Life's great mysteries (things that make NO sense)

In summary, the conversation discusses various things that make no sense, including touch screens in cars, personalized address labels in mail solicitations, and restaurants using QR codes for menus. The use of touch screens in cars is criticized for being less functional and potentially dangerous compared to traditional controls. The use of personalized address labels is questioned as most people rarely use snail mail anymore. And the use of QR codes for menus is seen as a cost-cutting measure that may have cost the restaurant a potential customer.
  • #316
WWGD said:
fractions
Shhh, don't let any marketing types know that!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #317
These stupid
1644965679850.png

bumper stickers!
This is baby en route:
1644965722487.png
This is baby on route:
1644965787174.png
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Wow
Likes pinball1970, Filip Larsen, DrClaude and 7 others
  • #318
Keith_McClary said:
It means pressed out, expressed by pressure.
Yes. That's what the big lever is for . . .

1645131400301.png
 
  • #319
sysprog said:
Yes. That's what the big lever is for . . .

View attachment 297243
I love the esthetics of many of those machines, like the Faemas. Would consider buying one just for show if they weren't $1,000+ a pop.
 
  • Like
Likes sysprog
  • #320
Yeah I want a coppertone La Pavoni. Just for show.
I have a Capresso manual electric pump machine that I use daily and would recommend without reservation (around $100 as I recall). Doesn't give you coffee biceps though.
 
  • Like
Likes collinsmark, sysprog and Keith_McClary
  • #321
hutchphd said:
Yeah I want a coppertone La Pavoni. Just for show.
I have a Capresso manual electric pump machine that I use daily and would recommend without reservation (around $100 as I recall). Doesn't give you coffee biceps though.
Why without reservations?.Native Americans want espresso too!
 
  • Sad
Likes hutchphd
  • #322
(Some of these may be retreads. tuff. They keep me awake at nights. They should do the same to you.)

  • There exist simple, English sentences that can be spoken correctly but cannot be written correctly.

  • The fraction of living human skeletons to living human people is slightly great than one.

  • There exist numbers, used in peer-reviewed papers, that are so stupid large, they cannot be written out in the volume of the visible universe, even if each digit were no more than a Planck length in size. In fact, the number that is merely the number of digits in the aforementioned number likewise cannot be written in the volume of the visible universe. Yea verily, even the number that is merely the number of digits of the number that is merely the number of digits in the aforementioned number is too large to fit in the visible universe, even if the digits are a Planck length in size.

  • There exist concepts so dangerous that - were you simply made aware of them and nothing more - can conceivably doom your unborn descendants to a life of pain, suffering and torture beyond your control.
 
Last edited:
  • #323
  • "There are three ways to spell the word 'to'".

  • Pregnant women contain more than the average number of skeletons.

  • Remember, you were warned. Reading on makes you complicit.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes hutchphd and Keith_McClary
  • #324
I've always loved Pascal's Wager
 
  • #325
DaveC426913 said:
"There are three ways to spell the word 'to'".
Correction: There is only one way to spell the word "to", but three ways to spell the sound "/tu/" (IPA); and many more in other languages.
DaveC426913 said:
Didn't know about that. Wow, just wow! If there was an award for the most non-sensical subject on this thread, I would probably vote for that one.
 
  • Like
Likes Bystander, phinds, russ_watters and 1 other person
  • #326
jack action said:
If there was an award for the most non-sensical subject on this thread, I would probably vote for that one.
Yes. That article gets my vote for the hardest thing to read this month: GET TO THE F#$@!%^$ POINT ALREADY!

OTOH, I didn't succeed in really reading it, but I did skim the whole thing. I don't do well with that sort of "Deepak Chopra word salad" style.
 
  • Love
Likes Bystander
  • #327
jack action said:
Correction: There is only one way to spell the word "to", but three ways to spell the sound "/tu/" (IPA); and many more in other languages.
Perhaps you missed the preamble, which was laid out in post 322.
 
  • #328
DaveE said:
Yes. That article gets my vote for the hardest thing to read this month: GET TO THE F#$@!%^$ POINT ALREADY!

OTOH, I didn't succeed in really reading it, but I did skim the whole thing. I don't do well with that sort of "Deepak Chopra word salad" style.
Yeah, I hummed and hawed over what to link to. There are two links there, BTW. The other one is to a rationaWiki article, but that one goes in a slightly different direction - with simulations.
 
  • Like
Likes DaveE
  • #329
DaveC426913 said:
Perhaps you missed the preamble, which was laid out in post 322.
Which brings up a new one for me: Why do we have a preamble without having 'ambles'.
Or feeling overwhelmed, underwhelmed, without the option of feeling 'Whelmed'?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes DaveC426913, jack action, collinsmark and 2 others
  • #330
WWGD said:
Which brings up a new one for me: Why do we have a preamble without having 'ambles'.
Or feeling overwhelmed, underwhelmed, without the option of feeling 'Whelmed'?
Even 'Underwhelmed' is or was a jokey journalistic sort of wordplay on one of those words that don't/didn't have an opposite. A bit reminiscent of 'software'. Not done extensive research, but see the usage history graph here: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/underwhelmed
Big contrast with that here
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/overwhelmETA just thought of another example: 'gruntled'. Its history is quite well known: https://www.analyticalgrammar.com/disgruntled-and-gruntled/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes WWGD
  • #331
Vanadium 50 said:
For birth control: "...do not take if you are planning on becoming pregnant...". Ya think?
"Do not take if you are allergic to this medicine."
 
  • Haha
Likes pinball1970
  • #332
Bystander said:
"Do not take if you are allergic to this medicine."
It's not such a mystery if you're a corporate lawyer concerned about risk management. The correct translation is "don't sue us; you'll probably lose because we warned you not to be an idiot". This is probably the result of, like, 87 settlements paid for stupid s&^$. 97% of tort cases in the US are settled out of court. It doesn't cost much to add another sentence to the package insert. The fact that nobody reads it isn't relevant.

They're not saying their customers are stupid, they're saying their customers are greedy, trials are expensive, and jurors are stupid sometimes. It's all part of the "don't sue us" kabuki dance.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Likes berkeman, phinds and pinball1970
  • #333
DaveE said:
They're not saying their customers are stupid, they're saying their customers are greedy, trials are expensive, and jurors are stupid sometimes. It's all part of the "don't sue us" kabuki dance.
what he said (very small).jpg
 
  • #334
Bystander said:
"Do not take if you are allergic to this medicine."

DaveE said:
It's not such a mystery if you're a corporate lawyer concerned about risk management. The correct translation is "don't sue us; you'll probably lose because we warned you not to be an idiot". This is probably the result of, like, 87 settlements paid for stupid s&^$. 97% of tort cases in the US are settled out of court. It doesn't cost much to add another sentence to the package insert. The fact that nobody reads it isn't relevant.

They're not saying their customers are stupid, they're saying their customers are greedy, trials are expensive, and jurors are stupid sometimes. It's all part of the "don't sue us" kabuki dance.
Hmm, I think the point of @Bystander 's post is, how is the patient/consumer supposed to know if they are allergic to "'catchyname' or any of its ingredients"?
 
  • #335
gmax137 said:
Hmm, I think the point of @Bystander 's post is, how is the patient/consumer supposed to know if they are allergic to "'catchyname' or any of its ingredients"?
Or which pollen from his neighbor's garden? Or what chemicals were used in making his shoes? Or the things in his Cheerios that aren't intended to be there? How allergic he is to a wasp sting? Exactly which sweetener they put in that junk food? Welcome to the real world, where people aren't protected from every risk. People don't always know exactly what causes their problems. Although that's why there are Allergists at the clinic.

Manufacturers just can't do perfectly precise product labeling. Although labeling has gotten much better since I was young (peanuts, for example). Pharmaceuticals are probably the best characterized and labeled thing you will ever consume, but no it's not perfect, it never will be. Still, I think it is reasonable to expect people that can't take atorvastatin to also know that Lipitor might be a problem.
 
Last edited:
  • #336
pinball1970 said:
Drum synthesizers

Not the invention part, it makes sense, Electric guitar distortion fuzz wah Jimmy Hendrix amazing
Electric piano, classic Fender Rhodes, Hammond organ – brilliant.
Synth drum…..why didn’t anyone say, “This sounds pretty naff to be honest let's drop that idea?”Exceptions? Autobahn sounds cool but that is an exception, the music makes it and acoustic drums with a tonne of boom would have sounded great too.
Most synths sound like Night Rider theme tune.
I went to a Simmonds exhibition in Manchester in 1980s. One guy playing and explaining how they worked.
They sounded cr*p and everyone was going nuts I just did not get it.
You could double up by pressing a button (bass drum) and it even extracted out of time notes!
So totally cr*p sound played by nontechnical non-musical out of time drummers.
Drum synth is cheaper than real drummer.

Kate Bush used to use a drum synthesizer to make an oppressive sound. To me, that's the only area in which they excel.

I can't stand loops and drum machines. But many if not most people prefer beats so simple that a drummer would get depressed playing them. So drum machines are the correct business decision in most cases of recorded music.

Suppose you are a dance troupe that wants to make a little money from a video. You have to use Youtube. If you use copyrighted music, then the copyright holder gets all the money. So you use a computer program to generate uncopyrighted background music. It's good enough.

As a hobby I pair up modern dance videos with copyrighted sound tracks. It takes only an hour or so and the result can be to my ears far superior. Let the copyright holders have the sliver of advertising money.
 
  • #337
pinball1970 said:
Drum synthesizers
Make sense if you loose an arm. Many other great drummers have used electronic kit too.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #338
pbuk said:
Make sense if you loose an arm. Many other great drummers have used electronic kit too.
They still sound awful. I know this is subjective but Hysteria to me was horrible. Anthemic, soul less overproduced commercial garbage. Pretty standard for the 80s.
The drum kit is a very special instrument, it does not rely on pitch it relies on sound, the player has to show technique, creativity and dynamics totally different to a guitar player for instance.
The drum synth removes all of that.
I played one a few months ago. The kit cost a grand and the guy who owned it already had a double bass drum kit at the studio but packed away.
I asked him why he was using the electronic kit and he told me it was smaller lighter and quickly set up.The late great Buddy Rich used them once to my knowledge in the track 'You got to try.' Just for one bar I think, soon dropped. 1981 on Parky possibly.
 
  • #339
Hornbein said:
Drum synth is cheaper than real drummer.

Kate Bush used to use a drum synthesizer to make an oppressive sound. To me, that's the only area in which they excel.

I can't stand loops and drum machines. But many if not most people prefer beats so simple that a drummer would get depressed playing them. So drum machines are the correct business decision in most cases of recorded music.

Suppose you are a dance troupe that wants to make a little money from a video. You have to use Youtube. If you use copyrighted music, then the copyright holder gets all the money. So you use a computer program to generate uncopyrighted background music. It's good enough.

As a hobby I pair up modern dance videos with copyrighted sound tracks. It takes only an hour or so and the result can be to my ears far superior. Let the copyright holders have the sliver of advertising money.
Kate Bush is an absolute legend. Whatever she does will be creative beautiful and pushing an envelope somewhere in the Universe.
 
  • #340
"Laser 'FOCUSED'...?"
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes hutchphd, DaveC426913, berkeman and 1 other person
  • #341
Bystander said:
"Laser 'FOCUSED'...?"
"I thought that Floyd's visual show was a little laser focused, they should have more back drop videos like they had in the 60s.
Make it real man."
Makes total sense.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes DaveC426913
  • #342
pbuk said:
Make sense if you loose an arm.
There is a famous trumpet player named "Wingy" Manone who lost an arm in a streetcar accident. Notorious prankster Joe Venuti once gave him a single cufflink as a gift.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes jack action
  • #343
Vanadium 50 said:
...lost an arm in a streetcar accident.
It was a noble sacrifice in order to save the five arms on the other track.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50 and jack action
  • #344
pinball1970 said:
"I thought that Floyd's visual show was a little laser focused, they should have more back drop videos like they had in the 60s.
Make it real man."
Makes total sense.
I think @Bystander was referring to the nature of "normal" laser light. An intense small dot of light with all the photons going in parrallel. Focusing not usually necessary.

There are however cases where you want focused laser light. for example confocal scanning laser microscopes have produced big advances in modern microscopy.

Putting the laser light through a lens (focusing it) allows you to generate images in various ways. The confocal mechanisms allows you to more easily assemble a clean 3D image, and being digital goes right into computers for 3D imaging. Its mostly used for looking at fluorescence, indicative of various things (chemical status, cell shape, watching cells move, location of labeled molecules in cells, ...)

The intensity of the light can also be used to affect living things and chemical things (usually by destroying things, sometimes by making a molecule active by breaking a specific bond).

In addition, there are multiphoton confocal microscopes. These are like a confocals, but rely on a great density of photons (in space and time) to have two (or more) photons arrive at a molecule at the same time (using nanosecond pulse lasers). If they are "there" at the "same time", then their energies can add up (approximately adding) to enough energy to activate the target molecule to fluoresce (or whatever else it might do). Among other things, this gives a greatly enhanced 3D resolution.
As the laser is focused down (along the z-axis) to a very small area (defined by the optics), the photon density goes way up.
The reason this is better than a normal confocal microscope is that the low end limitation on the background of a single photon confocal is the activation by single photons in less focused z-levels (in front of or behind the layer focused on). This kind of activaion in a two photon system is very unlikely due to the requirement of two photons simultaneously for activation.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, berkeman and WWGD
  • #345
Flags on mailboxes: in the movies/cartoons, delivery raises the flag; in real life you raise the flag to alert the mail carrier.
 
  • #346
Bystander said:
Flags on mailboxes: in the movies/cartoons, delivery raises the flag;
I don't remember seeing that.
in real life you raise the flag to alert the mail carrier.
Right on!
 
  • #347
Bystander said:
Flags on mailboxes: in the movies/cartoons, delivery raises the flag; in real life you raise the flag to alert the mail carrier.
Interesting. I've never seen one used except on TV, so my knowledge is unreliable.
But this site suggests your version is also a myth:

5 Myths About Carrier Signal Flags in Mailboxes​


#1) Only Used for Outgoing Mail
Today, carrier signal flags are typically used to alert mail couriers about the presence of outgoing mail. In the past, though, they were used for incoming mail as well. In rural areas, couriers would raise the carrier signal flag on a mailbox so that the resident would know he or she has mail to collect. As a result, residents wouldn't have to make unnecessary trips to and from their mailbox. Unless the carrier signal flag was raised, residents would assume there was no mail to collect.
https://www.mailboxesandsigns.com/blog/2020/posts/5-myths-about-carrier-signal-flags-in-mailboxes/
 
  • Like
Likes Bystander and jack action
  • #348
A friend modified my sister's mailbox so a little springy flag flipped up when the door on the box was opened to put mail in.
 
  • Like
Likes Hornbein and gmax137
  • #349
In the commuter train parking lot I use, there are "disabled" parking spots close to the train. OK. That's great.

How did they decide how many such spots there should be? The lot is nearly 1/4 taken up by designated accessible spots. They are nearly all empty, pretty much every day. Usually there are one or two vehicles in the designated spots, often none.

Now, in the six months or so I have been using this lot I have never failed to get a spot. Still a lot of people doing the work-from-home thing. The commuter train and parking lot are not operating anywhere near to capacity. So it's not a big deal.

But it is kind of wacky that every morning I get to walk by nearly 1/4 of the lot totally empty.
 
  • #350
Grelbr42 said:
In the commuter train parking lot I use, there are "disabled" parking spots close to the train. OK. That's great.

How did they decide how many such spots there should be?
The answer is building/construction codes dictate the percentage.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman and Bystander

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
37
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
20
Views
2K
Back
Top