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

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

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

ChemicalChaos

10,393 posts

160 months

Tuesday 2nd June 2015
quotequote all
Here's an interesting one - why, when dogs get old, do they only "go grey" around the muzzle instead of all over like a human?

phil1979

3,548 posts

215 months

Tuesday 2nd June 2015
quotequote all
Funkycoldribena said:
Oh yes,I do.
I guess it's because you often fill up a dishwasher over the course of the day. With a window in place, for most of the day you would see skanky plates etc on show in the middle of the kitchen - not cool. I guess this is why bins are not see-through either.

Saying that, I now want a window in my dishwasher.

barwea

123 posts

173 months

Tuesday 2nd June 2015
quotequote all
BristolRich said:
You can tell its been a quiet day in the office and here's another...

Why is "normal" Whole, Skimmed and Semi Skimmed Milk sold in plastic Pint unit bottles (with litre equivalent printed on the label as you'd expect), but Filtered milk e.g. Cravendale sold in Litre unit plastic bottles?
It's just to do with the shop's preference. Fresh milk is regularly sold in round litres e.g. Wiseman's own label milk. It's similar to the question of why it's sold in plastic bottles and not Tetra Pak. Some consumer research was done where they put 2 litre Tetra Paks next to 2 litre poly bottles and the bottles outsold them 9 to 1. The milk tastes the same, costs the same, has the same lifespan, but people have habits they stick to. The supermarkets think they prefer to buy pints of milk, so that's what they specify from the suppliers.

AstonZagato

12,704 posts

210 months

Tuesday 2nd June 2015
quotequote all
Whilst on milk, why are the colours for different grades of milk different for bottles and plastic?

Plastic is:
  • Red for skimmed
  • Green for semi-skimmed
  • Blue for Full fat
Bottles are:
  • Blue for skimmed
  • Red for semi-skimmed
  • Silver for full fat

SpeckledJim

31,608 posts

253 months

Tuesday 2nd June 2015
quotequote all
walm said:
wildone63 said:
SpeckledJim said:
Because all the faff associated with your visit is before and as you arrive, and as and after you leave. They may have decided the faff is not worth it for £100, but is worth it for £200 (or whatever). The middle of your visit is very low-maintenance for the B&B - thats their easy money.
So if I want to book a room for one night say a Wednesday for example,and someone else has booked the room for the preceeding Monday and Tuesday,and another person has booked the room for the following Thursday and Friday nights then the hotel would rather turn my custom away than have all the "faff"?
Strange way of doing buisness
I think it is more to do with opportunity cost - in this case the risk they miss a really big booking.
Most hotels and even B&B have more than one room.
Say the other room was empty on the Wednesday night too.
If they took single night bookings then both could get booked up and lose them any weekly custom that was looking to include that Wednesday in their week.
That risk isn't worth it for just one night of income but is OK if you have two nights income out of it.
This is particularly acute over a weekend - for many there is enough demand over weekends for two nights' stay that they don't mind missing the odd time when a one-nighter would have been all they could get.

Once you get to bigger hotels who almost always have an empty room - you will see them accept single night stays since they will only very rarely miss the week-long bookings as they have that available capacity.
Or they go for dynamic rules whereby as soon as a particular date gets popular they enforce multi-night stays to maximise revenue.

That said, as the date approaches you can often get them (hotels and B&Bs) to bend the rules for you as it becomes clear that the mythical week-long booking looks unlikely to appear.
That's dead right ^^^

There is a fixed minimum amount of work involved in a short stay, and that work is almost the same whether the stay is one night or two or three. It is much much easier for a B&B to handle 5x 2 nights than it is 10x 1 night.

Just like a 1kg parcel to Australia with UPS costs £30, and a 10kg parcel costs £35, not £300. The major effort is at each end - the bit in the middle (which is the bit the customer actually wants) is very easy, and very cheap to deliver.

Funkycoldribena

7,379 posts

154 months

Tuesday 2nd June 2015
quotequote all
phil1979 said:
I guess it's because you often fill up a dishwasher over the course of the day. With a window in place, for most of the day you would see skanky plates etc on show in the middle of the kitchen - not cool. I guess this is why bins are not see-through either.

Saying that, I now want a window in my dishwasher.
There is one!
http://dishwashers.reviewed.com/news/finally-a-dis...

BristolRich

545 posts

133 months

Wednesday 3rd June 2015
quotequote all
barwea said:
It's just to do with the shop's preference. Fresh milk is regularly sold in round litres e.g. Wiseman's own label milk. It's similar to the question of why it's sold in plastic bottles and not Tetra Pak. Some consumer research was done where they put 2 litre Tetra Paks next to 2 litre poly bottles and the bottles outsold them 9 to 1. The milk tastes the same, costs the same, has the same lifespan, but people have habits they stick to. The supermarkets think they prefer to buy pints of milk, so that's what they specify from the suppliers.
Brill thanks!

vxr8mate

1,655 posts

189 months

Wednesday 3rd June 2015
quotequote all
When surfing the net some sites allow you to simply click the back button to return to your surfing results, but others just loop you around their own site until you click faster than it can update. So fcensoredn annoying.

Why does this happen and is there a simple fix?

MissChief

7,111 posts

168 months

Wednesday 3rd June 2015
quotequote all
vxr8mate said:
When surfing the net some sites allow you to simply click the back button to return to your surfing results, but others just loop you around their own site until you click faster than it can update. So fcensoredn annoying.

Why does this happen and is there a simple fix?
It's usually down to an advert being served or some useless link with Facebook or Twitter. Try right clicking on the back button and it will usually give you the full history.

scarble

5,277 posts

157 months

Wednesday 3rd June 2015
quotequote all
it's more likely them having some kind of data processing page e.g. when you go to gmail it goes from the login page to a "loading" page then when it's done "loading" dumps you on another page for your email.
Once you're in your email pressing back takes you to the loading page, which then automatically dumps you into your email, so you press back and go to the loading page.. bla bla you get idea.
Usually something to do with processing your login information, possibly retrieving data, like getting all your email titles and stuff from the server to your computer.
Probably slightly neater and easier than starting to load the final page while that data is still coming.

The trick is to right click on your back button, on phone or tablet you are sol tongue out

Edited by scarble on Wednesday 3rd June 15:43

227bhp

10,203 posts

128 months

Wednesday 3rd June 2015
quotequote all
marshalla said:
As to a window on a dishwasher - do you really want to see grease and gravy being flung around at high speed ?
You want to watch my wet Y fronts being flung around at high speed? biggrin

marshalla

15,902 posts

201 months

Wednesday 3rd June 2015
quotequote all
227bhp said:
You want to watch my wet Y fronts being flung around at high speed? biggrin
Rule 34.

I've heard that that particular type of video sells very well in Moscow.

Nom de ploom

4,890 posts

174 months

Thursday 4th June 2015
quotequote all
In evolutionary terms, What would have happened if the Earth day was half or 50% more thsn the present 24 hours?

imagine the earth is the same size but spins either slower or faster - would Humans have still developed or would it have been too cold or too hot for complex life to develop in the way it has?

Or would life hae developed anyway based on the prevalent conditions?

Shall I ask prof. B. Cox esq.?

scarble

5,277 posts

157 months

Thursday 4th June 2015
quotequote all
IANAAB but afaik atmospheric temperature is more dependent on heat of the star, distance from it and atmospheric composition within reason, I don't think 50% difference in spin speed would make a huge difference due to longer heating/cooling cycle alone, humanity probably would still exist, though things would all be a bit different, our circadian rhythms I'm sure would have developed differently, as would those of our co-inhabitants, and having a 12 hour working a day and sleeping for 12 hours would feel natural.
If our day night cycle lasted a month it would be a different story, although we probably wouldn't have months, or we might but they wouldn't be the same.

Oh and it would impact the magnetic field and magnetosphere which might mean we never developed compasses as the field wasn't strong enough and it would probably have a considerable impact on atmospheric conditions due to the magnetosphere preventing the solar wind stripping our atmosphere.

Nom de ploom

4,890 posts

174 months

Thursday 4th June 2015
quotequote all
Sooo life would effectively evolve to cope with the conditions...

Would the gravtitaional effects of faster or slow spinning have made a difference though? if the earth span faster would life evolve differently to only say, reach a maximum size or mass?


RobinOakapple

2,802 posts

112 months

Thursday 4th June 2015
quotequote all
Gravity is mostly to do with the mass of the Earth, AIUI, I don't think the rotational speed would make much difference.

Timmy40

12,915 posts

198 months

Thursday 4th June 2015
quotequote all
I'd be more interested to know if there were no moon would life have evolved here. It was only one of those freak occurrences that meant we ended up with a relatively huge moon for quite a small planet.

singlecoil

33,628 posts

246 months

Thursday 4th June 2015
quotequote all
Suppose someone is riding a horse across grassland, a journey of several days, how far could he ride per day on average while allowing the horse enough time to graze to fuel up for the next day's ride?

One gets the impression from westerns that horses don't need food, but I'm given to understand that they most certainly do.

walm

10,609 posts

202 months

Thursday 4th June 2015
quotequote all
singlecoil said:
Suppose someone is riding a horse across grassland, a journey of several days, how far could he ride per day on average while allowing the horse enough time to graze to fuel up for the next day's ride?

One gets the impression from westerns that horses don't need food, but I'm given to understand that they most certainly do.
They eat when riders prepare food, eat and sleep or at rest stops.
You aren't in the saddle 24/7.

It isn't the food but more the exhaustion of the horse that means you have to stop from time to time.

Sounds like 50-60 miles per day max: http://www.wwwestra.com/horses/history_travel.htm

TwigtheWonderkid

43,386 posts

150 months

Thursday 4th June 2015
quotequote all
Timmy40 said:
I'd be more interested to know if there were no moon would life have evolved here. It was only one of those freak occurrences that meant we ended up with a relatively huge moon for quite a small planet.
No moon, no tides, no currents, no flow of seas, no oxygenation of the sea, no life in the sea, no life on Earth, or not as we know it. Plus without the moon we'd have a different orbit of the sun so different conditions.

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED