. By that I mean it has the same damage per kilogram as a nuke, counting all the nuke's framework, electronics, fissionable material, and whatnot. (for the projectile to do the same damage as a standard nuke, it would need to be the same mass as a standard nuke, about 250 kilograms) A projectile moving at 3,500 km/sec would have about one mega-Rick, which is the same damage per kilogram as the ultra-compact 475-kiloton-yield W-88 nuclear warhead.

As a general rule, anything with more than 100 Ricks (i.e., over 30 km/sec relative) does weapons-grade levels of damage. As an even more shaky general rule, anything with more than 4,000 Ricks (i.e., over 190 km/sec relative) does nuclear warhead levels of damage. This is based on the assumption that a nuclear weapon has about a 4,000 fold increase in energy per kg released versus TNT.

And if you are thinking in terms of bombarding your enemy with asteroids, as a general rule an asteroid's mass will be:

Ma = 1.47 x 10^4 * (Ra^3)

where:
  • Ma = mass of asteroid (kg)
  • Ra = radius of asteroid (m)
 
QUOTE
Louisa May Alcott’s debut novel was published in 1868 with the very long title Little Women: Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy. The Story Of Their Lives. A Girl’s Book. This work, which Alcott never intended to have a sequel, ends with Beth contracting scarlet fever and recovering. Amy is sent away to live with their Aunt as Beth convalesces, Jo has success earning money with her writing, and John Brooke asks permission from the March parents to marry Meg. To Alcott, this was her version of happily ever after — allowing readers to imagine where the characters would wind up. But her publisher, thrilled with the sales figures for this book and hearing from the public about their desire for a sequel, requested that Alcott provide one. She did, in a second book published in 1869, titled Good Wives.


Good Wives contains Beth’s death, along with the still-contentious plotline finding Jo turning down Laurie and Laurie settling for Amy. Jo then agrees to marry the much older Professor Bhaer, in a pairing that seems to have been Alcott trolling the Jo/Laurie fans who had written to her begging to know if their OTP would wind up together. And it doesn’t end there — Jo and Bhaer open a boy’s school! All the surviving little women have at least one baby! Marmee celebrates her 60th birthday! The whole volume sort of exists as a Sliding Doors moment making fans wish it had all ended at the end of the original book, but its existence means any contemporary publisher must choose which ending to include — the 1868 conclusion of Little Women, or the 1869 denouement of Good Wives?


Most American editions combine both books into a single volume, titled Little Women. In the United Kingdom, the preference is apparently to keep them separated into two volumes. And thus, the existence of two books, both titled Little Women and both by Louisa May Alcott, that end in two entirely different ways.
END QUOTE
bookriot.com

Beth Doesn't Always Die in Little Women. Sort Of. | BookRiot.com

Does Beth die in Little Women? Depends on which book you buy.
bookriot.com bookriot.com
 
1703692614937.png


getpocket.com

The World’s Oldest Pants Are a 3,000-Year-Old Engineering Marvel

Strong in some places and flexible in others, the pants were designed for horseback riding.
getpocket.com getpocket.com
 
[Recently], I learned...
...that Alexander Graham Bell's telephone was originally designed to work through the existing telegraph system. (And I am a retired systems analyst...!)

(I already knew that radio-based audio had been built on the existing wireless telegraphy system.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom