HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
Subject: Re: why the moon/sun looks bigger -new expl
Reply-To: rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 14:35:29 GMT

In article <conibear.714151608@cunews>, conibear@sol.carleton.ca (Dave
Conibear) writes:
|> For those bemoaning the lack of photos comparing the "moon at horizon"
|> with the "moon in sky":
|> 
|> Try getting into the habit of blocking out the moon with your thumb
|> (better yet, your pinky) held at arm's length.  When you find that the
|> "moon at horizon" is no harder to cover up, you get a whole new class
|> of hypotheses:

This is all very well, but what in the world is a "pinky" in this context?

Inquiring (European) minds want to know!
--
Robin (dump Brian Kay) Fairbairns, using the facilities of the U of
Cambridge Computer Lab, for which permission is gratefully acknowledged.
[Wonderful what a few job offers can do for one's self-esteem :-]
From: groves@noao.edu (Lee Groves)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: why the moon/sun looks bigger -new expl.
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:22:17 GMT
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA
Originator: groves@yam.tuc.noao.edu

From article <1992Aug17.183551.9077@CERIS.Purdue.EDU>, by dheisler@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Dave Heisler):
> 
>    try this : the visual portion of the brain has gotten used
>    to thinking that things higher up are 
>    farther away. 
> 
>    The brain assists by (subconsciously) enlarging the
>    (sun/moon) when it's low. While similarly when we
>    tilt are heads up (higher, more verticle) the brain shifts the
>    perceived image size
>    to smaller. Our visual system is probably tied with the inner
>    ear to sense head position.
> 
>    comments? flames ?
>    dave

You are exactly right.  This is a known phenomina.  The name for it
is Know Size/ Apparent Distance.  We think the sky is closer than
the horizon, so when the moon is on the horizon, it seems bigger.

--This all based on my memories from the "Sensation and Perception"
psych. class I took my senior year of college.  

Lee
From: kstuart@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Kenneth Stuart)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Lightning and trees.
Date: 12 Aug 92 13:51:19 GMT
Reply-To: kstuart@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Kenneth Stuart)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In alt.folklore.science, pjh@eng.cam.ac.uk (Philippa Hogben) writes:
>
>Why is it dangerous to shelter under a tree in a thunderstorm? Is it
>safe to camp under a tree or will the spikes on the tent poles tend
>to attract the lightning from the tree?

Philippa, the following hazards exist if lightning strikes the tree:
   1)  The lightning current will spread through the ground from the
       base of the tree.  This can cause a severe or lethal shock!
   2)  When lightning strikes a tree, it is not uncommon for the trunk
       to split or limbs to break off causing the damaged trunk or limbs
       to fall.  Not a thrilling prospect if I were camping UNDER that
       tree at the time...


>I thought that thunderstorms were caused by convection currents in hot
>weather. How come, then, that we had a massive thunderstorm on
>Saturday night when Saturday was cold?

The temperatures in the upper atmospheres are *VERY* cold.  Thunderstorms
are not uncommon in the dead of winter!


>How come there was so little thunder? There was an almost constant
>flicker of lightning but it thundered only occasionally.

Probably, the lightning was cloud-to-cloud with little of it reaching
the ground.  Therefore, most of the sound would be lost.  The energy
level of the lightning also was probably less than that of higher energy
ground strokes.

Hope this helps...

regards,  Ken Stuart
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: bit bucket identified
From: ecmtwhk@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Thomas Koenig)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 06:17:26 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

wiml@milton.u.washington.edu (William Lewis) writes:

>In article <1992Aug10.084412.16105@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz> ecmtwhk@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Thomas Koenig) writes:
>>If a memory or mass storage segment with n bits is set to all zero, you
>>decrease the number of possible states that particular system can be in,
>>from 2^n to 1.
>>
>>Statistical thermodynamics tells us entropy is K*ln(sum of all states)
>>(K being Boltzmann's constant), so you have just decreased the entropy of
>>the system by K*n*ln(2).

>I once read an article (I think it was in Scientific American) which
>claimed that this is the reason you can't build effective Maxwell's Demons.
>The demon has to detect the approaching molecule, open or shut the door,
>and then repeat the cycle. But the bit of information which stores the
>demon's decision to open or shut the door must be (gasp) FORGOTTEN,
>and this forgetting takes enough energy to keep the thermodynamicists
>happy. 

>This always struck me as particularly weird. I mean, if each daemon
>carried around a little tiny write-only memory (WOM), which would record
>all the decisions it made for all eternity, then you *could* violate the
>Second Law, right? Oh well...

Unfortunately not, because we have just increased the number of states
our daemon could be in, so we have a net entropy transfer from the
outside of our daemon to the inside. Pity...
-- 
Thomas Koenig, ecmtwhk@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz, ib09@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de
The joy of engineering is to find a straight line on a double logarithmic
diagram.
From: ralf@ark.abg.sub.org (Ralf Stephan)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Ball lightnings with microwave
Date: 13 Aug 92 09:42:00 GMT
Organization: Private Coherent 3.2.1 site waiting for 4.0

This is the public announcement for the first competition

                     "Make your own ball lightning!"

Basis for the competition: The article "Plasma fireballs formed by microwave
interference in air" by Y.H.Ohtsuki & H.Ofuruton in Nature 350,139 (1991)

Excerpt of the apparatus:

                           Waveguide (o 55x109mm)
                        _______________
                       / _____________ \
                      | |             |=| E-H tuner
                      | |             | |
                    __|_|_         ___|_|___
                   |Cavity|       |Magnetron| 2.45 GHz, 5 kW
                    ------         ---------
                (diam. 161mm           |
                length 370mm)        Power

1. Prize:  A crunchy microwaved cat  (Siam/Perser Medium/English al gusto)
for the first person who creates a ball lightning with his microwave.

Now where are the *real* experimentators, huh?

--ralf
-- Telepathy is just a trick:  once you know how to do it, it's easy. (nh)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: spzkny@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY)
Subject: Re: why the moon/sun looks bigger -new expl.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 19 Aug 1992 08:25 EST  

In article <1321@uknet.ac.uk>, tlg@uknet.ac.uk (Tim.Goodwin) writes...

>I thought the whole point was that the angle subtended by the moon's
>diameter is the same, it just looks different.
>...his explanation is that the brain correlates clarity with distance.
>When the moon is high in the sky, there's less atmosphere in the way, so
>the image is sharper, so the brain thinks it's further away.

I read in a psychology text once that it's simply human perception that's 
at fault.  We instinctively "think" that objects overhead are closer than 
objects on the horizon (sort-of like the sky is an overturned, shallow 
dish).  Makes sense to me.  There's nothing in the atmosphere that distorts 
the apparent size of celestial bodies.  It's all in yer heads.

                                                  James S. Zakany
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: baylor@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com
Subject: Re: Lightning and trees.
Reply-To: baylor@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale, California
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 16:23:19 GMT

In article <RFowler.330@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>, 
RFowler@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Robert A. Fowler) writes:
>In article <1992Aug14.121756.26708@cl.cam.ac.uk> rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns) writes:
>
>>In article <govender.713710105@shannon> govender@shannon.ee.wits.ac.za (Govender) writes:
>>>[...]
>>>the safe thing to do in a thunderstorm is to lie flat on the ground, away
>>>from any tall objects and preferably in a low lying area.
>
>>Surely, if you're in a large flat area this is positivley _not_ the
>>sort of thing you want to indulge in.
>
>>If the area is flat, any place to strike is as good as any other.  By
>>lying down, you increase your cross section (as seen by Jove), and
>>hence increase your chance of getting hit.
>
>[...]
>BUT, if you stand up, your head is the highest point in the local area, and 
>you will atract lightning.  If you lay down, yes your vertical cross-section 
>is larger, but you will hopefuly be lower than some other point in the area, 
>so lighting will strike there.

Good GRIEF! I hope none of you actually LIVE in lightning country!
Listen up, the officially sanctioned best practice for being outside in
a thunderstorm is as follows: [Not a quote, but believe me, I learned 
this well when I lived in Tornado Alley!]

Do not stand under a tree. High points get hit. Find the lowest place away
from trees that you can be, but do not lay down, especially in a large
flat area. Reason: the lightning still has to hit somewhere.  Once the 
ground has been hit, the charge dissipates outward from the strike point
If you are near the strike point, but not directly hit, laying flat on the
ground can put your head & feet at different electrical potentials,
causing a charge to go through you (& perhaps more importantly, through
your heart, where it can do the most harm.) Instead, find your best 
location and squat, minimizing both your contact with the ground
and your height.

Any questions?

RB
From: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com (Mark Slagle)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: scientific explanation for divining rods?
Date: 13 Aug 92 21:26:20 GMT
	<SLAGLE.92Aug12031602@sgi417.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com>
	<1992Aug13.014852.10681@panix.com>
Reply-To: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com
Distribution: na
Organization: You wouldn't ask this if you'd seen my desk.
In-reply-to: carlf@panix.com's message of 13 Aug 92 01:48:52 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.014852.10681@panix.com>, carlf@panix.com (Carl Fink) writes:

> For the record:  if you really believe that you can detect underground
> or otherwise hidden metallic objects using bent wires (which colloquially
> would be called "dowsing", although one correspondent restricts that word
> to detection of water) then you should contact James Randi, who will gladly
> award you a prize of $10,000 upon proof of this ability.

This is getting tiresome.  Don't you bother to read the 
articles you respond to?  We are NOT talking about dowsing,
which is defined as the location of underground water (or
sometimes mineral) deposits.  And Randi is not the principle
in this offer.  If you want to get the facts on the offer,
contact Paul Kurtz.  He is a professor of philosophy at the
State Univ. of NY at Buffalo, and he is the founder and head
honcho of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of
Claims Of the Paranormal (CSICOP).  He is in a similar position
with respect to a group of "Secular Humanists", although I can't
remember the official name of the group.  I do recall that they
publish a (monthly?) magazine called "Free Inquiry."  Contact
Kurtz for subscription information, if you're interested.

In any case, what we are talking about is locating straight runs
of shallow underground pipe, NOT DOWSING.  It is my (limited)
understanding of Kurtz's offer that it applies only to DOWSING,
which is NOT the topic here, despite inaccurate claims in the
press clipping that started this discussion.

> Reminder:  Randi has tested quite a few dowsers before, and they have
> universally failed under controlled conditions.

Which is what I wrote, if you'd bother to even read it
before spewing an uninformed response to it in public.
You guys are incredible.  If you don't believe it then
why don't you get off your ass and trot out to the yard
and try it, like I suggested in the article you didn't
bother to read.
--
----
Mark E. Slagle                                 PO Box 61059
slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com                       Sunnyvale, CA   94088
408-756-0895                                   USA
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Subject: Re: Microwaved light bulb
Reply-To: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 07:23:01 GMT

In article <EACHUS.92Aug19105643@Dr_No.mitre.org> eachus@Dr_No.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) writes:
>
>   Further, is the 110V variety such as the Syvania CapSylite using
>   the same principle or is there another effect at 110V as opposed to
>   12V?
>
>   No, the filament structure is different is all.  I'm not sure about
>the small halogen flashlight bulbs, it seems possible to design an
>inner envelope which gets hot enough, but why?  Most flashlight bulbs
>fail from vibration well before tungsten darkening of the glass is
>noticable.

Thanks for the info.  I have seen small flashlight bulbs slightly darkened
by tungsten boil-off, but usually shock damages the bulb first.

The Sylvania CapSylite is rated for 3500 hours usage, which is pretty good
for this class of bulb.  The glass is rather thick and has a mold mark on it,
so it doesn't look that much like a "bulb".  Its shape is slightly squarish
as well.

I assume that this is the opposite of long-life bulbs that are at lower
temperature, thus the light output versus electricity usage is more efficient
than standard, not less so as in those cooler bulbs.

cjl
Xref: sparky alt.folklore.science:3012 sci.chem:3026
From: srp@babar.mmwb.ucsf.edu (Scott R. Presnell)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science,sci.chem
Subject: Sparking grapes
Date: 13 Aug 92 15:02:39 GMT
Organization: UCSF Computer Graphics Lab

Hi -
	On a recent trip with some folks, I was introduced to an
interesting phenomenon: If you cut a grape in half, place the two halves
side by side (skins touching) in a microwave, and fire up the microwave,
the grape will "spark" much like a piece of metal would.  I have not fully
investigated the varaibles involved, but I'm told this will only happen
with grapes... Does anyone have a clue what is in the grapes that would
cause this?

	Thanks.

	- Scott Presnell (srp@cgl.ucsf.edu)

-- 
Scott Presnell				        +1 (415) 476-9890
Pharmaceutical Chemistry, S-926			srp@cgl.ucsf.edu
University of California
San Francisco, CA 94143-0446
From: liangw@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (William Liang)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: water after knock-out
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:23:25 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

Is it true or is it a myth that when a person is unconscious after getting
struck one can revive him/her by splashing water on his face?  I see this
done all the time on movies and TV, but am not sure why it always work
like magic.  One splash of water and the person will pop up like nothing
has happened.

Bill
From: ralf@ark.abg.sub.org (Ralf Stephan)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Lightning and trees.
Date: 21 Aug 92 19:38
Organization: Private Coherent 4.0.1 site Augsburg/Bavaria/Germany

govender@shannon.ee.wits.ac.za (Govender) writes:
> to answer the lady's question, the reason why it is dangerous to shelter
> under a tree in a thunderstorm is that trees, being more often than not 
> the taller objects in the vicinity, are more susceptible to lightning strikes
> than other shorter objects.this explains why thatched houses (in south 
> africa, at least) have to be shielded from lightning by suitably tall
> metal poles acting as lightning conductors.lightning bolts always seek the 
> shortest electrical path to ground.

I remember a documentation which stated that if you take an imaginary
sphere with 30 meters diameter and roll it over your position/house/objects,
the objects that are not touched by the sphere will be safe from direct
lightning strike.

That means you are really safe from *direct* strike when you are between
objects that stand 25 m apart and a minimum height of 15 m, but not if
you are in the center of a place with 40 m diameter with objects of 100 m
height.

--ralf
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: drsmith@hamline.edu (jime)
Subject: re: microwaved risk
Organization: Hamline University, St. Paul, Minnesota
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 17:54:34 GMT

anyone for a game of risk? %-) **end of snickering**

-- 

any size is too sizy for my light eyes

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: pashdown@javelin.sim.es.com (Pete Ashdown)
Subject: Water ionization via magnetism?
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 19:29:34 GMT


I remember many moons ago a blurb on the radio about replacing your costly
water softener with a super-duper high power magnet.  It was supposed to do
the same thing by just sitting on your pipes.

Right now I live in an apartment that spits bricks out of the shower head.
Even if the magnet would ionize 10% of the water, I would use it.  So is there
any truth to this?
-- 
			  I'm not wearing any pants.

DISCLAIMER: My writings have NOTHING to do with my employer.  Keep it that way.
Pete Ashdown    pashdown@slack.sim.es.com    ...uunet!slack.sim.es.com!pashdown
From: larry@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Seriously, microwave health risks?
Date: 22 Aug 92 20:41:11 GMT
Reply-To: larry@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Distribution: alt
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

In article <BETSYS.92Aug21163628@ra.cs.umb.edu>, betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) writes:
>One thing I have heard, and maybe you folks can shed some luminescence
>on this, is that one should wait 30 seconds after removing food from
>the microwave so that the microwaves can "settle down."
>  Do microwaves "bounce around" inside food for a while? Or, will food
>continue to heat up for a few seconds after the machine is stopped?
>  thanks, Betsy
  Although it might be a good idea to let food sit inside of the
microwave for a few seconds after cooking, it is not due to stray 
microwaves bouncing around.  The lifetime of any individual photon
of microwave energy is certainly less than one second.  Maybe
if you were the world's fastest human (Dan or Dave?) you could
open the door after the microwave turned off and stick your hand
inside quickly enough to absorb microwave radiation.  However, I
doubt it.  As another reassurance, if stray microwaves were a 
problem after the microwave shut off, the microwave would probably
have a feature which prevented you from opening it during that 
period, much like current microwave ovens have some sort of safety
feature that prevents them from being on with the door open.
  
  However, it might be a good idea to let things sit for a 
minute anyway as it could allow some steam to release from
the food you are cooking before you attempt to handle it.
Steam burns from pulling something out of the microwave and
taking off the lid/plastic wrap on top are a very real danger.

-Lec Luthor
 Criminal Genius Extraordinaire
From: rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: halogen bulbs (was Re: Microwaved light bulb)
Date: 17 Aug 92 11:15:17 GMT
Reply-To: rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
Organization: U of Cambridge Comp Lab, UK

In article <1992Aug17.063922.22800@news.columbia.edu> lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
>[...]
>Can someone explain the Halogen operating principles over and above the
>conventional incandescant bulbs.  Also, I assume in the car case, this is
>also the so-called "quart-iodine" type bulb, not some other.

Iodine is a halogen, so quartz-iodine bulbs are indeed halogen bulbs.
The idea is that since the tungsten filament crumbles by slow
evaporation, and since tungsten and halogens perform a neat
vapour-phase reaction to form tungsten halides which are themselves
decomposed by the _real_ heat of the filament itself, you can recycle
the tungsten in the filament by adding a little halogen to the
envelope.

Because of the recycling going on, you can afford to run halogen bulbs
hotter than conventional ones, so that they shine brighter.  (They run
hotter by having a different resistance profile, not by taking a
different voltage or whatever.)  The reason for the quartz envelope is
that hot halogens also tend to attack "ordinary glass" bulbs, whereas
quartz is less reactive.

>Further, is the 110V variety such as the Syvania CapSylite using the same
>principle or is there another effect at 110V as opposed to 12V?

Shouldn't imagine so: the effect is pretty straightforwards, so Occam's
razor would imply that it's the same whatever the input voltage, AC or
DC.  Of course, we don't get many 110V bulbs here, so I can't be
entirely sure.
--
Robin (dump Brian Kay) Fairbairns, using the facilities of the U of
Cambridge Computer Lab, for which permission is gratefully acknowledged.
[Wonderful what a few job offers can do for one's self-esteem :-]
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: scientific explanation for divining rods?
From: hoyt@isus.UUCP (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.)
Date: 14 Aug 92 16:37:33 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: International Society of Unified Science

In article <SLAGLE.92Aug12031602@sgi417.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com> slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com writes:
>
>I'll take the flame that another responder promises.
>The answer to your question is:  No, there is no
>scientific explanation that I know of.  But the
>effectiveness is not just apparent.  It works and
>I have done it.  I have done it blindfolded in areas
>where I had no previous knowledge of the location
>or existence of underground pipes.  It doesn't seem
>to depend on the kind of pipe or what it carries.
>

The explanation that seems most likely to me is the effect psychologists
call "ideomotor" response, which is muscle movement caused by the
subconscious.  Nothing particularly new about that, walking is automatically
accomplished by the subconscious mind, and really involves an enormous
amount of computation that the conscious mind is not aware of.

The rods amplify very small movements of the hand.  How the knowledge
gets to the subconscious mind is another matter, but probably based on
experience and intuition.

Ideomotor movement is the same phenemon responsible for "automatic writing",
Oija (sp?) board movement, and other so called supernatural effects.

-- 
Hoyt A. Stearns jr.|hoyt@          | International Society of Unified Science|
4131 E. Cannon Dr. |isus.tnet.com  | Advancing Dewey B. Larson's Reciprocal  |
Phoenix, AZ. 85028 |ncar!enuucp!   | System- a unified physical theory.      |
voice_602_996_1717 telesys!isus!hoyt The Universe in two postulates!_________|
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science