Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
hide menu

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Highest Rated Top Rated Newest
auto-refresh every 1 2 3 5 seconds

Per page:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #3079 - xsnowshark (09/30/2014) [-]
Samio, this made me think of your comics:

User avatar #3081 to #3079 - samio ONLINE (09/30/2014) [-]
Funny enough, I made a comic based on that mission.

User avatar #3077 - xaeox (09/29/2014) [-]
Hello people, I would like some help.

My geography teacher gives random assignments based on whatever she happens upon in the wonderful world of science.
Today, she gave us an assignment to research what a 'Pink House' is.
If I remember correctly, she said it has something to do with genetics and could lead to us being able to live on Mars. (One or both of those may be inaccurate, I have been getting less sleep lately, after all).

Any help at all would be greatly appreciated. I'll probably look around for another 15-30 mins before saying 'Fuck it'.
User avatar #3078 to #3077 - xaeox (09/29/2014) [-]
Looking up 'Pink House' along with genetics got me to this marijuana genetics site.
Maybe teach on a bit o' somethin'?

#3069 - soulknitter (09/29/2014) [-]
Heelo guys. I have a big question which my friend and I tought about.

Let's just say that "Everything" (which contains universes, physics, particles and truly everything that exists) will be "direction 1" which goes foward.
Now what a reversed Everything would be which goes to direction 2 a.k.a. backwards.
It would be anti-Everything but since "everything" already has everything in it than what direction 2 would be? And what the other directions would be?
User avatar #3070 to #3069 - whatley (09/29/2014) [-]
This doesn't really seem to be a coherent thought. Like...at all. Try to be more clear.
User avatar #3071 to #3070 - soulknitter (09/29/2014) [-]
Okay i'll try to rewrite it...
What an anti-Everything would be? Me and my friend couldn't figure it out cause Everything already contains everything in itself.Would it be just a clone?
User avatar #3072 to #3071 - whatley (09/29/2014) [-]
Well there's antimatter, where every particle has a variant with opposite properties, but I'm assuming that's contained within your definition of "everything". You can't really have the opposite of everything as anything that you create to be an opposite would be included in "everything".
If you wanted to really have the opposite you could say the most important property of "everything" is existence, and therefore the opposite of everything would be nothing.
User avatar #3073 to #3072 - soulknitter (09/29/2014) [-]
Yeah we thought about that too.
And also that Everything contains nothing also. We couldn't figure this one out.
User avatar #3074 to #3073 - whatley (09/29/2014) [-]
In set theory there's something called the universal set, which contains everything, but it can't be used because it's inherently paradoxical in nature. I'd say it's the same thing as what you're defining as everything, and that's why you can't get a coherent answer.
User avatar #3075 to #3074 - soulknitter (09/29/2014) [-]
Thanks for your effort..
User avatar #3076 to #3075 - whatley (09/29/2014) [-]
No problem.
User avatar #3065 - severepwner (09/29/2014) [-]
So I've been thinking of meditation lately. The theme of meditation relates mainly with spirituality and partially religion.

So I'm wondering, if you were to dismiss both of those, what would be a psychologist's thoughts on meditation?
#3066 to #3065 - strigt (09/29/2014) [-]
Well...I'm certainly no psychologist, but maybe it could be seen as a sort of introspection taken by the patient to remove anxiety and stress, thereby giving clear, unhindered thought processes.
User avatar #3067 to #3066 - severepwner (09/29/2014) [-]
That actually does make sense, combined with the relaxation as well.
#3068 to #3067 - strigt (09/29/2014) [-]
Hope that helped. I just stopped by the science board because I'm bored. Well not the board, but just with nothing to do.

Have a nice day now.
User avatar #3056 - imnotkickthecat (09/28/2014) [-]
How much mass does something have to have to hold down a human with its gravity?
User avatar #3080 to #3056 - xsnowshark (09/30/2014) [-]
How much does said human weigh?
User avatar #3064 to #3056 - BlueToaster ONLINE (09/29/2014) [-]
Gravity is a two-way street. You have a pull on everything just as everything has a pull on you, which means any mass can "hold" on to you.
User avatar #3058 to #3056 - xtwinblade (09/28/2014) [-]
if in a zero G or microgravity environment all you need is follow newtons law os universal gravitation. G times m1xm2/r^2
You can stand on an astroid the size of a car as long as no other force is pushing you away.
User avatar #3057 to #3056 - whatley (09/28/2014) [-]
"Hold a human down" isn't really a clear statement. You could stand on a tiny rock in space and not float off as long as you didn't exert a force upwards.
User avatar #3054 - churchofmagcargo (09/28/2014) [-]
science about our lord
Pokemon Theory: Is Magcargo Really 18,000 Degrees?
User avatar #3053 - pipeworks (09/27/2014) [-]
Okay, fellas, riddle me this.

Why are the Mediterranean and Northern California so goddamn mild in climate when compared to New York, even though they're all coastal and are roughly the same latitude?

Something to do with air currents, I wager, but an explanation would be real neighborly.
#3055 to #3053 - carevq (09/28/2014) [-]
not only air currents, but water ones as well. as you can see from this picture, water is significantly colder on the east coast compared to the west coast. also, water tends to get heated fast and lose the heat slowly. that means that heat is stored in it for longer periods of time, increasing the overall temperature (where there are warm currents). in colder regions, water absorbs heat from the air/mainland, decreasing the temperature

if i made any mistake, i beg the FJ science community to correct me
#3060 to #3055 - pipeworks (09/28/2014) [-]
Thanks, mate. That helped.    
Have a gif, you earned it.
Thanks, mate. That helped.

Have a gif, you earned it.
User avatar #3044 - sideism (09/27/2014) [-]
if i wanted to hit a 1 meter wide object with a projectile from 10 meters away
at what angle would the projectile have to be thrown at to hit the object but would miss if the object were slightly farther away?
User avatar #3046 to #3044 - whatley (09/27/2014) [-]
Depends on force it's thrown with, although if you want it to miss if it's slightly further away you probably want an angle where the projectile will go up and down in a big arc, something like 70 degrees away from the ground.
User avatar #3048 to #3047 - whatley (09/27/2014) [-]
Oh I see, well if you'd want the object to just hit the edge of the object, then the maximum angle you could throw it at would be only 2.862 degrees.
User avatar #3049 to #3048 - sideism (09/27/2014) [-]
how did you calculate that?
#3050 to #3049 - whatley (09/27/2014) [-]
Pythagoras theorem. If you have a right angled triangle then you can apply basic trigonometry to it. Your object if 1m wide, that means it's radius is 0.5m. The distance to the thrower is 10m, and we can model this as a right angled triangle.

Because tan(theta) = opposite/adjacent, tan^-1(0.5/10) is equal to theta, the angle you're trying to find. Tan^-1(0.5/10) is about 2.862 degrees.
User avatar #3051 to #3050 - sideism (09/27/2014) [-]
your ms paint skills are obviously much better than mine, but this really helped me alot and i am eternally grateful.
User avatar #3052 to #3051 - whatley (09/27/2014) [-]
No problem man, any time.
User avatar #3045 to #3044 - sideism (09/27/2014) [-]
horizontal angle, not vertical
#3041 - alcoholicsemen (09/27/2014) [-]
Daffy D. believes in science to breakthrough safes.
Vote Daffy D. 2016
#3039 - newvein (09/27/2014) [-]
Let's say we have a basic DC circuit setup consisting of a small battery and lightbulb.

If i were to pass a wire through ...let's say.. a neodymium super magnet (like the pic), would there be any effect on the circuit? Assuming that one wire passes through the magnet and the rest of the circuit is far enough away that the battery and bulb are not significantly affected by the magnetic field.

Would it make a difference if it was AC?
#3040 to #3039 - frikandelspeciaal (09/27/2014) [-]
When you have a conductor, carrying a electrical current, inside of a magnetic field, that conductor will experience a force. (the upper 2 images i've assembled show this)

This force is called a "Lorentz force" and it is the main principle behind the electric motor. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_force
The stronger the current and the magnetic field, the stronger the force

We'll start with the simpler example shown in the top right image:
When a DC-current is applied here the wire will experience a force in one particular direction and should move in that direction if the wire is suspended freely (and the current and magnetic field are strong enough).

Now, if we apply AC on the circuit, the current in the wire will constantly switch directions with a certain frequency. This means that the Lorentz-force will also constantly be switching directions. So there are 2 possible things that can heppen:
1) the wire will constantly be moving back and forth
2) The wire won't move at all because the inertia of the wire is too great or the frequency is too high

You asked what would happen in the case of a cylindrical magnet and to be honest, i don't know for sure.
There are different ways that the polarity of such a magnet can be configured.

I happen to have a couple of cylindrical magets which i've extracted out of an old microwave oven so i might just try it out myself tomorrow if i have the time.
User avatar #3042 to #3040 - newvein (09/27/2014) [-]
So do you think the wires could actually be pulled out/apart from the circuit if these were the super magnets i was talking about and the current was strong enough?
User avatar #3061 to #3042 - frikandelspeciaal (09/28/2014) [-]
Lorentz Force On A Wire I tried it myself and i didn't get any results, probably because the current i had wasn't nearly high enough.

I did find a very cool video of a guy who actually has proper equipment and is able to do a really good demonstration
User avatar #3062 to #3061 - newvein (09/28/2014) [-]
That's rad! Thanks for insight!
#3038 - disasterbater (09/27/2014) [-]
just put up content about da vinci, fibonacci, and the golden ratio www.funnyjunk.com/the+golden+ratio/funny-pictures/5309475/
#3037 - princessren ONLINE (09/27/2014) [-]
is it possible to bring something back to life?   
like this board for example   
 nuk nuk nuk nuk
is it possible to bring something back to life?
like this board for example
nuk nuk nuk nuk
#3030 - imtryingmybest (09/26/2014) [-]
how do i become one with the universe?
User avatar #3059 to #3030 - xtwinblade (09/28/2014) [-]
Every molecule in your body, every atom in your molecules, came from a supernova in space somewhere. hundreds of supernova gasses collected and formed this solar system, this planet, and you. You're stardust, you are already one with the universe
User avatar #3029 - feelythefeel ONLINE (09/25/2014) [-]
I'm the wizargon of Osmium. Of course, being the anything of OS isn't much to be proud of considering OS is highly toxic to living organisms.
User avatar #3022 - coronus (09/25/2014) [-]
So, here's some exciting news for amputees and people with neurodegenerative disorders. Fully paralyzed rats, made able to walk again. First link is the paper, second is an article that sums it up in plain terms.


#3010 - disasterbater (09/25/2014) [-]
just made a bit of content explaining Forty-Six & 2 by Tool.
User avatar #3001 - pipeworks (09/25/2014) [-]
I came in here like, "Yeah, science is pretty cool I guess, I like learning" but immediately I have no fucking clue what any of you are talking about.
User avatar #3007 to #3001 - whatley (09/25/2014) [-]
Guy below is right. The board is dead as hell as it is, I doubt people would mind questions being asked, even if they're simple.
#3008 to #3007 - dudeheit ONLINE (09/25/2014) [-]
"guy below"
User avatar #3009 to #3008 - whatley (09/25/2014) [-]
Nigga we aren't on a first name basis.
User avatar #3032 to #3009 - dudeheit ONLINE (09/26/2014) [-]
not now, guy above
User avatar #3004 to #3001 - dudeheit ONLINE (09/25/2014) [-]
Then ask what you don't understand and maybe someone can/will explain it to you
#3003 to #3001 - princessren ONLINE (09/25/2014) [-]
someday I wish to understand
someday I wish to understand
#2996 - dudeheit ONLINE (09/24/2014) [-]
Can anyone tell my 1-Chlorobutane is less reactive than 1-Bromobutane compared to a Sn1 mechanism or respectively why 1-Chlorobutane is more reactive than 1-Bromobutane compared to a Sn2 mechanism?
The solution says so but from my perspective I would tell that they should be the same because in both cases we would have primary Carbenium ion, so its logical that they are more reactive to Sn2 than Sn1
User avatar #3011 to #2996 - Sethorein (09/25/2014) [-]
Oh my god this is so cute

Orgo... Orgo only gets harder my friend.
User avatar #3031 to #3011 - dudeheit ONLINE (09/26/2014) [-]
whats orgo ?!
User avatar #3033 to #3031 - Sethorein (09/26/2014) [-]
Organic chemistry. Aldols so many aldols...
User avatar #2997 to #2996 - tidaldiamond (09/24/2014) [-]
Its to do with the size of the halogen and that chlorine is more electronegative giving it more ionic character which is turn is stronger than covalent bonds so the additional ionic character of the chlorobutane means it requires more energy to break and so would be more likely to occur via sN2 than the bromobutane which with the lower electronegativity is more covalent in character to less energy would be require to seperate it and it can autoionise
User avatar #3002 to #2997 - dudeheit ONLINE (09/25/2014) [-]
Actually, that makes sense.
I hate organic chemistry, hopefully I will pass this fucking test. Do you mind if I pn you again if I have another question?
User avatar #3005 to #3002 - tidaldiamond (09/25/2014) [-]
It took me ages to get the hang of electronegativity, ionic character, bond strenth and electron density but eventually it starts making sense.....eventually
User avatar #3006 to #3005 - dudeheit ONLINE (09/25/2014) [-]
all in all OC isn't that hard but if you miss just one tiny thing about a molecule, you are fucked - like directing effects of substituents on the benzolring
#2989 - Womens Study Major (09/23/2014) [-]
User avatar #2990 to #2989 - xtwinblade (09/23/2014) [-]
Electrons in the metal lining up to produce an electromagnetic field.
User avatar #2993 to #2990 - squirrelterritory (09/23/2014) [-]
That doesn't explain shit, how the fuck does the field work?
#3036 to #2993 - zacchaeus (09/27/2014) [-]
it gets even more convoluted, its all virtual particles that "don't exist" and move at the speed of light. that is why you can't block a magnetic field. You could more accurately describe it as a warping of space like gravity but even that doesn't fully explain it.

Physics can teach you in detail the math and the way in which something works, but it will always lead to more whys.
 Friends (0)