TheVat

I live thirty miles from Deadwood, South Dakota and have rarely heard "perdict." That said, if you say "pree-dict" very fast and slur a bit, not taking time to get the "ee" out, it will sound sort of like "perdict.". So my guess is that it's not some sort of yearning for a rural folksy thing, but just haste and lack of that delicious British crispness. Incidentally, in actual cattle ranching regions, it's common to say "stockman" or "ranch hand" in lieu of "cowboy. "

I don't currently have the energy to reply to this. Or wrap it up neatly and put boson.

An extreme case are Janus words, which can mean their own opposite, or a quite contrary meaning. E.g. oversight, sanction, fast, cleave, dust. I find this charming (and easily dealt with by context). Due to good oversight, the project was a success. Due to an unfortunate oversight, the project failed.

Judging by your comment I can confidently conclude that you are immune to jokes. Surely you understand that an OP which asks "Could raw electricity be the missing food group?" is going to inspire some jesting. I would be shocked if it didn't. Please continue your experiments with electrical shocks, taking care of course to up the voltage and amperage very gradually. Consulting with a cardiologist beforehand might also be advisable, as stronger jolts could pose some risks. Also, be mindful that shining UV light in the human colon does not cure covid-19.

Plus one, more for the brave attempt than the result. With puns, an ounce of prevention is worth 4.45 newtons of cure.

I refuse to engage in a duel of wits with an unarmed man.

Except insofar as sizes of 500 to 1000 tons underscore the utter preposterousness of using an impromptu Panama Canal of mercury locks in an era when extracting a few ounces of mercury would have been an extraordinary feat of metallurgy. This is all a gedankenexperiment and quite a silly one.

-- Victor Frankenstein, in his seminal 1895 monograph, Methods of Electrovivification

I'll try tomorrow to get more deets.

With the Russian gas squeeze coming this winter, Berlin turns to a giant thermos... https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-technology-germany-berlin-trending-news-176229c8932869f45e553e615a6e9953 ...of coffee hot water. It will store off-peak wind and solar electricity production as heated water for use in home heating. Sometimes you have an abundance of electricity in the grids that you cannot use anymore, and then you need to turn off the wind turbines,” said Wielgoss. “Where we are standing we can take in this electricity.” The 50-million-euro ($52 million) facility will have a thermal capacity of 200 Megawatts — enough to meet much of Berlin’s hot water needs during the summer and about 10% of what it requires in the winter. The vast, insulated tank can keep water hot for up to 13 hours, helping bridge short periods when there’s little wind or sun. It will also be able to use other sources of heat — such as that extracted from wastewater, said Wielgoss. While it will be Europe’s biggest heat storage facility when it’s completed at the end of this year, an even bigger one is already being planned in the Netherlands. I found the thirteen hours figure a little surprising. With that much thermal mass, and the volume/surface ratio, and what I assume is excellent insulation, I would think it could stay pretty hot for longer than that. Anyway, "cool" idea.

Thanks. I think this makes sense. When you have the 100 ton boat floated with one ton of water, in a tight rigid container, it helps to consider the container itself. The boat does not "sense" any difference between the tight container and a vast pool of water of that depth. The displacement matters, not where that displaced water is, so long as the column is deep enough. And thanks for commiserations. Much better to have a divot than a bump. I'm going to fill it with water and see what I can float.

I just made something up on the density, for simple math. I will think about your explanation - am having minor surgery (basal cell carcinoma lopped off) in about an hour, so hope to have a clearer head after that. Not sure I entirely follow @sethoflagos equivalency between buoyant force and hydraulic pressure, either. Will also try to revisit that. Please, everyone, wear hats, slather sunblock, follow the "10 and 4" rule if you can.

Say Hg has an SG of 12, and the rock 2.0. You will need a ton of Hg to float a ton of rock, so you need at least one-sixth the volume of the rock in mercury, your flotation fluid. That is your minimum required volume of a fluid that's six times denser than rock. If your fluid had a SG of 4, then you would need fluid with half the volume of the rock, at minimum. All the close fitting container does is make it difficult to add enough fluid volume to float the rock. Your rock will bottom out.

I don't understand the resistance to Archimedes principle here. Pressure increases with depth below the surface of a liquid. Any object with a non-zero vertical depth will have different pressures on its top and bottom, with the pressure on the bottom being greater. This difference in pressure causes the upward buoyancy force. You need a lot of mercury to get that pressure differential to be sufficient. An object will displace its own weight of mercury, which means you need a ton of it. Listen to the guy who did an experiment at home.

A first year law student could poke holes in Ornato's credibility. Ornato was so pro-Trump that the president removed him from the Secret Service and made him his political adviser, then deputy chief of staff. Ornato helped orchestrate that infamous moment where riot police gassed peaceful Black Lives Matter protesters from in front of the White House so that Trump could have a photo op in front of a historic church. He also helped plan many Trump political rallies before later returning to the Secret Service. But what we really have are anonymous hacks feeding fantasy rumors to the Fox News bubble. They do this because they know how truly damning a lot of the testimony has been. Anything to sow seeds of doubt, and to repeat as often as possible.

I also wondered, as Phi did, if bringing in Cassidy was setting up some action by Garland. She had not only damning testimony but looks like she wandered off the set of The West Wing, yet not at all trying to put on a show or dramatize. And the allusion to attempts at witness tampering before her deposition - "they reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read transcripts..." - adds to her power as a sympathetic figure standing up to intimidation.

Throwing lunch against the wall? Attacking security staff and attempting to take the wheel of a limo to drive yourself to the riot? Suggesting turning off the magnetometer and letting people with guns join the crowd in order to maximize its size and make it more like your own personal coup army? And the most damning quote, imo: You know, I don’t even care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me. Very credible portrayal of Trump.

Definitely not helminth, given the size. Given the segmentation in the closer image, I have doubts about the uric acid crystals theory. If it's a fiber, I would lean towards something that got into the clothing and transferred to the outlet opening. It's not cotton, though. Might be worth checking micro images of mineral wool (fiberglass, in the US) or other sorts of batt insulation, if the donor was working around a building site, that kind of thing. Might be a help if @Qwerty2022 could update with a little more info on the pee source.

Wondered if the mall attack helped give Turkey a nudge towards the signing table today. They have agreed, finally, on accepting Finland and Sweden into NATO.

In keeping with the Roberts Court's embrace of originalist interpretation, Justice Thomas will, per Article One, section two, acknowledge the great tradition of the 3/5 Compromise (1787) and declare himself 3/5 of a person, and allow Biden to appoint another jurist to supply the other 40% of his vote. I wanted you all to have this breaking news.

Federal law cannot do what you think it can, because they are constrained by Constitutional law. So, even a reasonable compromise (which Casey v PP, 1992 opened the door to) can be shot down by Dobbs v Jackson WHO until another court reverses it. The official federal Constitutional position in my country is now that there is no fundamental right pertaining to abortion, in any form. Which means, for quite a while, only state legislators, backed by state judiciaries, can do what you suggest. Which means the new patchwork, and poor women struggling to afford trips to another state, etc. You Canadians are so nice and reasonable it may be hard to grasp what a colossal goatfuck we have down here. We have two Supreme Court justices who it now appears lied in their confirmation hearings.

Again, the thread comes down to the debate in American courts over something called substantive due process. To make sense of Roe v Wade, or Casey v PP, one must grasp substantive due process and unenumerated rights. And the implications of 5th, 9th and 14th amendments, as courts have put certain fundamental rights beyond government interference, i.e. beyond legislative tampering or regulatory orders. Some rights must not be at the mercy of whichever partisan hacks can shout the loudest. Or change at state lines. The point of SDP is to protect people in states against majoritarian policy enactments that exceed the limits of government authority. That's why legal people (like my former coworkers in that county courthouse many decades ago) speak of fundamental rights -- they are liberties which cannot be taken away by a pack of gerrymandered political hacks, or restricted because some tv personality on Fox News or Newsmax got the audience all riled up.

One reason infanticide sidebars are a red herring here is that they are substantially a different topic in bioethics: euthanasia. Specifically, for severe birth defects. Mothers who have carried for 24+ weeks aren't saying, "wow, this is boring and I'm tired of lower backaches and pissing every thirty minutes - let's yank that sucker outta there!". Only in lurid RW scare stories is that happening. In reality, that behavior is indicative of mental health issues and patients are referred for psychiatric help. Usually for depression. And/or substance abuse. The issue of this thread is if the right to abortion is an unenumerated right given Constitutional recognition by a 1972 SCOTUS landmark decision, then clarified on the matter of a viability criterion by a 1992 decision, thus establishing stare decisis, i.e. law settled by precedent. And, if so, on what Constitutional grounds could it be reversed? I strongly recommend this as a good read, laying out all the faulty arguments... https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/roe-overturned-supreme-court-samuel-alito-opinion/661386/

Do not be swayed by pubic opinion. Could be a fragment of a urine mite or other parasite. Maybe Candida albicans. Wouldn't hurt to show to a urologist.