 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Did mushrooms evolve to be poisonous because that's advantageous
>> somehow? Or do they just happen to be poisonous to animals because of
>> their unusual chemistry?
>
> Both.
One thing I haven't figured out is why poisonous prey animals (frogs,
butterflies, etc) wind up being brightly colored.
If you're trying to avoid being eaten, it would seem that being hard to see
is a benefit whether you're poisonous or not.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> One thing I haven't figured out is why poisonous prey animals (frogs,
> butterflies, etc) wind up being brightly colored.
AFAIK the bright colors work as a warning signal. Predators learn to
distinguish the poisonous prey by their color.
It would make little sense to just have poison but otherwise look edible.
Both predator and prey get killed. With a warning color both live.
(By this logic it would follow that some species mimic the color of
poisonous species. I wonder if there are examples of this.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> Anyway, take 200 metres of this stuff (which I make weighs 10 tons):
> http://www.csunitec.com/saws/new-river-band-saw.html
Cool. It doesn't really look that big from the ground, does it?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> It feels like everybody is writing like power cables were bare metal
>> wires
>> with nothing covering them.
>
> That's how they are actually:
Phone lines used to be bare wire too, and you can sometimes see that (at
least in the USA) running next to train tracks (it tends to look greenish).
Of course, when they invented ways to insulate the wires, they could start
bundling them and/or running them underground.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> One thing I haven't figured out is why poisonous prey animals (frogs,
>> butterflies, etc) wind up being brightly colored.
>
> AFAIK the bright colors work as a warning signal. Predators learn to
> distinguish the poisonous prey by their color.
>
> It would make little sense to just have poison but otherwise look edible.
> Both predator and prey get killed. With a warning color both live.
>
> (By this logic it would follow that some species mimic the color of
> poisonous species. I wonder if there are examples of this.)
Hoverflies look very like wasps, but have no venom.
False nettles look like stinging nettles, but lack a sting.
I couldn't give you a name, but I'm pretty sure there are snakes which
are harmless yet mimic deadly ones...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 15:43:01 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Standing under the twin-line set is creepy as hell. They crackle and
>> buzz quite audibly. The other lines, are very quiet, they don't make a
>> sound.
>
>Mmm. Petrol station. No naked flames. Switch off engine. No mobile
>phones. Bzzzzzzzzzzz.
>
>That can't be good(tm)!
Actually it is quite hard to ignite petrol from a petrol pump with a naked
flame.
Besides having a LEL (Lower Explosive Limit) petrol has an Upper Explosive Limit
(UEL) where above that level the gas/air mixture is too rich to burn. In the
open air the gas/air mixture goes from too rich to too leen very quickly. I once
saw a petrol pump attendant put a lit cigarette into the mouth of a full petrol
tank.
I would not do it myself, though. ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 09:23:03 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> Each episode
How many (and which ones) did you watch?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 10:27:43 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> Some tiny minority of the population, perhaps. But that wouldn't explain
> it being so popular.
If it was popular, then by definition it was understood by most of those
who watched it. This is not an implementation of your "alternative
hypothesis", as it has nothing to do with intelligence.
Escapism can be good for some people, and for some people, the show
worked for that.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 23:05:32 -0700, Chambers wrote:
> 101 isn't usually the "for noobs" section, but rather the "first course
> appropriate for college" level.
Well, maybe not now, but when I was in college, PS101 was colloquially
referred to as "Bonehead Chemistry". ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 09:06:16 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> Maybe the first unis that did this figured people were Pascal-based
>> rather than C-based. (Pascal, IIRC, starts arrays at '1', C starts at
>> '0').
>
> As *I* remember, Pascal arrays start at whatever index you tell them to
> start at. (E.g, you can make the first index be 17 if you want...)
>
> VAR stuff : ARRAY [17..21] OF INT;
I was thinking positions for a string. In Pascal, using the string
"abcdef", position 1 is "a". In C, it's position 0.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
