Things you always wanted to know the answer to [Vol. 3]
Discussion
Speed 3 said:
... and strangely HD channels seem to be dealyed vs the same channel in non-HD on the same equipment, certainly does on our Virgin fibre anyway.
Takes longer to encode and (more so, probably, as you have the less costly end of the equipment) decode the high-definition signal than the low-def one.Happens a lot in one of the pubs I go in, can be a few seconds difference between two TVs which isn't usually a problem unless it's something "special" (like a football match) and they've got them turned up quite high.
glazbagun said:
How big would a steel coil (like from your suspension) spring need to be to launch 100kgs past escape velocity?
If your intention would be to launch something into space, im not entirely sure if that is actually possible. Trying to punch through the lower atmosphere at such speeds would take such insane amount of energy.. We're talking 25-30 times the speed of sound easily, at sea level...allroad one said:
Say a car was involved in a fatal accident and ended up properly mangled, what would happen to it other than be crushed? What would happen after the police retrieve it etc, and would it ever be sold on? E.g copart
The answer is it depends. If it is a collision that triggers the airbags and there maybe some small blood from broken bones etc likely to have offending air bag removed and disposed (hazardous waste) then sold on. May have a pressure wash to get rid of worst of it.
Bad ones are a bit different. Often will be cut up by the fire brigade to get at the casualties. The collection drivers tend to wrap them up in black wrap and take them back to the yard. More often than not yard manager will choose to put it straight in the crusher as it is not profitable to process. It's easier on all if it is just sent to be recycled.
Have heard stories of the guys helping collect body parts and finding bits left in the wreck. The company I used to work for also used to pay a small gratuity to the driver if they'd had to do this.
Rostfritt said:
StevieBee said:
Actually called the Profanity Delay, normally 7 seconds but hardly ever gets used as such as it's very difficult to bleep a rude word in a live transmission without having someone hovering over a big red button. You have to find the profanity on the sound wave, highlight it and remove it or reverse it...while the sound file is moving...all in seven seconds.
It's used more these days to even out the variation in natural delays through different broadcast means (analogue, DAB, online, satellite, etc) so everything is set to the slowest.
I do a bit of radio and the station has two studios, 14 miles apart. Studio B is connected by fibre broadband to studio A where the signal goes to an FM transmitter. Through my headphones in studio B, I hear what comes out of the desk but switch a switch and I hear what someone would hear on FM or Online. FM is 1 second behind me and online is 5 seconds. I have in the past had a game I play live on air where guests are asked to read some local news article but using the FM input into their headphones and see how far they get into before it affect them. It is the funniest thing as they slow down their speech to wait for the signal to catch up but they just......end.........up................speaking...............really..................slowly.
I don't think they have a delay on the BBC News Channel. Earlier on they had a reporter on location and about 2 mins into a piece she loudly and disgustingly cleared her throat and muttered 'I think I'll start that again'. I guess she thought this piece wasn't going out live.It's used more these days to even out the variation in natural delays through different broadcast means (analogue, DAB, online, satellite, etc) so everything is set to the slowest.
I do a bit of radio and the station has two studios, 14 miles apart. Studio B is connected by fibre broadband to studio A where the signal goes to an FM transmitter. Through my headphones in studio B, I hear what comes out of the desk but switch a switch and I hear what someone would hear on FM or Online. FM is 1 second behind me and online is 5 seconds. I have in the past had a game I play live on air where guests are asked to read some local news article but using the FM input into their headphones and see how far they get into before it affect them. It is the funniest thing as they slow down their speech to wait for the signal to catch up but they just......end.........up................speaking...............really..................slowly.
FiF said:
When you're listening to Test Match Special, clearly there is a delay on transmission. You can see typed commentary on cricinfo before the TMS commentary is broadcast.
How long is the delay roughly and why, is it simply in case Boycott rips out a fookin' rubbish when someone plays a particularly bad shot and gets out.
It's down to transmission and processing delays on whatever media you are watching/listening to. There are different delays between normal radio, DAB radio, terrestrial television, satellite, cable and internet.How long is the delay roughly and why, is it simply in case Boycott rips out a fookin' rubbish when someone plays a particularly bad shot and gets out.
Try watching the F1 on Sky with the sound off and the commentary from Radio 5 on the radio - the pictures are about 5 seconds behind the audio. Or worse, watching F1 on sky with "live timing" from the F1 website - the website is nearly a minute behind the pictures!
Vitorio said:
glazbagun said:
How big would a steel coil (like from your suspension) spring need to be to launch 100kgs past escape velocity?
If your intention would be to launch something into space, im not entirely sure if that is actually possible. Trying to punch through the lower atmosphere at such speeds would take such insane amount of energy.. We're talking 25-30 times the speed of sound easily, at sea level...High school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
glazbagun said:
A quick google says 40,270 km/h is escape velocity for earth, I didn't realise it was quite so high. Plus like you say, atmospheric friction would be so high at sea level that you'd need to be going even faster initially. Given the speed of a spring's expansion of say one second, that's 100KGS accelerating from 0-4^4km/h in one second.
High school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
Makes sense, considering you want that accelerating in a single second, whilst the Saturn V would take muuuuuuch longerHigh school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
And interestingly, i think the really interesting bit here would be how the spring would behave, it isnt mass less after all, and you would have to have a spring weighing several orders of magnitude more then your 100kg payload, which after the initial push would end up going back/forth under its own weight a few times, all at hypersonic speeds. Not to mention the extra energy to get (part of) the spring to the required velocity.
Interestingly, the 1.1e8N/s figure you get is still a lot less then the energies released in a nuclear explosion
I think you should revise your launch method from spring based (can you imagine trying to store this much energy in a spring, and what kind of catch/release you'd need by the way? yowzers), to digging a whopping deep shaft and using that as a gun barrel, with a nuke at the bottom. You might need to find a way to get your payload pushed by the radiation/thermal output though, as im not sure the pressure shockwave would be fast enough to push your object to escape velocity.
glazbagun said:
Vitorio said:
glazbagun said:
How big would a steel coil (like from your suspension) spring need to be to launch 100kgs past escape velocity?
If your intention would be to launch something into space, im not entirely sure if that is actually possible. Trying to punch through the lower atmosphere at such speeds would take such insane amount of energy.. We're talking 25-30 times the speed of sound easily, at sea level...High school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
Vitorio said:
glazbagun said:
A quick google says 40,270 km/h is escape velocity for earth, I didn't realise it was quite so high. Plus like you say, atmospheric friction would be so high at sea level that you'd need to be going even faster initially. Given the speed of a spring's expansion of say one second, that's 100KGS accelerating from 0-4^4km/h in one second.
High school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
Makes sense, considering you want that accelerating in a single second, whilst the Saturn V would take muuuuuuch longerHigh school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
And interestingly, i think the really interesting bit here would be how the spring would behave, it isnt mass less after all, and you would have to have a spring weighing several orders of magnitude more then your 100kg payload, which after the initial push would end up going back/forth under its own weight a few times, all at hypersonic speeds. Not to mention the extra energy to get (part of) the spring to the required velocity.
Interestingly, the 1.1e8N/s figure you get is still a lot less then the energies released in a nuclear explosion
I think you should revise your launch method from spring based (can you imagine trying to store this much energy in a spring, and what kind of catch/release you'd need by the way? yowzers), to digging a whopping deep shaft and using that as a gun barrel, with a nuke at the bottom. You might need to find a way to get your payload pushed by the radiation/thermal output though, as im not sure the pressure shockwave would be fast enough to push your object to escape velocity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plumbbob#P...
glazbagun said:
A quick google says 40,270 km/h is escape velocity for earth, I didn't realise it was quite so high. Plus like you say, atmospheric friction would be so high at sea level that you'd need to be going even faster initially. Given the speed of a spring's expansion of say one second, that's 100KGS accelerating from 0-4^4km/h in one second.
High school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
Why can't you just slowly leave the earths atmosphere then? Obviously it would take a while, but why can't you just travel upwards at 30mph and pop out the top.I supposes it comes back to the ladder to space thing, but I just never got the escape velocity thing. I simple thinking it would make sense that the further from the surface you got the lower the effect of gravity. Annoyingly I did A level Physics but we never did any space stuff at that level, only really did the order of planets and stuff in the lower years. Is it down to a multiplication of g=9.81m/s2?High school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
gazzarose said:
glazbagun said:
A quick google says 40,270 km/h is escape velocity for earth, I didn't realise it was quite so high. Plus like you say, atmospheric friction would be so high at sea level that you'd need to be going even faster initially. Given the speed of a spring's expansion of say one second, that's 100KGS accelerating from 0-4^4km/h in one second.
High school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
Why can't you just slowly leave the earths atmosphere then? Obviously it would take a while, but why can't you just travel upwards at 30mph and pop out the top.I supposes it comes back to the ladder to space thing, but I just never got the escape velocity thing. I simple thinking it would make sense that the further from the surface you got the lower the effect of gravity. Annoyingly I did A level Physics but we never did any space stuff at that level, only really did the order of planets and stuff in the lower years. Is it down to a multiplication of g=9.81m/s2?High school maths of F=MA gives a force of 100KGS X acceleration of 11111111MS^2= 1111111100N If I round down to 10^8N, that's above a Saturn V by an order of magnitude.
gazzarose said:
Why can't you just slowly leave the earths atmosphere then? Obviously it would take a while, but why can't you just travel upwards at 30mph and pop out the top.I supposes it comes back to the ladder to space thing, but I just never got the escape velocity thing. I simple thinking it would make sense that the further from the surface you got the lower the effect of gravity. Annoyingly I did A level Physics but we never did any space stuff at that level, only really did the order of planets and stuff in the lower years. Is it down to a multiplication of g=9.81m/s2?
You can go up as slowly as you want. Getting out of the atmosphere doesn't mean you wouldn't fall back down due to gravity when you stopped going up. The moon is effected by earth's gravity and that's a long long way away. Rockets generally go very fast so they can get into orbit, which just means they are going fast enough so that when they fall back to earth under gravity they keep missing and go in a circle.
Hugo a Gogo said:
why has there never been any standardisation of the position of reverse on a manual box, and more importantly, why has there been no outcry about it on PH, with down-and-lefters arguing with down-and-righters? (up-and-lefters butting in occasionally)
If you can't adjust to these incredibly minor differences then, frankly, I'd rather you weren't on the road at all. (That's a general "you" rather than a specific accusation BTW).Einion Yrth said:
Hugo a Gogo said:
why has there never been any standardisation of the position of reverse on a manual box, and more importantly, why has there been no outcry about it on PH, with down-and-lefters arguing with down-and-righters? (up-and-lefters butting in occasionally)
If you can't adjust to these incredibly minor differences then, frankly, I'd rather you weren't on the road at all. (That's a general "you" rather than a specific accusation BTW).
people do get het up about indicators on the left or the right though, don't they?
alock said:
gazzarose said:
Why can't you just slowly leave the earths atmosphere then? Obviously it would take a while, but why can't you just travel upwards at 30mph and pop out the top.I supposes it comes back to the ladder to space thing, but I just never got the escape velocity thing. I simple thinking it would make sense that the further from the surface you got the lower the effect of gravity. Annoyingly I did A level Physics but we never did any space stuff at that level, only really did the order of planets and stuff in the lower years. Is it down to a multiplication of g=9.81m/s2?
You can go up as slowly as you want. Getting out of the atmosphere doesn't mean you wouldn't fall back down due to gravity when you stopped going up. The moon is effected by earth's gravity and that's a long long way away. Rockets generally go very fast so they can get into orbit, which just means they are going fast enough so that when they fall back to earth under gravity they keep missing and go in a circle.
In addition to the space stuff- how much difference does a Jockey make?
Surely all you need is a light guy/girl who can sit on top of a million dollar horse with centuries of breeding and not slow it down?
I guess he may need to beat the s
t out of the animal without it getting too pissed off or dying on the course- is that a Jockey's main actual skill?
Surely all you need is a light guy/girl who can sit on top of a million dollar horse with centuries of breeding and not slow it down?
I guess he may need to beat the s
t out of the animal without it getting too pissed off or dying on the course- is that a Jockey's main actual skill?glazbagun said:
In addition to the space stuff- how much difference does a Jockey make?
A lot.The jockey decides on where the horse is going to be during a race, maybe sit at the back, maybe keep in front, etc.
The jockey will also know when to start 'geeing' the horse up as the finish approaches to get the best from the horse.
The jockey will also know the best path to steer the horse through the pack of other horses in the race.
Hence why some jockeys can make millions from their trade.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff