Facts that shocked you
Discussion
Cockaigne said:
The body produces 100w of power an hour just on tick over, metabolic processes. The body can produce 1000w a hour under strenuous exercise, think Matrix.
Being pedantic but power (w) is a rate of energy consumption so time doesn't come into it. When you measure power over time its energy (kWh)98elise said:
Being pedantic but power (w) is a rate of energy consumption so time doesn't come into it. When you measure power over time its energy (kWh)
being extra pedantic, watts are joules per second, so time does come into it, but the point I think you're making is a good one; it may be possible for a fairly strong person to produce 1000 W for a short time, but this is not remotely sustainable for a human. This chap for example, is, in local parlance, very powerfully built (look at that stem and bar flex goddamn) and a professional athlete, but producing ~ 700 W for a little over a minute looks to nearly finish him
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4O5voOCqAQ
ETA one horse power is approx 750 watts, so while the very strong human in the video can almost do this for a minute, to produce this much power continuously you would need an animal roughly the size of... a horse
Edited by deadtom on Friday 18th August 14:09
deadtom said:
being extra pedantic, watts are joules per second, so time does come into it, but the point I think you're making is a good one; it may be possible for a fairly strong person to produce 1000 W for a short time, but this is not remotely sustainable for a human.
This chap for example, is, in local parlance, very powerfully built (look at that stem and bar flex goddamn) and a professional athlete, but producing ~ 700 W for a little over a minute looks to nearly finish him
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4O5voOCqAQ
ETA one horse power is approx 750 watts, so while the very strong human in the video can almost do this for a minute, to produce this much power continuously you would need an animal roughly the size of... a horse
Yeah but he's also producing a lot of heat, a bit of light, and a lot of work which isn't going perfectly into the spindleThis chap for example, is, in local parlance, very powerfully built (look at that stem and bar flex goddamn) and a professional athlete, but producing ~ 700 W for a little over a minute looks to nearly finish him
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4O5voOCqAQ
ETA one horse power is approx 750 watts, so while the very strong human in the video can almost do this for a minute, to produce this much power continuously you would need an animal roughly the size of... a horse
HustleRussell said:
Yeah but he's also producing a lot of heat, a bit of light, and a lot of work which isn't going perfectly into the spindle
I originally planned to say something along the lines of 'true, but humans are more efficient than cars and don't lose twice the energy to heat as they produce in useful power, so that wouldn't meaningfully change the outcome' but I wanted to find an actual number, and in doing so found a fact that shocked me...Humans are only about 25% efficient, which is worse than most modern ICE vehicles
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/11/mpg-of-a-human/
I think that might be an overly simplistic way of looking at it though, because the heat generated is necessary to keep us alive, so isn't really wasted as such... right?
I await a biology type person to deploy some knowledge in a way that is easy to understand for my tiny brain that is much better at mechanical stuff than biology
deadtom said:
I originally planned to say something along the lines of 'true, but humans are more efficient than cars and don't lose twice the energy to heat as they produce in useful power, so that wouldn't meaningfully change the outcome' but I wanted to find an actual number, and in doing so found a fact that shocked me...
Humans are only about 25% efficient, which is worse than most modern ICE vehicles
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/11/mpg-of-a-human/
I think that might be an overly simplistic way of looking at it though, because the heat generated is necessary to keep us alive, so isn't really wasted as such... right?
I await a biology type person to deploy some knowledge in a way that is easy to understand for my tiny brain that is much better at mechanical stuff than biology
the thing is a lot of energy used is metabolic processes, so can't really compare this. Unless you take humans without a brain.Humans are only about 25% efficient, which is worse than most modern ICE vehicles
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/11/mpg-of-a-human/
I think that might be an overly simplistic way of looking at it though, because the heat generated is necessary to keep us alive, so isn't really wasted as such... right?
I await a biology type person to deploy some knowledge in a way that is easy to understand for my tiny brain that is much better at mechanical stuff than biology
98elise said:
Babies are born with their full set of adult teeth already formed in the jaw.
ZedLeg said:
otolith said:
mikey_b said:
Indeed - an xray of a baby's face is quite a sight.
I think you misspelled “a Lovecraftian horror”By the 6th week of development, the basal layer of the epithelial lining of the oral cavity forms a C-shaped structure, the dental lamina, along the length of the upper and lower jaws. This lamina subsequently gives rise to a number of dental buds, 10 in each jaw, which form the primordia of the ectodermal components of the teeth. This is only the first stage of the complex process of the formation of the teeth. The process continues until the eruption of the deciduous (milk) teeth at 6-24 months after birth. Even at birth, the process of the formation of any of the milk teeth is not complete in the vast majority of babies.
The buds for the permanent teeth are located on the lingual aspect of the milk teeth and are formed during the 3rd month of development. However, these buds remain dormant until approximately the 6th year of life when they start to fully form and begin to grow. Therefore, although it would be correct to say that babies are born with the precursors of their adult teeth already formed in their jaws, these are by no means "the full set of adult teeth" which will erupt through their gums in several years. They're not even born with the full set of milk teeth since even they haven't completed their formation yet.
Yes, you can see the tooth buds and the milk teeth which have not completed their growth on the X-rays, but they're still not fully developed teeth.
QuickQuack said:
98elise said:
Babies are born with their full set of adult teeth already formed in the jaw.
ZedLeg said:
otolith said:
mikey_b said:
Indeed - an xray of a baby's face is quite a sight.
I think you misspelled “a Lovecraftian horror”anonymous-user said:
QuickQuack said:
98elise said:
Babies are born with their full set of adult teeth already formed in the jaw.
ZedLeg said:
otolith said:
mikey_b said:
Indeed - an xray of a baby's face is quite a sight.
I think you misspelled “a Lovecraftian horror”You'd have to have never seen a baby to believe that was true.
ChocolateFrog said:
anonymous-user said:
QuickQuack said:
98elise said:
Babies are born with their full set of adult teeth already formed in the jaw.
ZedLeg said:
otolith said:
mikey_b said:
Indeed - an xray of a baby's face is quite a sight.
I think you misspelled “a Lovecraftian horror”You'd have to have never seen a baby to believe that was true.
It's fairly obvious that a baby's jaw couldn't accommodate adult sized teeth. They would have to fully form later.
Zetec-S said:
Having watched numerous US TV shows and films set in New York, my impression was that the city was full of alleys. Randomly browsing the internet earlier and discovered that there are hardly any.
NYC was designed purposely not to have alleys. There are about 6 in total and they are in the South of the island where buildings were not demolished for the grid pattern. Cortlandt Alley is the one used most for film and TV when the storyline requires it.h0b0 said:
Zetec-S said:
Having watched numerous US TV shows and films set in New York, my impression was that the city was full of alleys. Randomly browsing the internet earlier and discovered that there are hardly any.
NYC was designed purposely not to have alleys. There are about 6 in total and they are in the South of the island where buildings were not demolished for the grid pattern. Cortlandt Alley is the one used most for film and TV when the storyline requires it.hidetheelephants said:
h0b0 said:
Zetec-S said:
Having watched numerous US TV shows and films set in New York, my impression was that the city was full of alleys. Randomly browsing the internet earlier and discovered that there are hardly any.
NYC was designed purposely not to have alleys. There are about 6 in total and they are in the South of the island where buildings were not demolished for the grid pattern. Cortlandt Alley is the one used most for film and TV when the storyline requires it.h0b0 said:
hidetheelephants said:
h0b0 said:
Zetec-S said:
Having watched numerous US TV shows and films set in New York, my impression was that the city was full of alleys. Randomly browsing the internet earlier and discovered that there are hardly any.
NYC was designed purposely not to have alleys. There are about 6 in total and they are in the South of the island where buildings were not demolished for the grid pattern. Cortlandt Alley is the one used most for film and TV when the storyline requires it.Monkeylegend said:
h0b0 said:
hidetheelephants said:
h0b0 said:
Zetec-S said:
Having watched numerous US TV shows and films set in New York, my impression was that the city was full of alleys. Randomly browsing the internet earlier and discovered that there are hardly any.
NYC was designed purposely not to have alleys. There are about 6 in total and they are in the South of the island where buildings were not demolished for the grid pattern. Cortlandt Alley is the one used most for film and TV when the storyline requires it.Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff