Random facts and Trivia
- Thread starter hempyninja309
- Start date
You can roughly estimate burn mortality by adding patient age and percent of partial + full thickness burn surface area.
Here's the little known factoid: If it is over 100% that is the percent of medical staff that dies with that patient.
Here's the little known factoid: If it is over 100% that is the percent of medical staff that dies with that patient.
Oh that was fun! Little known neurosurgical fact. When we are getting ready to start the sterile team usually pulls some stupid stunt. At which point a member of the non-sterile team yells, "It's not like it's brain surgery." At which point we all stop and cackle like hyenas. Because you got it, it really is..... LOL
Blue Wizard
Well-Known Member
The only difference between a oral thermometer and a rectal thermometer is the taste.
Jimmyjonestoo
Well-Known Member
Not saying youre wrong....but how does one prove that?
minnesmoker
Well-Known Member
I am more intelligent than 99.9794780761% of the world. One in roughly 4890 people are as intelligent as I am... And, I have brain damage. I used to be smart!
minnesmoker
Well-Known Member
Ask an autistic with OCD...
That was a cheap response, I apologize (it's insincere, but you deserve an apology.)
So, you can do it a couple ways. You could actually count the sand on the planet. As it's not infinite, and then count stars, until you hit 1 more... Or, you could do a bunch of really goofy math, crazy math involving a shit ton of boundaries, like "what is a pebble of sand?" It must be defined, as does "what is a star?" Count black holes? They're just super-dense stars, they've imploded and are actually brilliant, but the light can't escape the gravity (remember the "does light have mass thread? That's one way to prove light has mass... Only objects with mass can be affected by gravity.) How small can it be, before it's not a star? Does it have to be actively ignited? Can we count supernovas? And then, you figure out the size, approximately, of the universe, based on an expansion at the speed of light for 13.1 billion years, calculate galaxy density in the visible distance, and extrapolate from their, giving a margin of error of 50%+/-. With that margin of error in tact, and given math to approximate the "number of pebbles of sand" and then calculate the approximate number of stars. If the number show, unequivocally (i.e. double the margin of error, not mathematically, but numerically, and still have a difference greater on one side than the other.)
Basically, it's "theoretical," but, it's a pretty fuckin' solid theory.
Total Head
Well-Known Member
it would take 76 eight hour work days for the average person to read the terms and conditions they agree to in a year.
http://techland.time.com/2012/03/06/youd-need-76-work-days-to-read-all-your-privacy-policies-each-year/
lobsters are functionally immortal.
http://www.npr.org/2007/11/16/16349118/the-long-and-happy-lives-of-lobsters
http://techland.time.com/2012/03/06/youd-need-76-work-days-to-read-all-your-privacy-policies-each-year/
lobsters are functionally immortal.
http://www.npr.org/2007/11/16/16349118/the-long-and-happy-lives-of-lobsters
Let n = all the sand on earth
Let s = all stars in universe
Earth is finite, and because n is a subset of earth n is finite. Currently the universe is expanding and infinite and s is a subset of universe. It follows s is hypothetically infinite. Therefore it would always be at least s >= n+1 by definition within our accepted physics.
Minne you really took the roundaboutation way LOL and I'm on brain2.0 (the stoopid years), as well!
Balzac89
Undercover Mod
But you are comparing the size of the universe to the amount of sand.
Matter in the universe is finite.
Matter in the observable universe is finite but not in the infinite universe.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
It is currently estimated that the visible* Universe contains approx. one-tenth of a mole of stars. A mole is Avogadro's number, 6.022 x 10E23, times what's being counted. So 6 x 10E22 stars/universe.
I found a calculation online that places a high boundary on [sand]/Earth at 1.7 x 10E27 grains. I was surprised at this result, but there you have it. Sand takes it, provisionally. Florida is asking for a recount.
*"visible" differentiates my analysis from Annie's rather larger premise.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Nope. Desert sand, sand in soil, sand washed onto the sea floor and on and on. Sand is one of the most awesomely durable mineral parts of the earth's surface. The only way to really remove it is to melt it, and then when the magma cools and is weathered, you get ... more sand.