Things you always wanted to know the answer to [Vol. 3]

[walm]

rufmeister said:

Travelling in a vehicle, let's say plane.

If I jump in the air, why am I not thrown back at the rate the plane is travelling at?

Similarly, a fly, in my car, car doing 50mph, is the fly flying at 50mph also?

Simply put - you are travelling at the same speed of the plane and no amount of jumping up and down will change that!
It's the same reason we don't hurtle into space backwards when we jump up off the ground - we are travelling at the same speed the earth is rotating and that doesn't change when we accelerate perpendicularly (very much).

For the fly - it is surrounded by air also going 50mph relative to the ground so it can happily buzz around at normal speeds and maintain that pace - it isn't flapping its wings like crazy trying to keep up.

That is obviously very different when it's a convertible. Then (most of) the air will be flowing at 50mph backwards relative to the car and the fly wouldn't be able to keep up.
Although if it is chilling just behind the windscreen then again it would be fine.

This is all Newton's first law which essentially says we will continue at the same speed and in a straight line until something knocks us off that path.

So when we are already going 550mph in a plane we won't stop with a vertical jump.

[P-Jay]

paolow said:

TREMAiNE said:

Could someone please explain to me as simply as possible why the Vietnam war happened and why the technologically superior US lost to the Vietnamese?

1) the NVA and VC wanted to reunify Vietnam as a communist whole and Eisenhower feared a domino effect for other bordering countries becoming communist at a time where communism was seen as THE threat to the west.
2) home advantage.

Home advantage, they played to their strengths and the terrain and most importantly reacted to the enemy better - the Anti-communist forces largely tried to fight a conventional war - the North fought a large scale guerrilla war, they used lots of 'nasty' tactics to demoralise the US solders especially.

As war goes it was pretty even in terms of total kills, an horrific amount on both sides, it took 15 years, but the North won by making the war so unpopular in the US they pulled out.

[menousername]

Sorry if this has been asked before..

Do NHS drivers etc have to suffer the £60 and 3 points if they go through speed cameras.

Yesterday a motorcycle set one off next to me. As he came by I noticed he was an NHS Blood Courier, probably coming from the local hospital.

He wasn't in a particular rush and I am really surprised he set it off. Hence the question do NHS drivers and the like have to accept the fine and points when (1) responding to an emergency and (2) going about their emergency business but not in a rush?

[fomb]

menousername said:

do NHS drivers and the like have to accept the fine and points when (1) responding to an emergency and (2) going about their emergency business but not in a rush?

Is the answer not obvious? Would it really work with emergency responders picking up a ban each shift?

[menousername]

fomb said:

Is the answer not obvious? Would it really work with emergency responders picking up a ban each shift?

well ok maybe the specifics would be nice... perhaps my question is skewed by the fact that I was thinking about a blood delivery courier not riding with blues flashing

do they ride through with exemption, do they or any admin departments have to go through a process of proving the emergency and responding to the initial paperwork etc.

[anonymous-user]

Any traffic order (inc parking, access etc) has an exemption for emergency vehicles. They can do, pretty much, what they like. And rightly so, IMO. If he's got 4 pints of my blood in his box then I don't want him stopping for red lights!

[SpeckledJim]

OpulentBob said:

Any traffic order (inc parking, access etc) has an exemption for emergency vehicles. They can do, pretty much, what they like. And rightly so, IMO. If he's got 4 pints of my blood in his box then I don't want him stopping for red lights!

If it's 4 pints of mine I'm not that bothered what he does. It's 4 pints of somebody else's that I might just be really keen on!

[SpeckledJim]

menousername said:

Sorry if this has been asked before..

Do NHS drivers etc have to suffer the £60 and 3 points if they go through speed cameras.

Yesterday a motorcycle set one off next to me. As he came by I noticed he was an NHS Blood Courier, probably coming from the local hospital.

He wasn't in a particular rush and I am really surprised he set it off. Hence the question do NHS drivers and the like have to accept the fine and points when (1) responding to an emergency and (2) going about their emergency business but not in a rush?

What type of emergency business is not conducted in a rush?

[P-Jay]

menousername said:

Sorry if this has been asked before..

Do NHS drivers etc have to suffer the £60 and 3 points if they go through speed cameras.

Yesterday a motorcycle set one off next to me. As he came by I noticed he was an NHS Blood Courier, probably coming from the local hospital.

He wasn't in a particular rush and I am really surprised he set it off. Hence the question do NHS drivers and the like have to accept the fine and points when (1) responding to an emergency and (2) going about their emergency business but not in a rush?

It's a good question - I know a lot, if not all of the 'Blood Bikes' are volunteers, I've seen some with blue lights fitted and some when I didn't notice any - I've always wondered if they're trained / allowed to go through lights / speed etc - you'd hope so really.

[singlecoil]

What is the essential difference between ink and paint?

[Dr Jekyll]

P-Jay said:

It's a good question - I know a lot, if not all of the 'Blood Bikes' are volunteers, I've seen some with blue lights fitted and some when I didn't notice any - I've always wondered if they're trained / allowed to go through lights / speed etc - you'd hope so really.

No they aren't, if lent a bike with blue lights they are under strict instructions not to use them. I heard about a local long standing blood bike volunteer who was seen using the lights for a few seconds to get past a hold up, I don't think he was prosecuted but his courier services were certainly no longer required.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Dan_1981 said:

I've been wondering about this.....

I have insurance on my house buildings & contents. My house is mortgaged too.

Assume my house was blown up in an explosion or completely destroyed in a fire or other disaster.

I claim from my house insurance who pay out the value I have insured to rebuild.

Do I have to rebuild my house? Or can I just pay the mortgage off and then potentially sell off the empty building plot?

Any ideas how this works?

The rebuild cost is usually way less than the market value of a house. If that were not the case, no one would build new houses, because buying the land and putting up the house would be more costly than the price they'd get for the house.

So accepting the rebuild cost in cash from the insurer and selling the land would not net you enough money to buy a similar house. Financially it wouldn't be a wise move. Better off getting insurers to liaise with builders and build you a new house, whilst they pay for your alternate accommodation during the disruption period, that would also be covered

The mortgage bit is a red herring, as the principle is the same regardless of a mortgage or owning it outright. But so long as the mortgage co had either the house as collateral, or the mortgage repaid in full, I doubt they'd care what you did.

I doubt there's any law against your suggestion. If say you lived in London and wanted to move to Scotland, and you wanted to go in a hurry, provided you and insurers could reach agreement on the figure, you could take the rebuild cash, sell the land to a developer, clear any mortgage and sod off.

[Justayellowbadge]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Dan_1981 said:

I've been wondering about this.....

I have insurance on my house buildings & contents. My house is mortgaged too.

Assume my house was blown up in an explosion or completely destroyed in a fire or other disaster.

I claim from my house insurance who pay out the value I have insured to rebuild.

Do I have to rebuild my house? Or can I just pay the mortgage off and then potentially sell off the empty building plot?

Any ideas how this works?

The rebuild cost is usually way less than the market value of a house. If that were not the case, no one would build new houses, because buying the land and putting up the house would be more costly than the price they'd get for the house.

So accepting the rebuild cost in cash from the insurer and selling the land would not net you enough money to buy a similar house. Financially it wouldn't be a wise move. Better off getting insurers to liaise with builders and build you a new house, whilst they pay for your alternate accommodation during the disruption period, that would also be covered

The mortgage bit is a red herring, as the principle is the same regardless of a mortgage or owning it outright. But so long as the mortgage co had either the house as collateral, or the mortgage repaid in full, I doubt they'd care what you did.

I doubt there's any law against your suggestion. If say you lived in London and wanted to move to Scotland, and you wanted to go in a hurry, provided you and insurers could reach agreement on the figure, you could take the rebuild cash, sell the land to a developer, clear any mortgage and sod off.

Could depend on the property - I can imagine a plot could be worth more than the same land with something restrictively listed on it.

I'm sure it's only a coincidence when arson attacks follow planning refusals...

[Cliftonite]

I would imagine the mortgage is paid off well before the lucky property owner sees any of the cash!
Lenders do tend to have their interest in the property well flagged up in the insurance policy do they not?

[SpeckledJim]

singlecoil said:

What is the essential difference between ink and paint?

A guess: ink infiltrates the substrate, whereas paint sits on top?

(Though that wouldn't cover water-colour paint on canvas or paper. Hmm.)

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Cliftonite said:

I would imagine the mortgage is paid off well before the lucky property owner sees any of the cash!
Lenders do tend to have their interest in the property well flagged up in the insurance policy do they not?

Yes, they'd agree a rebuild cost and if you were taking the cash, they'd clear the mortgage and send you the balance. Like a written off car with outstanding finance.

[DervVW]

Issi said:

Why is it that despite Birmingham being the second biggest city in the UK, but you very rarely see or hear a Brummie in the media?

There are loads of celebrities/bands from Newcastle, Liverpool, Manchester etc, but the Midlands is like a cultural black hole.

to quote James Franco "they hate us cos they anus/aint us"

[scarble]

Dr Jekyll said:

No they aren't, if lent a bike with blue lights they are under strict instructions not to use them. I heard about a local long standing blood bike volunteer who was seen using the lights for a few seconds to get past a hold up, I don't think he was prosecuted but his courier services were certainly no longer required.

They do get blue lights and are allowed to use them but as I have apparently just learnt from google, they can't go fast or go through red lights, yet?
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/14/blo...

Edited by scarble on Tuesday 10th March 08:41

[ShiningWit]

singlecoil said:

What is the essential difference between ink and paint?

Paint is opaque, ink isn't.

[StevieBee]

Let's say I start a bank - just a normal high street retail bank. Rates are prices are all competitive and inline with the market but I need customers.

So, I run a promotion. Switch you Mortgage and current account to my bank and you can have a year off paying your mortgage. Obviously there would be tie-ins and conditions and my bank would have to raise considerable funds to cover the deal for a year but in essence....is it doable?