The useless facts thread.

[Markus Hanke]

Another useless - but actually interesting - fact: start at any random Wikipedia page, and click on the first link that appears on the page. This will bring up another Wiki page - do the same here. And again. And again...

For over 95% of all Wiki pages that you start with, within about 20 link-clicks on average, you will arrive at the same page - Philosophy.

[studiot]

  On 8/13/2020 at 4:38 PM, Markus Hanke said:

Another useless - but actually interesting - fact: start at any random Wikipedia page, and click on the first link that appears on the page. This will bring up another Wiki page - do the same here. And again. And again...

For over 95% of all Wiki pages that you start with, within about 20 link-clicks on average, you will arrive at the same page - Philosophy.

Expand  

Man you have waay more click stamina than I do.

[dimreepr]

  On 8/13/2020 at 4:38 PM, Markus Hanke said:

Another useless - but actually interesting - fact: start at any random Wikipedia page, and click on the first link that appears on the page. This will bring up another Wiki page - do the same here. And again. And again...

For over 95% of all Wiki pages that you start with, within about 20 link-clicks on average, you will arrive at the same page - Philosophy.

Expand  

There must be a law for that, Markus...

[Airbrush]

  On 8/12/2020 at 5:40 PM, zapatos said:

Speciation occurred in the female parent. The egg is built after fertilization. Therefore the chicken came first.

You can be superstitious but you cannot be a little bit stitious. 

Expand  

What does "stitious" mean?

If speciation occurred in the female parent, was the female parent not a chicken at first, but after the critical mutation occurred which resulted in a true chicken, the parent changed into a chicken?

Edited August 13, 2020 by Airbrush

[Markus Hanke]

  On 8/13/2020 at 4:48 PM, studiot said:

Man you have waay more click stamina than I do.

Expand  

Lol...I haven't actually tried this myself, it was in a presentation on information theory and data science by the mathematician Dr Hannah Fry. 

  On 8/13/2020 at 4:59 PM, dimreepr said:

There must be a law for that, Markus...

Expand  

I don't think so, but it is interesting in the sense that it shows that encyclopaedic information has a tree-like structure, and the concept of 'philosophy' sits pretty far down, basically at the roots of that tree of knowledge. 

[Airbrush]

People will yell crude references to sex acts out of anger.  What does sex have to do with anger? 😲

[joigus]

  On 8/13/2020 at 6:15 PM, Airbrush said:

People will yell crude references to sex acts out of anger.  What does sex have to do with anger? 😲

Expand  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBpetDxIEMU&t=381s

@ 20' 34'' - 40' 38''

Both hilarious and spot on.

[MigL]

Wow !

Wiki pages have 20 ( on average ) degrees of separation.
But celebrities have 6 degrees of separation !

[Area54]

  On 8/14/2020 at 4:00 AM, MigL said:

Wow !

Wiki pages have 20 ( on average ) degrees of separation.
But celebrities have 6 degrees of separation !

Expand  

Surely celebrities would have eight or nine degrees of separation now, given social distancing. (Except for those celebreties who think the rules don't apply to them.)

[Markus Hanke]

  On 8/14/2020 at 4:00 AM, MigL said:

Wiki pages have 20 ( on average ) degrees of separation.

Expand  

I don't think that follows logically They have 20 degrees of separation on average from the Philosophy page, but not necessarily from each other.

[Strange]

And it only uses the first link, not the “best” so it only specifies an upper bound

[joigus]

I tested it and it doesn't work for me. Plus there's a considerable amount of looping. Could account for the remaining 5%.

I need a clicking tutorial. The thing is it kind of make sense to me that philosophy is an attractor.  

[Strange]

  On 8/14/2020 at 1:19 PM, joigus said:

I tested it and it doesn't work for me. Plus there's a considerable amount of looping. Could account for the remaining 5%.

I need a clicking tutorial. The thing is it kind of make sense to me that philosophy is an attractor.  

Expand  

It would be quite easy to write a script to test this. (But I’m not going to!)

It reminds me of the Collatz Conjecture, which has been described as the most dangerous idea in mathematics 

[Markus Hanke]

  On 8/14/2020 at 1:19 PM, joigus said:

I tested it and it doesn't work for me.

Expand  

Lol...I given no guarantees, this is second hand information. Coming from what I would consider a reliable source, I simply assumed it's true

[Airbrush]

  On 8/13/2020 at 7:33 PM, joigus said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBpetDxIEMU&t=381s

@ 20' 34'' - 40' 38''

Both hilarious and spot on.

Expand  

That explains it in detail, thank you! 

[joigus]

  On 8/18/2020 at 4:18 PM, Airbrush said:

That explains it in detail, thank you! 

Expand  

I particularly like the example of the soldier who uses the F word in one sentence like seven times, except to refer to the sexual act!

[Airbrush]

Democrats vote by mail much more than Republicans do.  DeJoy has removed over 600 vote sorting machines without prior notice.  When questioned he said "Ok we will suspend."  Questioned again, he said he ain't putting them back "No sir!"

Edited August 28, 2020 by Airbrush

[joigus]

1) Ants can’t die from falling

Because of their body proportions and tough exoskeleton, an ant’s terminal velocity isn’t enough to kill or hurt it on impact. They can survive being dropped from the Empire State Building and walk away unharmed.

2) You can't kill yourself by holding your breath

At the very worst, voluntary breath-holding will only lead to unconsciousness. 

3) You can't tickle yourself

----------

1) and 2) make a lot of sense.

Why 3)?

Edited September 2, 2020 by joigus
Addition

[dimreepr]

  On 9/2/2020 at 11:44 AM, joigus said:

2) You can't kill yourself by holding your breath

Expand  

Tell that to a free-diver. 😉

  On 9/2/2020 at 11:44 AM, joigus said:

1) Ants can’t die from falling

Expand  

Depends on what they fall onto. 🤒

sorry, I coudn't resist...

Edited September 2, 2020 by dimreepr

[joigus]

  On 9/2/2020 at 11:57 AM, dimreepr said:

sorry, I coudn't resist...

Expand  

I know.  🙄

But you only took up the questions having to do with death.  

Any insights into the question having to do with laughter?  

What makes you tick (or tickle)❓

[dimreepr]

  On 9/2/2020 at 12:25 PM, joigus said:

But you only took up the questions having to do with death.  

Any insights into the question having to do with laughter?  

What makes you tick (or tickle)❓

Expand  

I laugh in the face of death, but only if it's ironic... 😊

  On 9/2/2020 at 11:44 AM, joigus said:

Why 3)?

Expand  

What's the fun in that???

[Airbrush]

  On 9/2/2020 at 12:25 PM, joigus said:

What makes you tick (or tickle)❓

Expand  

Good question.  Maybe when you tickle yourself, you already know exactly the location and the kind tickle you intend.  When somebody else tickles you, you cannot anticipate location and kind of tickling?

After my answer I googled "why can't i tickle myself" and I got this:

"...basically comes down to your cerebellum having the ability to predict the tickle, therefore cancelling it out before the sensation takes over.

"Our studies at University College London have shown that the cerebellum can predict sensations when your own movement causes them but not when someone else does," Blakemore explained to Scientific American. "When you try to tickle yourself, the cerebellum predicts the sensation and this prediction is used to cancel the response of other brain areas to the tickle."

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-scientific-reason-you-can-t-tickle-yourself

[joigus]

  On 9/2/2020 at 1:27 PM, Airbrush said:

Good question.  Maybe when you tickle yourself, you already know exactly the location and the kind tickle you intend.  When somebody else tickles you, you cannot anticipate location and kind of tickling?

After my answer I googled "why can't i tickle myself" and I got this:

"...basically comes down to your cerebellum having the ability to predict the tickle, therefore cancelling it out before the sensation takes over.

"Our studies at University College London have shown that the cerebellum can predict sensations when your own movement causes them but not when someone else does," Blakemore explained to Scientific American. "When you try to tickle yourself, the cerebellum predicts the sensation and this prediction is used to cancel the response of other brain areas to the tickle."

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-scientific-reason-you-can-t-tickle-yourself

Expand  

Good answer. +1 It must be some way in which your nervous system (autonomous or otherwise) cannot "not know" that you're about to get tickled. 

[dimreepr]

  On 9/2/2020 at 1:31 PM, joigus said:

Good answer. +1 It must be some way in which your nervous system (autonomous or otherwise) cannot "not know" that you're about to get tickled. 

Expand  

Indeed, the last time I was tickled and laughed out loud, was when my dog clearly thought that the duck-weed covered canal was a solid surface and tried to run on it; she didn't die...

[Airbrush]

Salvador Dali was famous for saying "I know what I eat, but I don't know what I do."